source
stringlengths 620
29.3k
| target
stringlengths 12
1.24k
|
|---|---|
How can I gauge what angle I can safely ride at on a downhill curve? On a Strava segment featuring a 80-100m-long, 40-50m radius curve going downhill on a paved road at about 8-10%, I make generous use of my brakes out of fear of wiping out on my 23mm, fairly slick road tires. Because of this, my 30-second time is almost double that of the KOM, which seems borderline unsafe from my point of view. I suppose this is actually two questions: Is it likely that the KOM has some special downhill setup on his road bike? If not, what are some best practices to quickly go down a downhill curve on a road bike without losing traction/having a wipeout/otherwise having a bad day? <Q> Focusing on the strava bit - its a screwed up strava track. <S> The track shows they flew, and strava's point-grabbing routines have gone wonky. <S> Short answer they did not do it in 11 seconds. <S> They are bike rides though - <S> just a fortuitous error on the GPS signal makes it look like they were faster, and much more direct. <S> I suspect there's some obstructions in the way (like a big `merkin freeway bridge thing) that are capable of interrupting and limiting GPS positional signals. <S> So when they get around the corner and get a better fix, it looks like they've gone really fast. <S> Its happened to me elsewhere. <S> There are no easy fixes. <S> You can flag the whole ride, which is somewhat draconian. <S> You can go out and ride faster again (you've tried, its really hard) <S> They can crop that piece off the end of their rides (but its in the middle for both top riders) <S> They can use something like SNAP (strava needs a polish) at http://strava-tools.raceshape.com/snap/ to generate a "polished" file to re-upload and delete the original. <S> (image below) <S> You can tell strava to only show your own results in the preferences, and stop caring so much about KOMs. <S> Remember you're only competing with yourself, despite what strava imply, so <S> its your own results you want to beat. <S> I've got some KOMs, and they're not that special. <S> Seeing my own improvement over time, that's special. <S> Here's a pic of SNAP showing the sugested tweaks for the KOM holder's ride <A> Gummier tires (that won't last as long) have superior traction. <S> As far as I am aware, that is the only advantage the KOM may have over you. <S> The fact that your time is almost double that of the KOM (that is a massive difference, even if he has stickier tires) <S> probably means that you are nowhere near pushing your traction limit. <S> The only piece of advice I can give you other than "get used to riding fast down hills" is to take the largest-radius path through the curve. <S> This means starting on the outside, coming in to the inside through the middle of the curve, and then exiting on the outside. <A> Keep in mind that indoor use rollers can upload to Strava as if they were a properly done activity. <S> This implies that downhill segments are being taken easily by that means, since they do not account for the risk. <S> In any case, even if the KOM is genuine, your bike might not be the same as the people riding faster, who may be in expensive machines with top notch wheels, tyres, brakes and a geometry more suited for descent. <S> In the case of going uphill it is the same, people may have a better suited machine, but the risk of trying to match them is considerably smaller. <S> Also the rider can be short and heavy, with a lower centre of gravity and whatnot. <S> Some may take risks and go into the opposite lane, or a certain KOM may have been taken with closed road during an event. <S> Gauging the speed at which you can take on a turn is tricky, even your tyre pressure can influence that. <S> Try to get information on the best descending techniques and practice if you really want to get better. <S> As the velominati rules put it, your confidence going downhill increases until it drops all of a sudden.
|
Also, aiming for downhill segments is pretty much setting yourself for a crash, people have already died because of that. But let me remark that it is not a good idea to go for downhill KOMs. On dry pavement, slicks have more grip than tires with treads, so your tires being "fairly slick" is not a bad thing. Your equipment, position on the bike, and weather will influence what is the maximum speed you can achieve on a given turn, and with practice you will get closer to that maximum.
|
What to Look for In Gloves for Winter Commuting We live in Buffalo, NY where winters are harsh. My husband rides early in the morning and afternoon about 6 miles each way. The temperature is often below freezing, especially early in the morning – wind and snow make the cold worse and make his hands very wet. He says he arrives at work every morning with numb fingers and can't type for the first 20 minutes or so until they thaw. I want to buy him some gloves that will keep his hands warm in the conditions he deals with. What should I be looking for? What features make a good glove for winter commuting in a cold, wet climate? <Q> You'll need gloves that allow you to still hold the bars and use the brakes and shifters. <S> Standard mittens don't work well since you have to grab the brake with all your fingers. <S> Durable waterproof ski gloves with five fingers are one of the best options, especially those which come with a hand warmer pocket for extra warmth capability. <S> Some folks prefer lobster style gloves since they are split and allow you to wrap two fingers around the bars and two on the brake on a flat bar setup. <S> They still suffer a bit when using STI shifters, but they are usable. <S> Gloves that have a separate outer an inner layer are very helpful for longer duration riding as you can keep a set of dry liners handy to swap out if your hands sweat a lot, since moisture will transfer cold from the liner to your fingers. <S> I've found this a lifesaver on long rides where my hands begin to freeze up. <S> If using on commutes, it's nice to have separate liners for to and from trips, in case your liners don't dry through the day. <S> For extra cold conditions, a lot of people prefer to combine thinner gloves with pogies / bar mitts. <S> These provide a lot of wind shielding as well as some insulation, enabling you to forgo super heavy gloves. <S> They are available for both drop bar and flat bar setups, but they are more optimal on flat bars. <S> Some popular brands of gloves to check out are: 45nrth - See Sturmfist gloves (some of the best deep winter cycling gear) <S> Pearl Izumi - See Pro Softshell Lobster Glove (one peice, makes layering hard) <S> Planet Bike - See Borealis Glove (lobster style, separate liner) <S> Swany - See <S> X-change Gloves (some of the best ski gloves, also awesome for winter cycling) <S> Popular Pogies: <S> 45nrth Cobrafist (Flat bar only) <S> Revelate Designs <S> (flat bars and jones loop bar compatible models) <S> Dogwood Designs <S> Pogies <S> (Flat bar only) <S> Barmitts <S> (Both Flag bar and drop bar models, simple neoprene design) <S> AMF Threadworms Moose Mitts <S> (Drop bar and flat bar models available) <A> In all honesty, I think your best bet is Bar Mitts or something similar. <S> They're neoprene covers that attach to your handlebars and cover your hands. <S> They allow you to get away with wearing thinner gloves <S> so you stay a little more dexterous. <S> If you ride drop bars, you're kinda stuck riding on the hoods to stay protected. <S> You can still move your hands to the top or drops, but they just won't be protected from the wind. <S> I rode all last winter with them <S> and I don't think I could've done it without them. <S> If you don't want something like that, then as someone mentioned, layering is key, even in gloves. <A> Based on weather in Helsinki, Finland: You'll want gloves with waterproof membrane (Gore-Tex is fine but others work, too) and room for additional thin gloves under them. <S> Gloves made for downhill skiing work well for riding and may be easier to find than winter bike gloves.
|
If your brakes and shifters allow, lobster gloves and even mittens are great.
|
What is the weight difference between frame sizes? I was wondering if any one has an idea of how much more weight a larger size bike weighs. Specifically S-works Tarmac. So for example what would the difference in weight be between a 56 compared to a 61? 100g, 400g any idea? <Q> One thing you should be aware of is there is some variations between identical frames due to manufacturing tolerances. <S> Looking at the listings on the site it appears that a 20-40 gram difference between carbon frame sizes is about the average. <A> This frame , including the fork, is advertised at 3 pounds, while a bike built on the frame weighs in at 16.69 pounds. <S> The frame is only 18% of the weight of the bike. <S> Even if the frame which was a bigger size weighed 20% more, It would only bring the weight of the bike up by 3.6%. <S> The weight for the above bike also includes the weight of the fork in the weight of the frame. <S> Since the same fork is used for bikes of different sizes, the actual frame weight will contribute even less to the total weight of the bike. <S> What mainly changes between different sizes is the size of the main triangle. <S> I couldn't see the weight of 2 different frame sizes making up more than half a pound. <S> I would recommend buying the bike that actually fits the best. <S> Weight doesn't make as much as a difference as you think, especially if you aren't competing at the top level. <A> This is a very good question. <S> I recently bought a Specialized Tarmac. <S> In the shop, I weighed the exact model that I wanted to get that happened to be a size 56. <S> It weighed 14.3 lbs. <S> I ordered my size, which is 61. <S> When I got it, I weighed it and it weighed 16.3 lbs! <S> Part of this was because I got disc brakes instead of rim brakes (the ONLY difference in components), which would add 285 grams, a little more than half a pound. <S> I compared the frames side by side and the tubes on my frame are MUCH larger than on the small frame <S> but I'm not sure how this could add that much weight. <A> Weights are extremely hard to find - the manufacturer doesn't seem to publish them directly, just making statements like "x00 grams lighter than last year's" Full bikes offered to reviewers seem to ALL be 56 cm. <S> I cannot find a review that mentions weight that is for any other frame size. <S> Reviewers don't review bare frames. <S> I think you'll have to try contacting Specialized directly, OR try to get in contact with the distributor for your country/region. <S> Collected results data points: s-works disc 2019 dura ace di2 and roval wheels <S> - Weight 6.69 kg (56 cm) Frame only 800g <S> s-works rim <S> 2019 dura ace di2 and roval wheels - <S> Weight 6.38 kg (56 cm) <S> Frame <S> only 733g from https://granfondo-cycling.com/review-specialized-s-works-tarmac-disc/ <S> Specialized Tarmac S-Works <S> Ultralight Rim 2018 weight <S> 6.30 kg (56 cm) <S> Frame <S> only 733g from <S> https://granfondo-cycling.com/review-new-specialized-tarmac-s-works-ultralight-2018-visionary-bike/ <S> Many statements here but not a lot of detail about exactly what frame size people have weighed. <S> Take it with salt: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=154296
|
Most weights listed in advertising literature are not for large frame sizes. The important thing to remember is that on a modern road bike, the frame is actually a small percentage of the overall weight of the bike. According to the Weight Weenies.com web site listed weight can differ from actual weight by as much as 10-13%.
