I have been racing a pair of Spinergy Rev-X wheels for about 9 years. Over the years, a lot of roadies and quite a few bike mechanics have told me that they are prone to cataclysmic, catastrophic failures. Is there any truth in this myth? Should I retire these wheels? I have been satisfied with their performance to date.
I have witnessed two front rev x explosions. both occured for seemingly no reason. In one of the cases, last year at the gainsville grand prix crit in florida (i’m being specific so that the event’s validity can’t be challenged), my team mate did a 35mph face plant and drove his teeth through his lip when his rev x exploded on a straight away. The other occured in collegiate nats road race last year, the rider made through ok though.
The design wasn’t great to begin with, then they did a long series of mods to the wheels that amounted to bandaids on a broken collar bone. Some of the mods (like the stupid rivets they put into the rim) are partly to blame for the failures, the rivets will pop from corrosion or just stress, and them rim will cave inward, with the wheel effectively exploding.
They are no more prone to cataclysmic failures than any other carbon fiber component. Anything carbon should be inspected and evaluated periodically. Small knicks and cracks can become major failures if they go unoticed. That being said 9 years is a pretty good lifespan for any high end component. How many other 9 year old parts do you still have? Have you ever replaced the bearings in the wheels? I see more old Rev-x at races and the owner will say to me “I love these wheels but they have loosened up over the last 8 or 9 years” After checking the bearings I usually find about 1/4 of play and the owner will say " gee you need to replace those?"
If it were me I would retire the wheels. We offer a lifetime trade in policy where you can trade in old or crashed wheels for a discount towards a new model.
Just a footnote on the Rev-X. They are the only wheels to win the World Championships on the road(twice, Brochard and Camenzind), Time Trial(Gontchar), Cyclocross(twice, Van Der Poel and Pontoni), Ironman and short course triathlon.
“The design wasn’t great to begin with”
Is that an engineering analysis? Do you have some data to support that?
The Rev-X won several design awards over the years but they obviously forgot to consult with you.
"Some of the mods (like the stupid rivets they put into the rim) are partly to blame for the failures, the rivets will pop from corrosion or just stress, and them rim will cave inward, with the wheel effectively exploding. "
I am very interested in this theory, please explain in more detail. make sure to include the type of testing you have done and how many times you observed this happening.
I dont mean to rip you on this one but, come on, cycling can be a dangerous sport and crashes happen all the time. Some times equipment is to balme some time it is not. Did your buddy thoroughly inspect his wheels before the race? Did he hit anything in the laps leading up to the crash? To come on this forum throwing out generalizations about a product that was produced and sold in the tens of thousands based on two incedents is just wrong.
The Rev-X failure is an issue that is based mostly on one basic theme:
An individual or small group of individuals who under the pretense of complete and factual information have propogated a “catastrophic failure” claim (which included Engineering claims - some bogus or incomplete). Can failure of the wheels occur (which could include catastrophic)? Yes. But, All products can fail. However, whether or not they fail more so (or in a catastrophic fashion) than other other wheels of simular design or materials is questionable. It seems, the complete information and facts regarding failure has not been presented in a complete and reliable fashion. In fact, those that advocated the severity of the design problem tended to over extend many “facts”. In many instances the “facts” are not that at all… and, in fact are simply lies by omission. In essense, they seem to leave out the facts that don’t fit into their bad experiences or negative opinion regarding the firm as a whole.
This is an age old story that was debated not long after the wheels began being sold. Whether or not you should retire the wheels is usually determined the same way you would evalute any high performance (i.e.,light design) piece of equipment - The longer the use of any equipment (or unusual abuse), the higher the probability of failure. My suggestion is to look at the wheel closely… specially around the metal brads. If you see no visible cracks or anything unusual, then the wheels should be fine.
I have a set I put about 3,000 or so miles with out a problem… However, I changed out wheels some time ago because I wanted to try out a different design. Would I ride my old Rev-X’s? After, I checked them out… yep, I would use them… but, then again… I know how well the wheels have been treated. Do I fear the design… No.
(IMHO) If the wheels were as dangerous of a product with the massive catastrophic failure problems that are claimed, I seriously think the firm would have been litigated into bankruptcy a long time ago.
FWIW Joe Moya
9 years, good for you. I’ve heard the horror stories too but I’ve never witnessed a Rev-X fail. I’ve seen lots of pros ride them and lots of them out on the road. What I do know is the following:
I don’t see pros riding them anymore. (A function of sponsorship and new models, I know)
They are not made anymore.
I have only heard of such spectacular catastrophic failures with the Rev-X and other small-carbon-spoked wheels.
I have seen plenty of traditional spoked wheels pop one or multiple spokes where the rider could safely stop without going over.
Spinergy is back to producing and promoting a more traditional design.
So I say congratulations to you that you got 9 good years out of a wheelset. I’d say it’s probably time to move on regardless of what style of wheelset you move to.
