Views - this wheel trueing stand?

[Sweep]

https://www.wiggle.co.uk/x-tools-pro-me ... g-stand-1/

I ask as I have a discount voucher at the mo from chain reaction.

(edit just realised I've linked to wiggle but - not surprisingly - same price on chain reaction.

Concerned by the fact that there are the (usual for online reviews) pretty widely divergent reviews.

Though have always found Xtools tools to be perfectly respectable.

Their crank extractor continues to do sterling service and can't see that it is inferior to Park.

[horizon]

You can get the same one here:

https://www.spacycles.co.uk/m2b0s159p36 ... d-YC-512NB

for £65. I don't know about postage.

I bought this stand about 18 months ago and find it excellent. You might need to calibrate it (easy) but it's sturdy and solid. I hadn't noticed the problem with the adjusting screw but I'll have a look. I'm no expert but I was impressed and pleased. BTW you will still need a dishing tool and AFAICS this stand doesn't have a dedicated "roundness" indicator.

[Sweep]

Hi horizon

Many thanks for the (rapid) reply.

You sure it's the same?

Did you look at the negative reviews on that wiggle link?

Something to do with stuff shifting I think.

<edit - i see you did - apologies - reading this in pub>

Bad samples/bad manufacturing in the odd example or just grumpy ignorant reviewers?

Can you explain the "roundness indicator"?

I thought the point of a trueing stand was to adjust lateral and vertical components of "true" (apologies if I have used the wrong terms) - if lateral and vertical components of "true" are taken care of by a stand won't this ensure that the wheel is round?

I take the point about the dishing tool - for rear wheel work?

Must admit I wouldn't expect Spa to sell wobbly junk.

edit edit - do please report back on possible "adjusting screw" issue. No need to apologise for not being an expert - neither am I in such matters.

[horizon]

1. Yes, I've read the reviews (except the ones in Russian and Chinese).

2. I've had a look at the screw-end under a magnifying glass and can see nothing wrong with it - nice flat end.

3. 100% sure it's the same product.

4. The truing stand allows you to make sure the rim is straight but it could still be straight and an oval shape so you have to check for roundness.

5. All wheels (AIUI) needed to be correctly dished in that the rim must be centred. I expect that front wheels (with rim brakes) would be zero dish but still need to be centred.

[horizon]

I've been trying it out on an old wheel (but one I do want correct). It's been a revelation as you start to really understand what's going on. I would recommend watching lots of different videos - you'll get additional advice from each. A dishing tool is important though (it also allows you to calibrate the stand if the wheel is correctly dished).

[Sweep]

4. The truing stand allows you to make sure the rim is straight but it could still be straight and an oval shape so you have to check for roundness.

.

Thanks for the reply horizon but must admit to still being puzzled.

If you can produce an oval wheel with this how can it be a trueing device?

If this doesn't check for "roundness", how do you do this and with what?

Have you used this for building wheels?

I stress am not being critical of your replies - much appreciated.

[horizon]

If you place a pointer at the edge of the rim and turn the wheel, you will see if the rim goes in or out - that's step one of the truing. But even if perfect laterally, the rim might still not be a perfect circle (imagine it bumping up and down as you go along rather than rubbing the brakes). I haven't done this yet, but you spin the wheel in the stand with one (or both) calipers lain against the rim edge or tyre (not the side). Some stands seem to have an additional tool for this. That's step two of the truing. Step three is making sure that your by-now perfect rim is centred between the locknuts, thus making a perfect wheel. This is done using a dishing tool and then adjusting using the stand.

[Paulatic]

Surely you just put the pointer under the rim rather than at the side when checking for roundness?
They seem a lot of money for something similar I built out of some scrap flat bar and a couple of bolts.

[horizon]

Surely you just put the pointer under the rim rather than at the side when checking for roundness?

Exactly. But some stands have an extra piece of plastic or metal that does this.

They seem a lot of money for something similar I built out of some scrap flat bar and a couple of bolts.

Or just use the bike itself. But many of us wouldn't even know where to start so I found the stand great. It sits very nicely on the kitchen table (after Mrs H is safely in bed ).

[horizon]

Found it!

This is a stand with the radial indicator:

https://www.wiggle.co.uk/tacx-t3175-exa ... nt=product

But I really wouldn't want to have to clamp the stand everytime!

[Brucey]

FWIW the stand in question is a knock-off of the park tool one. This means that it is 'feature rich' which is good if it is well made, bad if it isn't. It is meant to be screwed down to a workbench. The park tool version is a robust workshop tool which is accurate enough that a dishing tool isn't usually required. However re-setting the thing is can be a bit fiddly. Checking the setting is not so difficult; you just reverse a good wheel in the fixture; if the wheel remains centred either way round the wheel is correctly dished and the tool is accurate.

This type of stand is used to check radial trueness by lowering and closing the indicators. Because of their shape and position this means that you can't check the radial truth of a wheel unless it is already roughly true laterally and the dish isn't far out. This is fine for new builds (even if it seems to be at odds with Brandt's advice about build sequence) but not so good for repairs.

If the tool is not particularly well made there are very many places where the jig could develop free play and wobble about. The park tool one is vulnerable to this; even so it takes many years of use in a workshop for it to give a lot of trouble.

This stand design has 'hard pointers' i.e. they are rigid and don't deflect easily when the rim touches them. Maybe this is just personal preference but FWIW I very much prefer a stand with 'soft pointers' i.e. ones that are springy or spring-loaded. It seems to me that you can set such pointers to clear the rim by a set amount and then accurately determine the middle of the region requiring correction, whereas with a hard pointer the wheel can just jam, or you are left squinting at a tiny gap. Soft pointers either give an audible indication or they are connected to a dial indicator or something else that gives a very clear visual indication; they are usually much easier to work with.

I would only consider a tool of this type if I was going to build lots of wheels and I had enough bench space (in a well heated workshop) for such a tool. As it is, I have build and repaired hundreds of wheels using a much simpler tool that works well and packs down much smaller for storage.

cheers

[vat1666firerates1]

FWIW < SNIP >

Which wheel building jig would you recommend?

[fausto99]

which wheel building jig would you recommend?

The one in this book https://www.wheelpro.co.uk/wheelbuilding/book.php (if you don't mind a bit of woodwork)

[Brucey]

which wheel building jig would you recommend?

depends on the envisaged usage, budget, space available.

cheers

[Samuel D]

which wheel building jig would you recommend?

The Unior 1688. Simple, solid, folds down flat when not in use, does not require a bench or vice (I put it on the living room floor), spare parts available now and likely well into the future, and works well in practice. The plastic pointer can be arranged in a variety of angles and positions for radial and lateral truing. When truing the wheel laterally, I like to position the pointer at a 45-degree angle to the brake track so that I can rotate it in and out for small adjustments rather than sliding it horizontally (which stiction makes difficult for tiny adjustments). Replacement tips cost €1.90. David Rome reviewed it here.