|
Lamp holder for bicycle stem Is there any lamp holder for the bicycle stem?The normal 360º degrees spinning lamp holders do not work, because the stem is slightly top-wards inclined. Bike stem Normal lamp holder <Q> Maybe something like this may do the work? <S> But I couldn't find anything around the stem. <A> If you're willing to go to the very cheap end of the spectrum, some lights can pivot in the mount as well as having a hinge for tilt. <S> This awful thing from deal extreme , for example, runs on two watch batteries but does what you want: <S> Alternatively, some of the "flashlight holders" are very adaptable (and probably also flexible) <S> so would work. <S> Like this construction : Finally, you can make something yourself by using hose clamps: <S> One round the stem, then another around the light or use a strip of metal to make a mount for the light. <S> I've made light mounts like this before and they can be very effective. <S> Buy a strip of aluminium about 3mm thick and 20mm wide, then cut and drill a short length to do what you need. <S> Imagine the blue line is a strip of aluminium and the red bar is your light. <S> But really, a much better solution is joao_pimentel's answer . <S> A decent metal "need more handlebar space" device as sold in many bike shops specifically because so many people have the same problem you do. <A> I've used 2 light brackets with bits of a third to make custom brackets before. <S> I have a large spares box and a decent selection of tools for modifications. <S> On eBay or dx you can find a wide range of torch mounts, smartphone mounts and camera mounts for various bits of bikes. <S> The camera ones in particular may be a good source of parts with enough degrees of freedom. <S> You'll need to modify though.
|
In your case a saddle post light bracket might fit round them stem giving you something to pick up on to mount your light.
|
B01S brake pads for Deore A-M615 brakes? I bought replacement pads for my Deore A-M615 brakes. They installed just fine. But after cleaning the old pads, I saw that they are G01S , while the new ones are B01S . G01S, the original: B01S, which I bought by mistake: The "incorrect" B01S have just fitted fine, and seem to do their work equally good. Should I now: ride as usual? buy the correct pads, ride carefully before that? buy the correct pads, not ride with the wrong ones even to the LBS? <Q> The G01S pads are slightly wider, and slightly shorter, than the B01S which you replaced them with. <S> You may need a digital caliper to measure the difference. <S> Thus you can stick the smaller B01S into a G01S hole, but not the other way around... <S> A G01S will not fit in an Acera BR-M395 caliper (or a BR-M315, BR-M355, BR-M396, or Alivio BR-M445, or others that have th B01S as OE). <S> I wouldn't use the B01S pad in your application because it'll be wiggly in your M615 brakes - <S> The loads from braking are transferred to the beefy sides of your caliper, the through the caliper to the frame. <S> Wiggly pads will "wear out" your alloy caliper, making the hole bigger, and applying a torque to the split-pin that holds the pads into the caliper. <A> If they work, use them. <S> When I've been unable to find the right pads while touring I managed to find some that would go into the calipers and initially I planned to just ride to the next bike shop. <S> But they worked as well as the originals <S> so I kept them until they wore out. <S> The key factors: <S> material compatible with your brakes <S> (resin/sintered) <S> they fit properly (no extra wiggling, test by pulling the brake lever on then trying to roll the bike forward and backward. <S> If there's slop in the brakes you may well have problems. <S> they lock in place using the proper fasteners. <S> I've heard of people using cable ties to hold "wrong" pads in place. <S> That kinda works in an emergency. <S> Be very careful. <S> But since your "wrong" pads seem to fit properly, I think you'll be fine. <A> Seems that the answers are all yes, no and maybe at the same time http://answers.chainreactioncycles.com/answers/5230-en_gb/product/prod92721/shimano-shimano-slx-alfine-g01s-disc-brake-pads-questions-answers/questions.htm?sort=recenta Summarises to "they're close but not the same, theres a different profile on the two models of pad." <S> Do remember to get the right ones next time. <S> Given <S> they're only 6 euros you could just buy them.... <S> pads are cheaper than rotors.
|
I know this because I thought they were all the same but a genuine Shimano bleed block wouldn't fit in a BR-M395 caliper that has B01S as the specified pad. It probably isn't dangerous our anything, at least not over the life of one set of pads, but it will chew up your calipers some, which is more expensive than buying the right pads. If you compare backing plates carefully you will see the difference. You're unlikely to get a refund, so if they work for you then all good.
|
My bike brakes are lethal, help! I've got an old Raleigh Winner (1980s 10 speed racer) which is perfect in almost every single way for what I need it for (I got given it free, it's very speedy and also looks cool). However, the brakes are dodgy to say the least. I had to take the rear brake off entirely the other week as the bit that holds the cable in the brake lever fell off (mildly alarming as I was trying to stop at the time!). I haven't replaced it yet as it was basically useless before, should I bother? In the dry, the front brake is incredibly squeaky but very effective (I adjusted the toe the other week?) In the wet though, it just won't stop and it's bloody frightening! I think the brakes might be cantilevers (they've got two wire spring things on pivoting arms) but they're so useless in the wet! Admittedly, I think the brake blocks are probably as old as the bike, but why are they so bad in the wet compared to the dry? Freewheeling to a stop is nearly as effective (and when/if the brakes do eventually bite, they whole bike vibrates and judders, it's very odd)! The tyres seem to be fine as well. Would some new brake blocks and/or cables solve the problem (the rims are steel, which apparently makes a difference)? I'm a student so I'm hardly drowning in the dolla and also a bike n00b so I'm not great on the technicalities. What should I do? Cheers. <Q> There are a lot of things that could be wrong and a picture of the bike might help confirm this, so I'll just make a list of some things to check and what they need (this is by no means comprehensive): 1) <S> Brake pads -- if they're old, they've likely dried out. <S> Replace them. <S> Needs a hex key. <S> Make sure they're also hitting the rim and not rubbing anywhere. <S> Also, clean the rims with rubbing alcohol (or if you're a student, vodka). <S> 2) <S> You need a housing cutter <S> /dremel + awl + file to do this. <S> 3) Adjust the brakes. <S> They look like single pivot sidepull brakes from google images, and you can find directions to adjust them here . <S> You need probably a hex key and maybe a screwdriver. <S> Also, make sure the caliper is secured to the frame. <S> 4) <S> Could be a loose headset (is the fork moving when you hold the front brake and try to move the bike?). <S> Or it might go away if you fix 1-3. <S> My suggestion is that if you don't know much about bikes or don't have someone to help you is to take the bike to a bike shop to get it checked out and see what needs repair, since you may not have all the tools you need to fix it or the expertise. <S> You need both brakes in case one fails. <A> Along with changing your brake pads/cables, you might want to eventually explore switching out what is undoubtedly steel rims on your bike with new aluminum alloy rims. <S> The steel rims are notoriously 'slippery' to brakes -- especially when wet. <S> The judder you're experiencing could also be a bent rim and a new rim would fix that (so would retruing your current wheel). <S> You can either rebuild them using the old hubs or buy new built wheels. <S> Because of the hand labor of rebuilding if you use a bike shop, it's often cheaper to just get new machine built rims with new hubs. <S> Your bike likely has 27" wheels. <S> You can swap them out with 700c contemporary wheels if you have enough reach on your brakes. <S> Most brakes do. <S> I did the same thing with my 1975 Peugeot UO-18 and <S> the braking is now stellar with alloy rims. <A> I fixed up a bike of similar age and spec recently. <S> Just fit four brand new rubber brake pads. <S> You'll need to take an old one in to a LBS to get the right thing. <S> The juddering will be stressing the front forks - don't do that. <S> Also check the forks for alignment... any "odd" feelings when you hit a small bump could be related to frame mis-alignment. <S> You'll never get great braking from these old things - if they were any good, noone would have moved to more modern designs. <S> However it should get better when tuned right. <A> I can't really improve on the comments already made by others. <S> But, new pads will help & yes you need 2 brakes. <S> Truing the wheels and setting the pads close to the rim will also help. <S> As someone else commented, steel rims are slippery. <S> Rim brake performance will suffer in wet conditions, but steel rims do make this much worse.
|
Brake cables -- these can rust or the lining of the cables can be worn out making them not work properly. The judder could be lots of things -- theres a certain amount of judder on all bikes.
