So can we agree BST go boom / Rotobox go VROOM!!! ...and just thought I'd throw out there that I was a member of the R1-forum before here when I was just a street rider. It helped me find and sell street parts when I was still new to sport bikes and also meet some friends to ride canyons and go on trips. Things definitely operate differently over there, but I just look at it as there's something for everyone. It'd be boring if there was just one forum for everyone interested in motorcycles in general. You gravitate toward what interests you and WERA racing is definitely much more interesting to me now that getting a fender eliminator. I'm not gonna hate on those over there though, because it wasn't long ago that I was psyched on my LED integrated taillight and flush mount turn signals.. heh.
I was talking to a friend about the Rotobox wheels and first thing he said, and I believe he's got a very good point, what will they be like in crosswinds? There's such minimal space between spokes, I can't see them being very good at handling what wheels of a more conventional spoke shape/pattern can. Personally, I think they're too different looking for most people to find aesthetically appealing enough to chose them over something like BST's or Dymag's too. I don't think including the word 'box' in their name was entirely inspired either... Interesting that they're made in Slovenia too. I think they'll have to work hard on getting a good reputation in a mass market. And yes, I know, Akrapovic is Slovenian, but they've got a reputation well grounded which took many years and a re-brand to form.
i'm a member there, all those VS sites have adds all over them even when your registered, not to mention there are only a few grown up forums around, af1 and this one, the i'd hit it threads and look at my wheelie vid threads get old
Okay, I've got a few mins to spare and in the interest of some healthy debate, lets go back to the main subject of this thread, the destroyed BST rear wheel. Admittedly we'll never get the whole factual story behind the wheel/accident or whatever, but if anyone thinks it's really needed, then I'd suggest looking at the pics in the first post again. Let's picture a wheel that for argument's sake, ripped all it's spokes off while doing 90mph as the OP was told it was doing thereabouts by the owner. What would happen? The hub would continue to spin, driven by the engine for a few hundred revolutions at minimum. What would that do the remaining portions of spoke left attached to both the hub and the rim? It's not a trick question, it would flail and grind those spokes, the hub/disc etc. and especially the inside of the rim very, very quickly. Have a look at those pics. Any evidence of said spinning action happening? Not if you're seeing what I am. The rim and tyre can't go anywhere, it's held between the hub and the swingarm so it would create some very obvious damage twixt those, very quickly. The tyre would also me forced into the undertray/subframe area while also spinning for more than a couple of revolutions, creating very obvious damage to the tyre, and the parts it contacted. Granted the pics don't show the full surface of the tyre though, but they show at least one edge with mud debris on it from what looks like a non-revolutionary contact. But picture a crash, the bike flipping, rolling or whatever it takes to create a side impact on the wheel and or tyre and what would happen? The spokes would likely be ripped off the rim of the wheel as that's the greatest point of force acting on them , splitting one or two in half and leaving portions of the spokes attached to both hub and rim. Have another look at the pics...
i understand what your saying about spinning, but even if they started to split and crack without spinning could cause movement or flex to go down, maybe bike flipped on the ground then they broke apart, but then again who knows
How likely is that at 90mph though? Even if the wheel came loose, and the guy was exiting a corner (as the OP said) so probably had some straight track in front, he'd probably have stayed upright for long enough that the spokes would have continued to delaminate (that's if what you're suggesting as a possibility did happen) and then said spinning would have happened. This couldn't look more like an impact to the wheel after a crash if it tried, sorry. BST say they've only ever seen one wheel returned after the spokes sheared under 'normal' use and that was on a 400+ hp drag bike running a normal street wheel, years ago. As the guy launched after hundreds of runs on the wheel, the extremely sticky drag slick coupled with the high horsepower and sudden force of launching did destroy the wheel. It's testament to the fact it stood up to that for so long. That wheel did look like it had done a fantastic job of blending itself although the bike travelled very little distance and the engine was shut off almost instantly.
I agree. But I also think those pics are about as conclusive as you're going to get in this case. They make it fairly obvious to me. I'd also expect the rider to say that the wheel fell to bits causing the crash. Losing that much money during a crash would make me think of a bloody good answer!
