I’m definitely a bigger guy and can put some power down. 80kg and 300w+ FTP when well-trained. I hear you on the fact that torque transmits through the whole hub. My reasoning is that the hub experiences significant twisting/deflection under pedal load (at least according to Peak Torque), so if the goal is to maximize efficiency, it would make the most sense to make the torque transmission to the rim depend on the shortest load path as much as possible, and that would be through the drive side spokes. Now all this is in my head and not real life which is why I’m asking on here.

Rear braking is a concern. Given that the disc side spokes are radial this means the bulk of the rear braking torque will be transmitted through the hub shell and up the drive side spokes. I think the main reason I don’t see it as problematic as the reverse case is that with pedaling I’m trying to maximize efficiency, something that doesn’t matter with braking. But I am concerned if something about this arrangement is exceptionally stressful for the rim.

Hi all,

I've found some centerlock hubs by Goldix on AliEx designed for 21-spokes and 2:1 lacing patterns, that is 14 crossed spokes on rear drive-side and 7 radial spokes on the rear non-drive-side, and 14 crossed spokes on the front non-drive (disc) side and 7 radial on the drive-side:

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805026812998

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805132784998

These are the same lacing principle as Campagnolo G3 or Fulcrum's wheels, which is designed to even spoke tensions across drive and non-drive sides. It appeals to me, because in my mind I think it means I can get away with fewer spokes and have just as strong of a wheel. Also, when I spec these hubs with Pilar wing 20s and high-spec Deerobust rims, I get STUPID light weight predictions, like under 1350g for 55mm rim, or under 1300g for a 50mm rim.

The questions I want to field here:

Do people think these should be laced as a 3x or 2x pattern on the crossed sides? When I model it up in solidworks (embarrassingly, I found this easier than calculating the spoke lengths), the spokes come out of the hubs straigtest when laced 3x.

Do we think there is anything dangerous about going to 21 steel spokes, on say, a 50 or 55mm rim? I see that campag runs 24 spokes on their WTO rims, and I'm wondering if that's because 21 spokes is simply not going to be stiff. I want to hear your thoughts.

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Good to hear, also awaiting them in 46-32T configuration. Will combine them with a Magene P505 PES base crank to replace a 46-30T GRX600 set on my Gravelbike.
Its the closest match i could find (lowest number of teeth) matching with the regular 110BCD pattern and i am already curious how it will work out. Will also have to deal with some spacers in order to get it working with the front deralliuer and come as close as possible to the original q-factor of the GRX. Lets see

I also bought the same configuration. Be prepared to remove your crankset, I had to remove mine to get the inner ring behind the power meter, since the inner diameter of the ring and the outer diameter of the power meter are so close in size.

Peak torque also has endorsed ninevelo’s craftsmanship. My only reservation with them is that they tend to be heavier than similar offerings

I’ve tried installing a replacement chain set in the past. It was warped out of the box and warped even more over time with use. I’m pretty sure the rings are just soft.

It’s a shame because for the most part I agree, lightweight for the price.

I’ve already replaced with a Skypivot crankset with Sigeyi PM I scored on the used market. So I’m not exactly interested in holding onto it.

And that's why you probably should have stayed away from this combo in the first place... Chinese components with proprietary parts is a bad idea.

I had no idea it was proprietary when I bought it. Honestly it never occurred to me a Chinese manufacturer would be stupid enough to use a proprietary spider standard, and then not make and sell the proper spare parts. Their previous 325 crankset used the Sram 8-bolt standard, I thought Magene was going to follow suit on the next generation and use another widely-used standard. They hide the spider interface in a lot of their marketing material. I thought it was because they wanted to avoid getting hit by IP disputes. The whole point of this post is to warn people to stay away from this crankset and avoid making the same mistake I did, and the mere fact that Magene made the choice to invent a standard and then leave their users high-and-dry should reflect poorly on Magene as a company.

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to update, even though it's been over 6 months since I interacted with Magene's customer service. The take-home message is I'm fed up with Magene's customer service and engineering. I've come to the conclusion that the QED crankset (in particular, the integrated chainring) is badly engineered (as I explain later), and there is absolutely no recourse via customer service and/or aftermarket options. Seriously don't buy these things, (either version with the integrated chainrings--power meter or not) they suck and are irredeemable in every way.

Their marketing department reached out in June and promised me a new chainring. They also begged me to delete this thread (see attachment) because it made them look bad. As appalling as I found their plea, I didn't want to share it because I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, in case the chainring actually solved the problem (spoiler alert: it didn't). The new chainring came in a partially-crushed box, was bent out-of-the-box, and it only worsened over time. In the ensuing months I had thought about making an extensive Hambini-style takedown/reaming video, and just didn't get around to it since I'm busy trying to graduate from my PhD program. But today I finally replaced the damn thing and found enough anger in my heart to make this post. I think the lesson here is that you should exercise caution when buying from Magene. Their fancy marketing does not set them apart, they are just like every other Chinese brand. They seem to make some decent products (i.e. the PES) but if you get a dud product from them you are well-and-truly fucked.

So: what's wrong with it? Fundamentally, the chainring deviates from the centerline by around 0.5-0.9mm. This is enough deviation that the chain will hit the derailleur when you approach a gear on the end of your cassette, especially when sprinting. You can check my previous posts in this thread for videos. This problem really rears its ugly head with Shimano's derailleurs, which are exceptionally narrow. No amount of derailleur tuning has solved my problem. I've even resorted to trying to bend the rings back to place--to no avail. This problem seems to get worse over time, suggesting that this chainring is so weak and poorly designed it cannot handle the stresses of your average rider. (Like many people, I can briefly hit 1000W in a sprint). You can imagine how annoying must be in a sprint. I can't count how many times I think I have managed to get the derailleur tuning just right, only to hear it grinding away at the lightest suggestion of a sprint in my 12t. Sometimes I've even had it bend so much into the derailleur that it knocked the chain off.

Normally you could solve this issue by buying an after-market replacement chainring or spider. Well, it turns out the direct-mount engagement pattern is completely proprietary to Magene. Superficially, it resembles Shimano MTB or Cannondale's direct-mount standards, except it's like an inverse of Shimano MTB-DM. It's more similar to Cannondale's standard, except that instead of 2 long lobes on the spider, it has just 1. In any case, if you don't want to deal with Magene's stupid chainrings, you're fucked. These cranks are officially useless.

Oh, also, the issues with the power signal randomly dropping out that DC rainmaker found on the original P325CS cranksets seems to be still happening. Hooking up the chargers to the pods is fiddly, you have to contort the cables in orientations that are not natural for them to be in, and then hope you have aligned and supported them just right so the magnets will take. If you screw this up at all, the magnets fall off and you fail to charge. Another thing I don't like about the crankarm-mounted power meters is they stick out quite a lot. Like around 1cm. I get that this is an aero-weenie complaint, but theoretically this is a problem for aerodynamics--the crank arms turn out to be a pretty important area for optimization and having a pod sticking off of them undermines that.

Before I replaced my cranks, I had some shred of a reservation that maybe these issues were just because Shimano's front derailleur cages are so narrow. But after replacing them with a unit from Incolor, I can confidently say that it's Magene's fault.

Given that I have no way I have no idea what I'm going to do with them now. Maybe I'll give them away to someone with a bike that has a wider derailleur cage.

Let my $500 mistake be a warning to you. Don't trust Magene.

LTwoo calipers are bricks. I'd rather source some Shimano calipers if possible or use lightweight ZRace/IIIPro calipers.

I've tried this, just wanted to warn that they aren't super great IME. I'd source shimano calipers instead.