|
What was the rationale for reverse brake levers? The Porteur style of bicycle popular by newspaper delivery men in France in the 1940s-1960s had reverse brake levers, seen here in this diagram from an article from Bicycle Quarterly (the photo jpeg is titled rebourherseville1960.jpg): A bunch of manufacturers including Dia-compe used to sell brake levers that were reversed and there are also some contemporary reproductions: Was this just purely for style reasons? I can't think of many advantages of a reverse brake lever (except style) and can think of major disadvantages (it will hook or catch on things as you move forward). What were the rationale for having brake levers like this originally? Period sources preferred. <Q> If you look at drawings of old bikes, both types of brake configurations are depicted. <S> This supports the idea that it was merely a design choice with no significant pros and cons over other configurations other than aesthetics. <S> I suggest that it just so happens that builders in the place and time period you cited used this design because it was fashionable. <S> There is very limited risk here for "catching" unless the rider is literally going through shrubs (and in that situation, catching would be the least concern). <S> Also, bizarre freak-accidents aside, no one is going to be "speared" by a reverse brake handle. <S> Think about what would actually have to occur for that to happen. <A> There can be different reasons for using this type of lever. <S> Personally I use it because the handlebar I've chosen bends sharply close to the end of the handgrip, so there's not room for both the thumb shifters and brake levers. <S> I've used the reverse levers for several years now without spearing or hooking anything with them, and find with a non-linear brake they perform well enough for city cycling. <A> The information is sourced from velo-orange.blogspot.com . <A> FWIW, The rental JUMP ebikes were redesigned to use these style levers to allow the entire brake cable to be internally routed to reduce vandalism to the bikes. <A> A cleaner appearance. <S> A standard lever will have an unattractive clamp. <S> Also, the rider may wish to use multiple hand positions on the bar & the clamp could be in the way of a desired position.
|
By moving the brake lever to the end of the bar, you're afforded more room on the handlebars for grips and shifters.
|
How to properly remove bearings from shouldered-axle track hub I am trying to learn the right way to remove bearings from a track hub. The bearings are cartridge bearings pressed into the hub. The axle has a ridge that prevents it from being removed while both bearings are in place. I know there are bearing pullers like this one from Enduro: But these require that the axle already be removed. So what is the proper way to remove these bearings? I know that I can just tap the axle out with a rubber mallet and force one of the bearings out, but I think this would damage the bearing. <Q> Hold the block against the axle, tap the block with a hammer. <S> Holding the wheel in your hand rather than blocking it against a solid surface also reduces the impact. <S> You will still probably damage the bearings, so preferably don't do this until you have the replacements. <S> Arts Cyclery have a video tutorial and the hammer appears about 70 seconds in . <S> In my experience this is actually easier than the removable axles, because even a decent bearing puller often doesn't work, or work any better than just using a hammer and punch. <S> The small hole in a bike wheel bearing (10mm) is often too small for the puller. <S> Press the new bearings in carefully making sure you press the outer races not the inner ones. <A> I've used the hammer method on my goldtec hubs back when I was a push bike courier in London. <S> Reckon <S> my rear hub did something like 80,000 miles in 6 years, changed bearings twice... <S> I was definitely what you'd call a bush mechanic.... <S> but think hammer method is fine. <A> This article on Cartridge Wheel Bearing Maintenance on the Art's Cyclery site says: When it comes time to replace the bearings, every hub is a little different. <S> For hubs like this one from Easton, the axle has internal shoulders that require one bearing and the axle to be removed at the same time. <S> To do this, tap on the end of the axle with a soft-faced hammer to push the assembly out of the hub. <S> If the hub isn't built into a wheel and you have an arbor press, like the one below from Harbor Freight, I'd be inclined to use that if gentle tapping didn't do the job. <S> They are relatively inexpensive (maybe $50-100 US for a new one) and generally useful if you like such things. <S> When the wheel is assembled, a small arbor press won't be big enough to be useful. <S> The trick to working with an arbor press is to support the hub with something so that you have a space into which to press the bearing and axle. <S> Sockets often work, as do pieces of key stock.
|
With a trapped axle like that you use a hammer, ideally a soft face one or I use a bit of wood as a pad.
|
How to cut a brake/derailleur cable? I need to cut a cable, cleanly enough that it can be inserted in its housing . What kind of cutting tool do I need for this? I probably won't be using it more than once every few years, so cheaper options are preferred. Also, tips to make sure the cable does not get disorganized when cutting would be appreciated. Note: This question is not about cutting the housing. <Q> You need a cable cutter. <S> All of the companies that make tools for bikes make them. <S> Here are a few options: http://www.parktool.com/product/professional-cable-and-housing-cutter-cn-10 <S> http://pedros.com/products/tools/brakes-and-shifting/cable-cutter/ <S> http://www.performancebike.com/bikes/Product_10052_10551_1030380_-1___400625 <S> As some of the other answers/comments have pointed out, it's a good idea to stick an awl (I use a fine-point nail set for finishing nails) in to the cut end of the housing after the fact to clean it up. <S> For the inner cable, the cable cutters will cut it cleanly with no prep or clean-up needed. <S> If you're going to use a pair of regular wire cutters, then you'll want to use the solder trick mentioned in other answers. <S> That being said, you really should replace the housing when you replace the inner cable. <S> It's rare for the cable to be worn to the point of needing replacement without the housing also needing to be replaced. <S> Alternately, you can use a Dremel tool with the cut-off wheel. <S> Some people swear by this approach: <A> I'm naughty - <S> I use a normal set of 6" side cutters on the inners and outers. <S> On the inners, I use a soldering iron and flux to heat and lightly tin the area where I will cut, then I simply cut it. <S> The solder holds all the strands together, and also makes threading easier. <S> For the outers, I use a super-screw (self-tapping wood screw with a very sharp point) as an awl to poke in the end and enlarge the inner hole. <S> Then I use a file to flatten off the end, turned <S> so I'm filing metal on the far side, to reduce dust going down inside the inner. <S> Finally I pop on a ferrule and its ready to fit to the bike. <S> Better tools would make this faster and cleaner, but for the once-a-year job its workable. <A> KevinC has the right answer - use either a dedicated set of cable cutting pliers from a bike manufacturer (don't use regular pliers or regular cable cutters, they will crush the housing) or use a dremel tool. <S> Most tools have a deburrer built-in. <S> With brake cables, you want to make sure you try to cut as cleanly against the helix at a single point (try practicing different small angles). <S> With derailleur cables, the strands run perpendicular, so you want to cut at a perpendicular angle. <S> The OP has clarified that s/ <S> he isn't talking about the housing but the inner cable: <S> If you're using a dremel tool, it's helpful to wrap some electrical or other tape around the cable before you cut. <S> This helps prevent the strands from untangling. <S> Work in small cuts so you don't overheat the metal and start melting the teflon coating too much. <S> Melted teflon gas is harmful so give yourself good ventilation. <A> My improvised techniques for when nothing else is around: using end cutters / carpenter's pincers :-) <S> It can work pretty ok for some types of cables, but needs a bit of practice. <S> Cutting inner cables. <S> For the simple (not teflon coated) inner cables, I never had issues cutting them with sharp pincers or regular cable cutters (though some of these are damaged by steel wires over time …). <S> The individual steel wires will spread out along the cutting edge a bit when cutting, but I would twist them back into shape and there would be no permanent damage. <S> Cutting housings. <S> If you have the type made with spiral-wound rectangular-cross-section wire, this can also be cut with sharp pincers. <S> You bend the housing a bit so that, when going down, one cutting edge slides in between two spiral windings and cuts the spiral-wound wire instead of crushing the whole thing. <A> Hi I used a Dremel and it cut through the cable housing very nice but unfortunately the housing was lined with a plastic a tube and it melted it shut. <S> After poking at for an hour <S> or I went out and bought a cable cutter designed to cut cable housing. <S> The moral of the story is check your cable housing before cutting.
|
If using a cable cutting tool, make sure to either use a deburring tool to remove the sharp edges.
|
Is my pump faulty or my tyre? I have recently bought a Specialized women's road bike and for the last couple of weeks was borrowing my boyfriend's hand pump with no real issues. Last night I finally purchased my own ( Topeak RaceRocket HP ) but each time I try to inflate the tyre (just a top up of air, not from flat) I can either hear air hissing out (I believe the pump isn't screwed on enough then) but even a quarter of a turn too far means the pump won't work as the air pressure seems to be too much and this would suggest I've screwed it on too tight. Just can't seem to get a happy medium. It could be resolved with a floor pump but as I've just dropped £30 on this, I want to be sure before I spend another load of cash just to eliminate possibility. Any suggestions? Should I return the pump or am I doing something wrong? Thanks :) x <Q> As other have commented since you can fill the tires with another pump the issue is not your tires. <S> If you bought it at your LBS (local bike shop) I would bring it in and have them demonstrate its' proper use. <S> If they can't get it to work they should replace it at no charge. <S> While the listed capacity is 160psi, the amount of effort required to generate the pressure will vary with pump design. <S> While not as much of an issue with a floor pump the difference can be considerable with a small pocket pump. <A> I was unable to inflate a presta tire. <S> After much experimenting found that the valve was not opening and closing with each mini-pump stroke, as it should. <S> If I did not unscrew the collar nut all the way, but only a turn or 2, then it worked properly. <A> So I think this thread can now be closed, thanks to everyone who replied. <S> I went to the shop who sold me the pump and they had no issues. <S> Still struggled when I got home <S> so I removed the wheel from the frame before inflating it, and this seemed to work. <S> So from now on I guess I'll remove the wheel! <S> They confirmed I had set it correctly in Presta mode so they were confused too haha, but at least I have a solution.