If you look at the wheel you will also notice that there is a spoke which peeled away from the rim. This is indicative of the laminate being loaded so that the inter-laminar layers are in peel (think of tape being pulled up). The way that it failed indicates a lateral load. If you look directly across you can see evidence of impact on the rim directly opposite of the peeled spoke, which supports the bending load and the mode of failure. If you look at the remaining spoke fragments you will notice that they are split down the middle lengthwise. The portion of the spoke that is left behind is the tension loaded side in the same lateral loading scenario. As you can see the fibers snapped as you would expect. The fact that they split lengthwise indicates that the force was again lateral since the fiber orientation would need to be longitudinal in order to deal with the stresses of the wheel driving. There would be far less fibers running transverse because it is not needed. All of the evidence is there to see that the wheel failed as a result of a lateral impact and not due to normal use, you just have to know what you are looking at.
No f@ckin' way man! Mark White? THE Mark White? Who is Mark White? Sorry Mark, I had to do it. It was just sitting there, taunting me. Hope you stick around on this board, you don't suck.
D'ya know the only thing I feel bad about is that I couldn't have said that myself! I would have registered another account just so I could, but I'm trying to get my post count up on this one... Thanks mate, glad you've taken everything I said with a pinch of salt, that's what this is all about for me.
How long have you been at PB? I used to read that all the time but it's been awhile since I've picked one up. Last time I regularly read it I think Gus and Ronnie were still there. I even have the video (Video Nasty?)! Somehow that hasn't made it into the trash yet.
I've been working for them 'full time' alongside running my shop for over three years now. I met Ronnie a few times previous to that but sadly never got to meet Gus properly and even more tragically, John Robinson. They're all still very fondly remembered around the office. I have all the PB videos still on VHS here, I started reading the mag when I was about 13-14.
We are not sponsored with ROTOBOX anymore so I feel I can post on the wheels openly. First off, I never cared about the name or the looks of the wheel. We were concerned only with the performance of the wheels and not the looks. We learned that it was "form-follows-function" so they look like they do because of how they work. Crosswind is not an issue with the wheels. We know, we used them. I am not going to knock on BST or Dymag also. I have no experience with their products good or bad. They certainly look nice and I know a few people who run them without issues (that I know of) Here are the physics of Rotobox as explained and deduced by me. If you take a big rubber band and replace the outer rim of a BST or Dymag wheel with the elastic, you will get a sense of how much of the rim is unsupported as it rotates. The spokes are posts that are meant to transfer load to the hub, thats their job. Now do the same thing with a Rotobox wheel and you will see not only much less area of the outer rim unsupported but also a much more even distribution of load around the wheel. This means that the outer rim spends almost no time in its rotation unsupported by a post. Now the posts themselves are oval shaped and huge compared to the spokes on a BST or Dymag wheel. Anyone who undertsands posts (construction, etc) will tell you that the larger the diameter of the post, the harder it is to bend it. So now you have many posts and larger diameter. Because of the aforementioned qualities, the outer rim can be made lighter as it does not need to support itself much in rotation. The loads are transferred effectively towards the center hub which means less rotational mass and gyroscopic effect of the wheel since the outer rim is so light. All of these things make sense to me as a stupid human. Physics is great like that. If you truly want to bling out on carbon, the Rotobox wheels attract people from across the street. We ran the wheels and stopped people dead in their tracks when they walked by our pit. No one else has as much gorgeous carbon per square inch than Rotobox. They also use the term RBX as well as Rotobox in case you don't think using "Box" in the name is fancy enough....LMAO! Thats it, from the horses mouth with nothing to gain. We sent our rims back to Rotobox. We didn't have to but we were moving away from Suzuki and didn't feel right about keeping them since we couldn't use them in AMA supersport regardless. HTH? Bernie
Mark, if you have a couple of minutes read this thread. It'll sort of explain our group thoughts on aftermarket wheels. cheers, -jim
I didn't click on the link but I'll bet it will take more than a few minutes. Razorboy, while you didn't have an issue with the wind I'm betting a big crosswind will push those wheels more than a regular spoke. It makes a big difference on bicycles, I presume it will be the same on a motorcycle, though less due to the weight differences, you know it's a physics thang.
Not when you view the wheels from the side on the bike and realize how much of the surface area is already blocked with rotors, sprocket + carrier, etc. Do you really think thats the biggest culprit in a crosswind? What about the giant sheet of plywood that is the rider and the machine itself? Not really comparable to a pro bicycle that weighs what 10lbs? We raced these wheels at Fontana which has more crosswind than most tracks. No problems and I asked again and again.