Paul, I’m not trying to attack the Rev-x or Spinergy. But I have to wonder that if the design was superior why we don’t see the next evolution of it on the market. I also don’t put too much stock into design awards. The I-Mac got plenty does that mean it was problem free or superior? Plenty of products get them, often for because they’re new or radical designs, or they have asthetic appeal. The awards are not necessarily certification of product safety or superiority.
the race was on a grand prix track. There were no obstructions or holes on the track. My teamate didn’t hit anyone or anything at any point in the race.
He had the wheel checked out about a month before this happened.
As i already explained, i watched this happen twice, both occurances happened last year.
Your right, bicycle racing is tough and can be dangerous, however i have never seen a wheel fail so catastrophically. Just this weekend at the gainsville downtown crit in the pro1-2 race, someones scewer found it’s way into someones rear zipp, spokes were broken, a rim was effectivly trashed, people got a little scared but no one went down, and his wheel remained intact enough for him to ride to the wheel pit. If that happened to a revx, the entire field would have gone down.
Before i go into what i see as wrong with the rev x, how do you respond to the metal rivets in the carbon rim failing (if i had to bet, as a result of corrosion, if this is true, then it takes time for them to corrode and accidents won’t immidiatly happen after production)? I am quite sure i am not the first person to propose this theory, here is your chance, tell the world why the failure of the rivets is not a problem or doesn’t happen
I watched it happen the first time. They went pop, carbon went every where, and my boy winston went down hard on his face.
I can only speak out my two experiences. That’s what the person asked about, and that’s what i’ve observed.
I wonder what awards they were. It seems like he would have jumped to list them specifically and immidiatly if they were reputable. They may very well be however, i don’t know what they are so i have no idea.
I recall hearing some stuff about spinergy and spending issues a while back, i also recal hearing some bad things about how they treated there former employee who developed there spox technology. I’ll have to do a search for where i found that stuff.
… there is a simple answer to your questions and observations…
If my memory is correct… the production stopped because of rule changes made them not viable to produce for a narrow cycling market (i.e., triathletes only).
However, I agree… 9 yrs. of use on one set of wheels is extremely good… I too would consider buying a new set regardless of wheel design.
FWIW Joe Moya
I’m not being argumentative here, but I’m ignorant of the rule you mentioned. Do you have any details on the rule that would make the Rev-X illegal but something like the Hed-3 or Mavic I/O legal?
Paul,
Regarding the design of the Rev-X (I still have two, but am thinking of not using them any more): here’s what well-known bicycle wheel expert Jobst Brandt (author of “The Bicycle Wheel”) had to say some time ago:
"I have made up my own mind on why these wheels can be
unsafe. They, like ordinary spoked wheels, rely on tension for
strength, tension that is difficult to control with the inelasticity
of the material. Through small changes, all preload can be lost,
leaving the wheel with no strength. These wheels have no means
of tensioning the four spokes. From monitoring comments on the net,
it seems that loss of preload is accelerated by heating the ‘spokes’,
typically in a closed car with the sun shining on them.
The spokes, constructed lying flat in the central plane of the wheel,
are tensioned by spreading the center of the four bladed web halves by
inserting the hub spool. This causes a radial change in length of
about 1mm, about half the displacement of tensioning a conventional
wheel with wire spokes and aluminum rim. Spoke tension in Spinergy
wheels cannot readily be measured nor can it be adjusted. Spokes that
make a rattling/rumbling sound in use are going through zero tension
and are dangerously close to failure. Under tension they do not
change shape and therefore, make no audible sound. In contrast steel
spokes and aluminum rims do not creep or lose tension with time or
temperature and have ductility by which to absorb damaging blows,
something that Spinergy wheels do not do well."
Basically, unlike conventional wheels, when a large force impacts the wheel, the bottom pair of spokes can go completely slack, leaving the wheel with nothing supporting the hub, and susceptible to side loads which could buckle the wheel.
Is that specific enough for your?
Ken Lehner
pooks. as i recall the rule spoke more to the danger of the spokes severing a finger or hand in a crash. it did effectively bar rev-x’s from mass start races. that’s all i recall - coulkd be hed 3’s ARE illegal in uci mass start races, or could be the rule specifically addressed the knife-like profile of the rev-x’s.
how funny is it to see noted curmudgeon j brandt cited in a tri forum! better be careful, i wonder what he has to say about ae-ro-dy-namic seatstays on 2000 dollar welded aluminum frames !!! ha. funny !!!
“I still have two, but am thinking of not using them any more”
Well if you decide not to, can I have them for cost of postage?
Ah Kraig, I remember reading this article. I had forgotten you wrote it.
(I realize you said this will be your only post, so I guess I apologize for responding to it, but I want to anyway.)
First off, let me say that this wheel has suffered from some really bad press. Whether or not the design is flawed, I do not know for sure. All I have is my impressions of the wheel. These impressions are based on my own limited engineering experience (just a little in college… you know the deal) and of course things I read and hear. Naturally I try to apply my BS meter, but my impressions are my impressions.