|
A larger diameter pump will require fewer pumps to inflate a tire but with more effort. Perhaps the weight of the frame was pushing the valve down...!
|
Do you know of tubes that are fully flat-proof? I am looking into whether there are inner tubes that are fully flat proof. Do you know how much they would affect performance and comfort? <Q> Yes, they're usually solid rubber <S> and they're very heavy, hard to fit and have a lot more rolling resistance than you're used to. <S> You can also get puncture resistant tubes that have thicker walls than normal tubes, and while they are heavier than normal tubes <S> they're nothing like solid tubes. <S> They also don't work very well. <S> Finally, you can get sealants that you pump into the tube that will leak a little then seal, like Slime . <S> Tubeless tyres use a similar sealant, but swapping to tubeless is a major change and there are many sites describing that process <A> Assuming that basics are in order and that you are using properly sized tires and inflating them to proper pressure, typical route to get more puncture resiliency is to use different tires with better puncture protection, not different tubes. <S> It reduced my puncture frequency dramatically, I expect it would also help you. <A> They are also solid one-piece tires made by Tannus ( http://www.tannus.com/#tires ) and AmeriTyre ( http://www.amerityre.com/our-flat-free-products/bicycle-tires ) that will replace the whole tire and inner tube. <S> One thing to consider with these kinda of tires is that the depth of the rim must be meassured properly otherwise the tires will roll-off the rim if it's too loose. <S> They also have a higher rolling resistance and will take some getting used a "smushy" feeling while riding. <S> Acme Tires ( http://www.acmebikeparts.com/ ) offer flat-free tires and wheel-sets packages if you don't want to do it yourself or take it to an LBS. <S> These are on the expensive side.
|
You're better off with puncture resistant tyres. Companies like "airless tyres" make them, and I suggest trying to fit them yourself before taking them to a bike shop and paying whatever they ask to have them fit the solid tubes.
|
Did I choose the wrong size bike? I don't know much about bicycles, and I have relatively little experience with them. I bike for fun, or to get around the city, not for sport. Recently I bought a BTWIN Rockrider 340 mountain bike , in size M. My height is 168 cm. After going out for a ~35 km ride, I found it somewhat uncomfortable and I got a back ache. The handlebar seems too low. It's much more comfortable and relaxing to just touch it with my fingertips instead of holding it properly, as I don't have to bend down that much. How can I tell whether I got the wrong size bike for my height or whether I simply did not use the correct posture? In the country where I am currently, exchanging the bike after such a ride is probably not possible, or very difficult, so it is really a last resort to try. While I did try the bike before buying, the store was in the city, on a high floor of a multi-story shopping centre, so there was very limited space and I didn't realize the problem. While people on this site might not think much of this bike, for me it was a fairly pricey one, mostly having had second hand bikes before. Therefore I would really like to make sure that I did not get the wrong size, or otherwise correct the problem somehow. I got this bike for getting out of the city and going to places inaccessible by public transport, mostly rocky dirt roads. <Q> People tend to think of fit as something for which there is a single solution, i.e ., a particular combination of frame size, seatpost height, stem length, and so forth, all of which will create the optimal size bike for them. <S> For example, I have a few different bikes which I ride. <S> One is a road bike with a 58 cm frame (flat top tube), one is a more modern road bike with 53 cm frame (sloping top tube), and so forth. <S> How is it that I can ride a collective 16,000 km on these different-sized bikes and be comfortable? <S> Because I have adjusted the combination of frame size, seatpost height, and stem length within a range that works for me. <S> You can achieve the same; it's not difficult. <S> You may wish to consider this fit calculator to help you figure out what the ballpark range of values is for your body. <S> You'll need someone to help you, but the numbers it gives you will be a decent starting point as you fine tune the fit of your bike. <S> You can use them to do an informed adjustment (if necessary) of your seatpost height/length and likewise your stem. <S> In addition, you can find many videos on YouTube and elsewhere which can help to inform your process: Correct saddle height for a mountain bike Mountain bike fit Etc. <S> Assuming that the people at the bike shop sold you the proper size frame, you may need to increase your fitness a bit, and then be sure the reach is appropriate, and the seatpost height. <S> In other words, you may need to ride the bike a bit to get a better idea of what the real root of the problem is. <S> 35 km may not seem like a long way, but for a lot of people it takes them some time to get comfortable going that kind of distance: <S> time to strengthen their core , their legs, and everything else that can ache at first. <S> After some saddle time, I think you will have a much clearer idea of what needs to be adjusted. <A> It's likely you can fix this by making the handlebars higher and possibly moving them back towards you. <S> That means a new stem, which is probably something you can fit yourself. <S> This is the part I'm talking about (photo from the manufacturer website). <S> If you have a 5mm allen key you can remove that stem by undoing all four bolts you can see here, plus the vertical bolt hidden under the small cap on the steerer tube (part of the front fork). <S> There are no doubt youtube videos showing how to do this. <S> The main thins is that this is what holds the front fork onto the bike, so if you reassemble it wrong you could make the bike unsafe to ride. <S> If you buy something like this one it will help your position on the bike: Online bike shops like ChainReaction will give you an idea of what is available ( maybe this? ), and you can then decide what you can afford to buy based on where you are. <A> A medium frame should be large enough. <S> Take some time to try to get used to riding it. <S> Lower handlebars require more core strength, but are more aerodynamic and therefore faster and cooler. <S> If it remains uncomfortable, either flipping the stem to slope up or buying a steeper stem or riser handlebars will move the handlebars up. <S> Moving the saddle backwards or forwards and also perfecting the saddle's slope can also have a great effect on comfort. <A> Seat height was mentioned above but there is also tilt angle (pitch if you will) and a small range of forward / backward adjustment relative to the seatpost (the rails can slide within the clamps). <S> In your case it sounds like shifting the seat forward and/or tilting the front down may help. <A> That is your size. <S> I don't thing there is nothing wrong with that. <S> How new are you in biking? <S> 35 km is not a small distance for some one new. <S> What kind of bikes did you ride before? <S> Maybe you are just not used to that type of bike. <S> Regards to not feeling comfortable. <S> That is geometry of a mountain bike with the seat being higher that the handlebar (or at the same level) and a handlebar being straight. <S> That is totally normal and I would not advice to try to change bikes geometry with extra parts. <S> But you should check if the seat is at the right height. <S> Check this for setting it right : <S> http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/article/how-to-get-your-seat-height-right-14608/ <S> Each kind of bike have its correct riding position. <S> Comfort city bikes allow you to drive with a straight back, mountain bikes require one more forward position and in a road bike you have to lay all way forward.
|
I'd try adjusting the seat first since that is usually easier than messing with the handlebars. In reality, it isn't that straightforward; proper fit can be achieved within a range of values.
|
Does a brand-new bike bought online need a service before riding it? I bought a brand-new road bike from a website. The bike was preassembled and delivered in a big box. The only things I had do were: - remove the styrofoam wrappings - screw on the pedals - loosen/reposition/tighten the handle bar (when the bike was delivered, the handle-bar was rotated and hooked under the top-tube so it was more compact for shipping) - adjust the height of the saddle I have ridden the bike. The tyres were already inflated. The gear shifting works fine. The brakes work. The wheels spin fine. But I noticed a (very) slight rattling noise (as if from the chain). I took my bike to a local bike shop. The man there told me the bike needs a service and it would cost £50. He claimed it would make the bike "safe" to ride, and if I had bought the bike from his shop (a physical shop instead of a website), it would be "put together properly". The cost of £50 was a little more than what I expected. This is a brand-new bike, after all. So my question is: should I get this brand-new bike serviced before I ride it? Or are there some simple things I can do myself? I can of course tighten everything with an allen key. I can also lubricate the chainand sprockets (or do I need to that? I read somewhere that brand-new bikes all have been lubricated in the factory before they're sold.) What else must I check (either myself or by a bike shop)? Is it a not a good idea to start riding the bike without getting it serviced first? Thank you for your input. <Q> I took the bike to another bike shop. <S> The man there adjusted my handle bar (apparently when I did it myself, it was not good enough, not straight or aligned). <S> Then he put the bike on a stand and checked gear shifting to all the gears. <S> It all worked fine. <S> He also pointed out the slight rattling noise I heard is caused by the chain rubbing against the front derailleur. <S> This is normal and can be corrected by "trimming". <S> This YouTube video explains "trimming" the front derailleur. <S> The man said the bike is fine to ride. <S> I asked him when I should get it serviced, he said: "in 3 to 6 months, depending on how much you ride." <S> He also said not to put any lubricant on the chain because the factory has already done that. <S> I was in the shop for 10 minutes and he didn't charge me anything, even though I was more than happy to pay him for his courteous and informative service. <S> Clearly this is the shop I'll take my bike to for the next service. <S> So to answer my own question, it's advisable to have a professional check out the bike before you ride it, unless you're experienced with bikes yourself. <S> You don't need a "service" per se. <S> Like with all new products, one should study the owner's manual before thinking there's something wrong with the product. <S> I should think the owner's manual discusses "trimming". <A> What your local bike shop said is exactly what many other shops will/would say. <S> Not that the bike wasn't put together properly, but it should probably be double checked to make that it assembled correctly AND that nothing wiggled loose during shipping. <S> It's a small price for the comfort of know that you won't hurt yourself or damage your new bike while out riding. <S> Also, local shops tend to charge more for servicing bikes bought online. <S> It comes across as them getting back at your for not buying with them, but I always think it's based in the truth - when you buy a bike at a local shop you're probably getting a bit extra from them in the form of service, tune-ups, etc. <S> Bottom line: bite the bullet and get it checked before you ride. <A> Wow This question has provoked some impassioned debate, all in the time it took for my morning ride. <S> Take a step back for a moment. <S> Let's say that you get what you pay for . <S> While not always true, let's go with that for a moment. <S> The guy charging 50 quid is saying a bike service from me is worth 50 quid . <S> Is a bike service worth 50 quid to you? <S> Apparently not (nor to me). <S> But maybe it's his standard charge for the bikes he sells, or he is swamped with work, or just made a bad call. <S> There can be valid reasons. <S> But what have you got from the guy who did the work for free? <S> Was he thorough? <S> Will he fix something if he messed it up? <S> Maybe he does good work and has just won a loyal customer. <S> Or maybe not. <S> At this point we don't know. <S> But we do know that because you haven't paid for anything, your consumer rights will be difficult or impossible to enforce. <S> We like things for free. <S> But I would prefer to pay a fair price and get the job done properly, with some assurance that my consumer rights were covered. <S> That way the situation is clear, and I like that. <S> In such a situation, my customer loyalty is also clear. <S> And just to address the question - <S> yes, any new bike needs adjusting / service.
|
In general, it is a good idea to bring a bike bought online to a shop for a once-over check.
|
Could I use a 30 tooth chainring with my current crankset? a few months back I installed a 34 tooth narrow-wide chainring in my Santa Cruz Bronson. I decided to install the 34 tooth chainring, basically, because I couldn't fit any other smaller chainring using my current crankset. You can see my current build in the following picture: I use a "standard 73mm threaded BB" GXP (or that's what Santa Cruz website says). How could I change it to a 30t chainring? Do I need to buy a new crankset? If so, do you recommend direct mount cranksets (in case I need to switch it to another side of chainring in a future), and, does any GPX-adapted crankset work? UPDATE: my crankset BCD is 104 <Q> The key measurement for chainrings is the Bolt Circle Diameter (BCD). <S> If you imagine those four bolts being points on the circumference of a circle, then the BCD is the circle's diameter. <S> As always, Sheldon Brown's site is a good reference here (and his crib sheet will help you work out your bike's BCD). <S> So having found out your BCD, any shainring with that BCD, and with the same number of bolts, should fit onto your existing crankset. <S> Now, you also need to consider how wide the chainring is. <S> If you imagine the chain going around the chainring during cycling, what you're looking for is to have a perfect fit as the chain feeds into the teeth. <S> The problem is that there are two common chain widths out there: 1/8" (generally used by track bikes, some fixies, bmx, probably others) and 3/32" (generally, any bike with a derailleur, including road bikes and mtbs). <S> So when you're looking to buy a chainring, it will generally be spec'd either 1/8 or 3/32 to denote the chain that it is paired with. <S> Without getting too bogged down in detail, the best combination is where both chain and chainring are matched, although you'll get away with a mismatch, as long as the chain is wider than the ring. <S> Now, you say that your BCD is 104, and point to a chainring that might be a good fit . <S> Certainly the BCD is a match. <S> Also, while that url doesn't say explicitly 1/8 or 3/32, it does say that the ring is compatible with 9/10/11 speed drivetrains. <S> In other words, with a geared bike. <A> That sure looks like a 112 BCD to me. <S> Just looking at you you can see there is not much if any room to get smaller. <S> There are some around that squeeze in a 33T. <S> If it is 104 BCD then according to Sheldon you can go down to 32T <S> but I would look around as the just does not seem right to me. <S> To me it looks like 32T is the smallest for 104. <S> Again just looking at the set up <S> it is clear there is very little room to go smaller. <S> A new crank for a few teeth is a bit of money. <S> Yes you can fit another crank with a smaller BCD or look at like RaceFace with spline based chainring. <S> Also called direct mount . <S> Looks like Santa Cruz is using that on the some of the latest models of that bike. <A> I'm sure it is 104 <S> mm <S> BCD <S> there are a lot of 30T chainrings for it. <S> I recommend you find a Race Face Narrow Wide 30T chainring.
|
So you can deduce that it is a 3/32 ring, and should therefore fit with your current chain. Lastly, note that if you are going to fewer T, you may need to shorten the chain.
|
Bicycle's inner-tube got puncture right next to the valve, How to patch it there? There is a very small cut 1-2 millimeter or less long in the inner-tube, right next to where it's the bottom of the Schrader valve. The cut is only 1-2 millimeters far away from the valve's bottom. The hole has a shape of a cut, parallel to the valve's edge, and it's very close, so it's very obvious likely that the valve was part of the reason (the other reason being the valve moved a lot probably because the inner-tube was not inflated.) Air escapes out of the hole so it needs to be repaired. I don't know if I can put a normal patch, because if the patch's edges detach even only a millimeter from the inner-tube, the hole will no longer will be covered and air will again escape. Any idea? I give my 2 ideas: Take a bike patch and cut a round hole in the middle, and then patch the inner tube with it, as if it were a ring, hugging the valve by all sides. Get some super glue or cement that covers the hole somehow. <Q> That's a very hard area to patch properly (if its even possible), and I'd recommend putting a new tube in instead of trying to patch it. . <S> I'd also check that the rim tape on the rim is intact and in good condition, cause otherwise if its busted, you're going to get another cut. <S> Also, as pointed out by ChrisH in the comments, rough edges on the rim hole can also cause this problem (you can use a small file to smooth them out, if that is the case). <A> The sander will need to be wider than the diameter of a bicycle Schrader valve stem . <S> You will use this to form a hole in an appropriately sized patch (i.e., a patch larger enough to have sufficient material on all sides of the hole). <S> The hole needs to be the perfect sized so that it just fits snug over the Schrader valve and will take force to move up and down the valve stem. <S> This will be a hard exercise and you may wreck a patch or two. <S> Use a slow sander speed on the Dremel and take your time! <S> Once you have the appropriate patch, you will need to prepare the tube all away around the Schrader valve (i.e., sand/scuff and patch cement the tube up to the base of the valve stem). <S> The final step is somewhat tricky as well. <S> Slide the tight fitting patch down the Schrader valve stem until it is just above the prepared area. <S> Make sure the patch is sitting perpendicular to the stem. <S> Take both thumbs and quickly and evenly push the patch down on the prepared area. <S> Do all your other typical finalizing steps such as massaging the tube and patch to ensure a tight bond. <A> Based on your description of the cut, it was caused by the rim and the under-inflation. <S> Check the valve hole in the inside of the rim with your finger. <S> It should be smooth with no sharp edge, and no burl or daggs on the corner. <S> If there are. <S> file or sand or trim them off with whatever tool you have available. <S> It could be the rim tape was missing or not covering the hole - you may consider replacing that if it doesn't look right. <S> Now the tube is probably rubbish. <S> However a patch costs a lot less than a new tube <S> so its worth trying to patch. <S> Buff the area on the tube, which means all around the valve stem plus the area of the cut. <S> Use sufficient vulcanising fluid on the tube, and leave it for 5-10 minutes till its cured. <S> I'd suggest you use a paper hole punch to put a round hole through your patch before unpeeling it from the backing paper/foil <S> EDIT Could also use a hot soldering iron to melt/burn a suitable-sized hole in the patch, but this could weaken the patch, ignite the glue or rubber or plastic/paper backings. <S> Could also leave a crispy ring around the hole best to use the hole punch above. <S> It would be handy to have a helper slightly stretch the patch <S> so you enlarge the hole as it goes over the valve. <S> The blunt end of a pencil or a small flathead screwdriver will help as a poking tool to encourage patch into place. <S> Then press and roll the patch on like normal, paying attention to all the edges. <S> Do not add extra glue to the patch once its in place. <A> Here's what I would do: Find a patch that will be large enough to cover the hole Draw a dot on the patch where the valve stem will be Tape the patch to a piece of wood Find a drill bit that is the size of the valve <S> stem Drill a hole in the patch at the place you marked in step 2 <S> Remove the tape from the patch <S> Patch the hole as you normally would using rubber cement <S> If the hole is right at the valve stem then you can try cutting the valve stem off of a similar tube (a used tube that you can't use anymore) and cutting the rubber off of the base of about 1/4th of the valve stem. <S> Create a patch from that with as much rubber as you need to cover the hole and part of the valve stem on your flat inner tube. <S> Applying heat (using a heat gun or some other method) and pressure to patch when it's setting also helps the patch seal so the tube will be good as new. <S> If the drill is spinning fast enough it will make a hole in the rubber no problem. <S> You could use a soldering iron to make a hole also if you don't mind the smell of burning rubber.
|
This will work as long as there is enough space between the valve stem and the hole for the patch to seal the hole. Otherwise its time for a new tube, they're not expensive. Get a Dremel (rotary tool) with a cone shaped sander (e.g., the 3/8 in bit shown below).