My main, and pretty much only, concern about the rev-x wheel is the manner of total failure. Yes, every wheel has a point at which it will experience a catastrophic failure. Many wheels, and probably many approved for use by the UCI, will fail under less harsh conditions than when a Rev-X will fail. Obviously, failure is failure and it is never a good thing to have occur. But it does seem to me that some failures would be “better” than others. For example, I would generally rather have a rim “taco” while riding than to have all spokes simultanesouly fail. When metal fails by stretching or bending (like a tacoing wheel) it is a relatively slow developing process when compared to carbon spokes failing. Though stories, myths, folklore, and heresay, I have heard quite a few tales of Rev-X’s failing in the latter way. Do Rev-Xs fail more often than conventional wheels? I have no idea and certainly have no info to support it. But I have seen conventional wheels fail and the result has never been too traumatic. All I know is I won’t ride a Rev-X and am typically not comfortable riding behind someone who is.
Is this unfortunate for Spinergy? You bet it is. Is it unfair? Probably, I’m not sure. Mayber Spinergy is the victim of some really unfair press or competitive marketing. But the fact still remains, I’m not comfortable with that design.
Remember how long it took Audi to recover from their 5 cylinder engine that had the “surge” problem? Only a small number of people experienced it…
failure, crash, destruction and mayhem . . . you guys need to prioritize, they look cool - enough said.
http://www.uci.ch/english/about/wheels.htm
Here is the link regarding wheel rules.
1st, I’ll state I work for Spinergy, Paul is my boss and one of my best friends, so now you don’t have to dig up an archive in order to accuse me of being bias.
The uci implemented a standard of testing for wheels for MASS START events that all wheels must now pass. Basically it is how the wheel “breaks” when impacted with various forces at various angles. Note that no “molded” (revx, hed3, IO…) wheels are on the list, because like any carbon fiber product, impact breaks it, not bends it, so it ceases to function as a wheel. These tests simulate what happens when a wheel is subjected to an IMPACT (ie curb), NOT the durability of a wheel under normal circumstances so don’t miscuntrue. It has NOTHING to do with “bladed” edges or the like, a bladed spoke would do far more damage if you stuck your hand in it.
You are free to use whatever wheels you wish in nonmass start events (tt’s).
For various reasons, cost, life-cycle of a product, new technologies availiable to the company and the above (which wouldn’t so much effect sales as our ability to promote the product via pro sponsorship), the rev-x were discontinued, but think about what other product was produced and successfully sold for nearly a decade in this industry??
As for “failure”, I’ve ridden rev-x’s tens of thousands of miles and have never had an issue. I’ve also ridden mile after mile with many riders all over the country, and have never witnessed the “Just Riding Along” failure of ANY product on thier bicycle, (well, maybe my buddies chain snapped once…guess I better go start a thread on the flaws of a dura-ace chain…oh and My old DuraAce STI used to stop functioning in the rain…but who couldn’t see that coming with how poor a design those guys at Shimano came up with…glad I’m still running my friction down tube shifter…I once witnessed a riders carbon drop bars snap, but also witnessed the same rider wrenching his clip-ons on the day before, I’m sure to the point of “the tight enough cracking sound”…no doubt he went off telling his coffee-crew and all who would listen the flaws in the design of his bars…leaving out the misuse part of the story…)
Paul, I’m sure can find the links to the awards the rev-x was awarded many years back so I’ll leave that up to him.
Just my 2 cents…
“For example, I would generally rather have a rim “taco” while riding than to have all spokes simultanesouly fail. When metal fails by stretching or bending (like a tacoing wheel) it is a relatively slow developing process when compared to carbon spokes failing.”
Some of the testing Kraig was involved in and I had the opportunity to witness would refute that statement. At a certain impact level “traditional” steel spoked, aluminum rimmed wheels can catastophically fail and it happens so quickly you would not have time to come to a controlled stop. For some widely used wheelsets that level is below the point which causes a Rev-X to fail. My guess is that you dont hear about those incidents because it is assumed that the impact was what caused the wheel to fail. I was warming up for a time trial a few years ago and a buddy of mine , not paying attention(fiddling around with his bars or something) rode right into a pothole at speed and destroyed the lightweight low spoke count wheel on his TT bike. He went down pretty hard but was more embarrased than anything. Everyone who saw it said things like" man you smoked that wheel,… that thing is toast,… nice job buddy." No one yelled “hey I bet thats a design flaw or defective product.” It seems like When a Rev-X wheel or other carbon part fails it is often assumed to be a defect or design flaw.
wow, Keith you and I need to get a life. We are both posting on slowtwitch at home at night!
Hey Survivors on I gotta go!
Paul explained to me in detail the “Mavic conspiracy” concerning the Rev-X’s popularity in Europe in the mid to late 90’s
Almost comical the lengths that Mavic went to, to try and get these wheels banned
I loved my Rev-X’s - probabaly the most famous and lusted wheel ever made
(using Tilium SS now: AWESOME WHEELS)
.
If anyone is looking for front TT wheels I have some 650c rev-x fronts in stock. Some tubies and some clinchers. Fronts only. I would be willing to sell them cheap. They are collecting dust in our warehouse. Let me know if anyone is interested.