|
Protecting bike attachments such as lights against theft I was wondering what one could do to keep his bike attachments from being stolen. On Monday two lights were stolen off of my bike. I only had them for a day. It was the kind that has a rubber "strap" of sorts that goes on the handlebar. I only really care/want to know because they were fairly expensive... <Q> Take the lights and anything else thats likely to be stolen off your bike. <S> For things that can't be removed easily, you may want to use something like Pitlock security skewers (or security bolts) or glue in ball bearings or similar into the head of the bolts (which will make them hard to remove when you need to remove them, but a casual thief can't remove them easily). <S> Also, make sure you know how to properly lock up your bike (which has been discussed at length in other places on this SE). <A> In terms of accessories like lights, GPS, etc. <S> the only way to be safe is to remove them entirely. <S> Remember that if something is quick-releasable for you, it's also quick-releasable for thieves. <S> Bike lights will frequently get stolen even if they aren't easily removable, because they're valuable. <S> There is an assortment of "anti-theft" bike accessories available, but most of them just rely on obscure screws, and they tend to be inferior products as they must make other compromises in order to be harder to steal while also being priced competitively. <S> For bike components you may also want to remove as many quick release levers as possible. <S> I've had a seat + seatpost stolen before, and know many people whose wheels have been stolen. <S> You can lock your bike in such a way to prevent wheel theft, but it's impractical to lock things like seats, so you have to make it as difficult as possible. <A> Fortified Bike sells bike lights that are designed to be theft resistant. <S> They're made of heavy aluminum and use security screws so most thieves won't have the proper tool to unscrew it. <S> I haven't used their newer rechargeable lights, but I've had their older Defender Stealth model on my bike for about 3 years now and haven't had it stolen despite keeping my bike locked up outside at work. <A> I've attached lights etc. <S> with anti-tamper torx screws and normal screws in awkward places (like under the rear rack). <S> Both have some deterrent value over normal screws in easy-to-reach places, which in turn are better than clips that need no tools at all. <S> Some modifications may be required to replace the thumbscrew with something more secure. <S> But I had half a front light stolen because the rest was well screwed on - they opened it as you would for changing the batteries. <S> Most lights are designed to be easy to take off, which might as well mean hard to secure. <S> For anything other than cheap rubbish lights you should reckon that they'll be stolen or destroyed in the attempt whatever you do. <S> You should probably make the same assumption even for cheap rubbish if you reply on them, or at least have a backup (in my case a cheap rear light on my pannier - which comes with me - and a headtorch on my helmet). <A> The only way to do this would be lights that are integrated into your frame so they can't be removed. <S> Not a cheap option. <S> Instead, leave your lights and tools, etc in a bag that can be removed from the bike with one motion, or in a backpack, so you have them but only fit the lights to the bike when you need them. <S> I don't generally leave the helmet at the bike either... <S> I've had one stomped to pieces while I was elsewhere <A> [With lights that attach via a quick release system,] clip the quick release thumb lever off with wire cutters, you can still remove them with a flat screwdriver. <S> It's only good for stopping the opportunistic thief. <A> I wrote a post listing out some locking lights and other alternatives to detachable lights on my website: Bike to Everything - Locking Lights . <S> Here is some of the info rewritten specifically to answer this question. <S> You have a few options to prevent theft of your bike lights: <S> Locking lights <S> that use tamper proof screws on them <S> (example: <S> Fortified lights mentioned in another answer.) <S> Anti-theft lights <S> that are extremely inconvenient to remove and use non-standard hex sizes ( <S> example: <S> Bell Radian 650 anti-theft lights) Concealed Lights. <S> If you attach your light on a seat stay or underneath your rear rack for example, it may be less obvious to a thief that there's a light there. <S> Get your own tamper proof screws and attach your (non-detachable) lights that way. <S> (As Chris H mentioned) Bike saddles can sometimes come with integrated lights (easier to find for a cruiser style seat), and bike saddles can be locked down . <S> Helmet lights can come with you if you take your helmet in with you. <S> There are now helmets with integrated lights <S> (example: Lumos), you can get a light that attaches to the helmet, or you could even get a normal headlight that you put on your helmet. <S> You can attach lights to your bag or pannier that you take with you, so you don't have to think about removing the lights. <S> I love using both my Fortified lights and the Bell Radian 650 lights, and honestly I hope more companies start coming out with some better anti-theft lights so you can lock your bike with only a U-lock !
|
The also sell a security seatpost clamp to help keep thieves from stealing the light by stealing your seat.
|
Are there permanently mounted bike computers? Over the years I've owned multiple bike computers (whose things that tell your speed/distance). Each time the head either falls off while I'm riding or I remove it, but lose it somewhere. I want my next purchase to be one that is permanently affixed to my handlebars so that it never falls off or gets lost. I'm looking for one with strong mounting mechanism. I want to have to get out a screwdriver to replace the battery. I can't seem to find any one on the market that does this. Any help? <Q> Adding bits of rubber, sticky back stuff, or possibly even hook and loop tape to keep things in place better. <A> I've not seen one since those old school mechanical odometers that attach to the front axle. <S> I think your best bet is to add a small screw to the mount to lock the computer in place. <S> If you get something small and pointy like this one, less than 1.5mm across the shaft, you should be able to screw it straight into the mount so that the point hits the computer. <S> I suspect you could do this without drilling a hole first, but I would drill the hole. <S> If you're lucky the mount will look like this one and you'll be able to put the screw vertically up underneath through non-critical plastic. <S> That way if you do crack it it doesn't matter too much. <S> It might be worth buying one that has spare mounts available on eBay, and buying a couple of spares. <S> Then you could just superglue the speedo into the mount and cut it out when the battery needs replacing. <A> That screw seems the worst of all possible choices. <S> I can't imagine a way that compromising either the waterproofing or the electronics doesn't seem likely. <S> I have no idea how you'd charge it given it would make it hard to access the charging ports <S> but there you go. <S> That said, I've never had a Garmin fall off <S> be it in a crash or just riding along with the out front mounts. <S> Given it seems what your main problem is that you can't stop losing bike computers I'd recommend that you use a current generation 520 or higher and take advantage of the wireless sync (either wifi or over your phone data) <S> then never take the Garmin off the bike except for charging. <A> To err is human, but to really foul things up you need a computer. <S> Paul R. Ehrlich <S> I am sure I will take flack for this, but if all you are interested in is speed and distance, why not go with an old style bike speedometer. <S> Permanent mounting and no batteries. <S> Just watch out for the roaming bands of bike hipster thieves, they may steal your whole bike to get at the speedometer. <A> No, there are no permanently mounted bike computers. <S> To slightly misquote what Rider_X has said the best computer is no computer. <S> Computers are a tyranny that should be resisted. <S> Velominati has plenty to say on this topic Rule #68 <S> Rides are to be measured by quality, not quantity. <S> Rule #6 <S> Free <S> your mind and your legs will follow. <S> Rule <S> #74 V Meters or small computers only (note that the aforementioned V Meter is a fictional product). <S> Not to mention Rule #5 . <S> (I did say not to mention it). <S> My Ride , etc.
|
I would look for a way to improve your existing mount interface to make it less prone to falling off rather than making it permanent. The best computer, is no computer at all! If it has to be permanently mounted, glue it into the out-front style mount and glue the tightening bolt into the mount. However, if you want to log rides and distances for historical value, you could use a smartphone app, such as Strava , Endemondo , Map
|
Why are derailleur jockey wheels commonly made of nylon? Almost all derailleurs seem to come from the factory with nylon jockey wheels . What is the rationale for the use of nylon (rather than alloy or aluminum)? Is it merely weight savings (which would seem to be trivial given the size) or is there a functional advantage to nylon/plastic? <Q> Caveat: <S> I've only seen two or three sets of metal pulleys in my life. <S> There are several reasons: <S> cost: <S> plastic parts are cheaper to make than metal ones weight: it's easier to make a lightweight plastic part than a metal one (this is also related to cost, "easier" usually means "cheaper") <S> durability/resilience: somewhat counter-intuitively <S> , plastic cogs are less likely to fail completely. <S> When the plain bearing locks up the plastic wheel is likely to slip on the metal bearing (and many people don't even notice that this has happened), or the teeth with abrade off to form a smooth surface that the chain will run on (it's very hard not to notice this). <S> A metal pulley does not do this, if they stick for some reason generally the bike isn't rideable, and it's unlikely that the aluminium pulley will slip nicely on the steel bearing. <S> The latter is somewhat hard to get experience with, since metal pulleys are sufficiently rare and expensive that few people use them. <S> Also, people who pay extra for them tend to maintain them <S> so I haven't seen them fail other than via "full of mud, not going round". <S> In that case, though, the chain will not go through the rear derailleur at all, so the bike needs to be converted to single speed before you can ride it. <S> Which is an ugly thing to have to do when you're out on a bike ride. <S> Note that recumbent idler pulleys have the same concerns but often they're on the drive side of the chain so the forces are larger. <S> So are the pulleys to reduce chain bend angles and thus losses. <S> In that case metal cogs are usually also lighter and quieter but significantly more expensive (more than double the cost). <S> Derailleur pulleys would also benefit from being larger, but that's relatively rare, I suspect because weight and air resistance also increase with size (and a larger cog would mean extra chain, further increasing weight) <A> Since jockey wheels simply route the chain and don't need to operate under the same load as chain rings and cassettes they can be made from a less durable material. <S> I would guess that the routing round the jockey wheels is potentially a high wear area for the chain, so making the jockey wheels from something softer reduces the wear. <A> Several reasons. <S> Nylon is lightweight, tough, wears only slowly, and in particular the dynamic coefficient of friction with steel is the lowest amongst the sufficiently tough synthetics. <S> Friction and Wear of Polymers <A> I had Bullseye red aluminum pulleys on a Super Record derailleur similar to the one that's pictured. <S> I recall they were slightly noisier than the original nylon ones.
|
I'd always assumed nylon was used because it was a softer material than alu or steel, and therefore reduced wear on the chain.
|
Can I ride a triple front chainring with no front deraileruer I've managed to strip the threads on my front deraileruer mechanism. Its off the bike now - can I ride it as-is until I locate a new front mechanism? The chain does stay on the front chainring where it is placed manually, while stopped. (I'd not do this while pedalling, I like counting all the way to 10 on my fingers!) If the chain falls off the outside it will get caught on the pedal or right crankarm, and if it falls off the left its on the chain. ...now to find a three-position front derailer with top swing and bottom pull and a braze-on mount. <Q> This is generally a YMMV case -- some chainring+cassette+frame+rider combinations do OK with this, others really need a front derailleur/chain guide for this to work. <S> My suggestion to ride it without the front derailleur is to get the chain as straight as possible (put the bike on a stand, and try different gear combinations until you get the one that looks the straightest) and be smooth with your riding. <S> This will probably be something like the middle chainring in the front and something in the middle in the back. <A> Yes, although it's something that recumbent riders probably do more than upright ones. <S> When your chainrings are something like 20T/50T/70T <S> there's no way to shift that easily with a front derailler, so ankle shifts are often no worse than a modified FD trying to shift bigger jumps than it was made for. <S> The ones that work least well are the ones you shouldn't be using anyway... <S> You can usually shift to a smaller chainring just by pausing as your ankle passes the chain and nudging it down. <S> You will get a bit of chain grot on you from that. <S> Another handy trick is to sleeve a short length of poly pipe onto the drive side of the chain and tie it loosely to the chainstay. <S> That way it'll slide along the chain while you pedal, but you have something clean to grab onto when you're shifting. <S> After about 6 months of that I bought a Rohloff. <S> It seemed easier... <A> OK I did a 60 km flat ride today with no front mech. <S> However if the road was bumpy the chain slapped and ended up falling off the left side. <S> At the halfway I turned and enjoyed a moderate tailwind. <S> However the higher cadences and/or faster speed meant the chain fell off the pedal side, to the right. <S> I managed to put the chain back on about five times, while coasting. <S> TL,DR <S> Yes its possible, no its not a good idea other than a "get-home" fix <S> EDIT: I gave up trying to fit my own replacement FD, and got the bike shop to do it just right. <S> They grumped at me, it was a pig of a job even with their shop full of tools. <S> The final fix was a combination of red locktite and a brand new claris mech (because together we'd stripped the threads on the entire shop stock of 105 triples.) <S> I should have got a cable tension adjuster fitted in-line, because now the cable has stretched a wee bit making up-changes difficult, and it needs a wee push by hand to get up to the big ring. <S> Later, this was resolved after changing to a new chain. <S> No idea why that had an effect.
|
Cross chaining is less advisable than usual, you will tend to drop the chain especially with large chainring-large rear cogs, but most gears are usable. It was mostly okay when steadily pedalling into the wind.
|
Individual cassette gears and swap a 10 speed for a 9 speed Why can't we buy individual cassette gears? Probably 90% of my riding is on just 4 to 5 of the gears on the cassette. The rest of the gears are used much less. I have a X0 SRAM derailleur 9 speed set up. Since I need to replace the chain and cassette very soon I'd like to swap for a 10 speed set up. Other than cassette, chain and shifter will I have to replace the derailleur and the rings? Thx <Q> A long time ago some bike shops stocked single cogs, but that was when there were 5 speed cassettes and few choices. <S> Back then few people seemed interested. <S> Today with 6,7,8,9,10,11 speed options, three major manufacturers, often with multiple materials in each width as well as other variations, there would be too many options. <S> I suspect even the really big online shops would struggle. <S> For comparison, look at spokes - few places stock more than the most common types in the most common sizes, let alone <S> 2mm increments from 100mm to 400mm (Rohloff 16" wheel to front 36" wheel) <S> Think about what's required: you want a replacement cog for the particular cassette you have, out of at least 10 options for your particular combination of manufacturer, number of cogs, material and cost. <S> Look online <S> : Wiggle have 84 cassettes listed, ChainReaction have 69 MTB and 56 road cassettes, Starbike have 80 options. <S> Assuming they average 9 cogs per cassette and 20% are duplicates/compatible, that's over 400 different cogs to stock. <S> (too long for a comment). <A> Shimano stopped selling disassembleable cogs when they moved to Hyperglide. <S> With Uniglide you could build up your own cassettes and even flip the direction of a cog to wear out the other side of the teeth. <S> I've heard a number of reasons for this, but ultimately I reckon it's to sell more cassettes. <S> Depending on your derailleur you will likely also need to replace that. <S> Typically they work down (i.e. 10-speed derailleur on a 9-speed cassette) but not up. <S> This is because the cable pulls are the same, but the geometry is different because of the narrower cassette and extra cog. <S> You do not need to replace anything on the front, unless you're running some super chunky chainrings that won't fit on a 10-speed chain. <A> You might want to swap to a 10 speed for the same reason there are 11-speed cassettes available nowm where as long ago we had only 5 speed cassettes. <S> Smoother, less-jumpy shifting. <A> They often have carriers for large cogs or have many of the larger cogs and their spacers bolted together. <S> I think a big reason for this is the adoption of aluminium freehub body for weight saving. <S> They cannot withstand as much force as steel freehub bodys without deforming and basically require cassettes be more connected on the medium and higher torque gears. <S> Additionally, it's difficult to tell when cogs are worn. <S> It's much easier for a bike shop (or home mechanic) to replace the entire cassette and chain together to ensure a smoothly operating bike.
|
Most modern cassettes now are not only just individual cogs and spacers. It's not easy to measure them like you measure chain wear as well as tighter tolerances between cassette cogs on 9-10-11 speed bikes making it more difficult to sell single parts of a cassette and ensure good shifting. Sure, you would probably accept a cog out of the next step up or down in the manufacturers range, as long as it was compatible (hint: it probably isn't).
|
What benefits do bike clubs provide? Some bike clubs charge annual dues or fees to join. What do I have to consider when determining whether to join a club? Any clear tell-tale signs to avoid? A more subjective question is: what is the point of joining a club, especially if you are going to be contributing an annual fee? <Q> I'm going to disagree with Frisbee and note that there are many cycling clubs which aren't race teams but are just a bunch of people riding together and supporting a community of cycling in the area. <S> There are several things that you can get: <S> Group ride organization (support for the rides, sometimes food, planning, etc.) <S> Discounts at local bike shops and for certain group rides which cost money Access to a workspace (shared tools) <S> Meeting people who bike in your area (social networking too, like Strava groups or whatever) <S> In some cases, the clubs run race teams as well (which will increase costs, to get team kit and stuff). <S> Insurance (as pointed out by RiderX in the comments) <S> That being said, is it worth it? <S> If it makes sense to you, you may want to go for it. <S> If not, don't. <S> A lot of clubs are only 15-20 dollars a year, some will be good, some will be bad. <S> Some will be more expensive, and some will be free, depending on how much they're providing and what not. <S> If you're new in the area, you may have some work to do in this regard. <A> bulk purchase and supply of standard consumables like tubes or gels <S> (ie my local 4wd club organises tow-ropes made to length for 1/4 the retail cost and superior hand-made quality.) <S> Advocacy - Raising cycling awareness by being active in politics (eg Cycle lanes vs Motor Vehicles) <S> Social meetups <S> Tool sharing - there are bike tools which you rarely need, and may not be worth owning yourself (a spoke tension meter for example) <S> Bike fixups/giveaways to help the community Fundraising to assist top riders to <S> remote events/races <S> Event-watching socials, so you watch "the game" on TV together. <S> Organise bike events other than races (float in the local Christmas parade <S> , we're "jousting" with big foam lances on BMXs) <S> Not the same but related to Is it ethical to ride with races without being part of them? <A> They are non profit. <S> They do it to cover costs. <S> This is typically for racers. <S> You then ride for team X. <S> I think there is a cost to register the team name. <S> Often they will sponsor one or more races / rides and they will expect you to help. <S> At a race they may have a tent and some shared supplies. <S> Ask them what the money goes for. <S> If they tell you it is $400 and they don't sponsor any events <S> then that is a bad sign. <S> Group rides are typically free - <S> that may be what you are looking for.
|
Your fees pay for the running of the club, and your return is that they exist to do some/all of: run bike races, on road or off road or track or whatever. The best thing to figure out to avoid or join a club is to talk to cyclists in your area -- you may want to visit bike shops you trust and talk to the staff there, and other cyclists you know in the area. Advocacy for local cycling efforts (trails, etc.) Look at the clubs in your area and look at how much they're charging.
|
Effect of salt on bike chain I have seen other questions on this forum where preventive measures against salt water on bike chain are discussed. I have seen them in context to rusting. What I want to ask is that, rusting will be caused by water, then what is so special about salt water ? What effect does salt specifically have on bike chains ? <Q> With salt water when it dries you get salt crystals, which are hydroscopic <S> (they suck up water from the air). <S> This means that even if the air is dry where you are now, the salt will attract water as soon as you put the bike somewhere more humid. <S> And the water will form rust in contact with steel, since steel reacts more vigorously with water than salt does. <S> In other words, the salt sucks water out of the air, then exposed steel sucks water out of the salt. <S> There's a second problem that salt water gets sticky as it dries, and that attracts dust. <S> It's like an oily chain lube in that regard, fine as long as you clean it off frequently. <S> But that grit grinds away any protective coating on the steel, and any protective layer of rust as it forms. <S> Then the salty water makes more rust. <S> Chains are especially vulnerable to this as water wicks more easily than chain lube (especially in cold weather). <S> So it will be drawn into the inner workings of the chain. <S> Then when the chain dries a bit the salt is already in the middle of the chain and ready to soak up more water and keep the wear surfaces of the chain links wet. <S> So they'll rust faster. <S> Solid salt spread on icy roads will work the same way as salt water, but probably more so since the lumps of salt will be saltier than actual salt water. <A> Answer: <S> Salt accelerates rust of iron and steel. <S> Any exposed metal will rust faster and sooner when exposed to salt. <S> Even a pinhole in your paint will start turning into a rust spot where in a non-salty location it would probably be fine. <S> With respect to chains, there's probably a bit more oil and lube on the chain than on the rest of your bike. <S> This may have a minor protective function until it washes off. <S> Chains are made of plain steel or less commonly stainless steel. <S> Sometimes the plain steel chains are powder coated, but this doesn't offer any protection to the rolling contact surfaces of the chain. <S> Stainless steel will last longer generally, but its not immune to corrosion either. <S> Doesn't matter if its road salt that some places spray around in winter, or if its sea salt that has come from seawater or sea spray, I don't think there's a significant difference. <S> Defence against the dark salts: <S> Your best bet is to avoid the salt. <S> Don't be riding through the ocean at any time. <S> Anytime your bike has been exposed to salt, wash it off after your ride. <S> Not uncommon for people to shower after swimming in the ocean, why not <S> your bike? <S> Avoid power washers, you just want to rain on it for a while, and ideally not over a lawn. <S> Do this as soon as possible after your salty ride. <S> Let it air dry and then relube the chain before storing the bike away, that way you can get on and ride next time with minimum prep. <S> Your regular bearing maintenance needs to be stepped up in frequency if you're regularly exposing the bike to salt. <S> There are antirust coatings, but they're more intended for inside frames etc rather than on chains. <S> Finally remember chains are consumables and should be changed every 2000 miles. <S> Perhaps your chain change <S> interval drops a little to 1500 miles. <S> They're not overly-expensive items. <A> Any iron will rust. <S> Steel is mainly iron. <S> Rust is oxidation and salt increase the number of oxidizing agents. <S> From wikipedia <S> The rusting of iron is an electrochemical process that begins with the transfer of electrons from iron to oxygen. <S> The iron is the reducing agent (gives up electrons) while the oxygen is the oxidizing agent (gains electrons). <S> The rate of corrosion is affected by water and accelerated by electrolytes , as illustrated by the effects of road salt on the corrosion of automobiles. <S> The key reaction is the reduction of oxygen: O2 + 4 e− + 2 <S> H2O <S> → 4 OH− <S> Providing the electrons for the above reaction is the oxidation of iron that may be described as follows: Fe <S> → Fe2 <S> + + 2 e− The following redox reaction also occurs in the presence of water and is crucial to the formation of rust: 4 Fe2 <S> + + O2 → 4 <S> Fe3 <S> + <S> + 2 <S> O2− <S> In addition, the following multistep acid-base reactions affect the course of rust formation: Fe2 <S> + + 2 <S> H2O <S> ⇌ <S> Fe(OH)2 <S> + 2 <S> H+ Fe3 <S> + <S> + 3 <S> H2O ⇌ <S> Fe(OH)3 <S> + 3 H+ as do <S> the following dehydration equilibria: <S> Fe(OH)2 <S> ⇌ FeO <S> + H2O Fe(OH)3 ⇌ FeO(OH) <S> + H2O 2 FeO(OH) <S> ⇌ Fe2O3 + <S> H2O <S> From the above equations, it is also seen that the corrosion products are dictated by the availability of water and oxygen. <S> With limited dissolved oxygen, iron(II)-containing materials are favored, including FeO and black lodestone or magnetite (Fe3O4). <S> High oxygen concentrations favor ferric materials with the nominal formula Fe(OH)3-xOx/2. <S> The nature of rust changes with time, reflecting the slow rates of the reactions of solids. <S> This question would probably be a better fit on chemistry.stackexchange.com
|
Salt accelerates rust because it is an electrolyte. what is so special about salt water Pure water when it dries is gone, there's no residue. Rust is not specific to a chain.
|
Winter tyres or winter wheels? I've just picked up some lightly studded tyres - winters aren't too bad here but ice can be a problem. The bike is a hybrid mainly used for commuting, with some early starts. Most of my route is theoretically salted, but not all and not always. I'm planning to mount them this weekend on the rims I've got, so this question is thinking ahead to when I put my normal tyres back on the bike. The bike in question is a hybrid set up with a not-easily-removable child seat, so must do duty all year round. Does it make more sense to swap the tyres or the whole wheels? I've thought of several reasons both ways. In favour of swapping wheels: Rims, cassettes etc. wear out anyway, so I'll have to replace them at some point (the rims have >5000 km on them). I can put the summer wheels back on if I'm going for a long ride on a warm day. (I now have other bikes for this so it's not an advantage any more). Over the course of a year it's less work to leave the tyres on the rims (3 season tyres are marathon plus so not the easiest to mount, but not the hardest either). In favour of swapping the tyres on the rims: Save a little storage space. Defer some costs. and the two big ones: Will I have to align the derailleur and/or brakes when I switch wheels? What effect will running a new cassette on a worn chain have? Alternatively: when do I need to swap the chain if I'm running 2 cassettes of different ages. What experience do people have of the last 2 points in particular? Is there anything I've missed? <Q> I'm assuming you have rim brakes, since you are asking about wear and aligning brakes. <S> Winter riding will wear out everything faster. <S> The rims are going to be wet and dirty for most of the time, and the same goes for transmission. <S> It might be a good idea to use any old equipment you don't care about as winter parts. <S> The exception is that better hubs have better sealing. <S> 5000 km isn't that much for rims, by the way. <S> Unless the rims are exact same width (or the rotor is aligned exactly the same) you'll have to adjust brakes every time you switch wheels. <S> Possibly the derailleur too. <S> New cassette on worn chain will be noisy, wear out the cassette fast and skip if the chain is worn badly enough. <A> Fatter tires should be able to give you more traction in snow and mud. <S> You can then switch to thinner rims and tires in the spring. <S> Your winter wheelset could be on the cheapside since you're not particularly interested in superlight wheels. <S> You can often find very cheap used wheelsets on craigslist from thieves who steal wheels people upgrading to lighter wheelsets (if you buy the used as a pair, you lower the risk of buying hot goods). <S> But that's a relatively simple job - as is adjusting your derailleur (which might again happen unless you use the same brand/make rear hub). <S> You might as well have a dedicated winter chain to go with your winter rear tire/cluster -- or just replace your chain every spring. <S> This'll prevent the excess wear on your winter chain from affecting your summer cluster too much. <A> My advice is to run one winter and decide in the spring. <S> You would want your nicer wheel to be your summer. <S> Use this is an opportunity to buy a nicer wheel-set. <S> With spacers you can typically get two to align. <S> If is a hybrid you probably have a mid width rim. <S> Rims take a ranges of tire widths. <S> I would stay with same width unless you are making a big jump in tires sizes. <S> As for chain change it when it is worn out. <S> For me once I have a wheel off the bike a tire change out is only a couple minutes. <S> Once you wear out the current rim you may decide you want another bike with more gears or disc brakes. <S> I would defer. <S> I know you say space is tight but consider a second beater winter bike. <S> Maybe even a single speed. <S> Road salt is hard on a bike. <A> Offering a compromise solution: I had a spare front wheel with a studded tire when I was broke and biking all winter (on a cheap 26" rigid MTB) <S> I still haven't run full studs four winters in to bike commuting in the upper midwest.
|
One of the advantages of having winter wheels is that you can spec wider rims for the winter season. But yes, you'll have to realign your brakes if your rim width changes or if you switch wheel brand/makes.
|
is this cassette and chain ring combination good in terms of number of teeth? I recently bought a used bike which has a shimano alivio 8 speed gearset. When I look at the drivetrain, it really looks small to me. Below are the size of them in terms of the number of teeth: chainring: 24t,34t,42t cassette: 11-23T. Is this combo ok? From what I read this is not the standard no of teeth for chainring and cassette? Are their any drawbacks of using this combo? EDIT It's a hybrid bike (Specialized Sirrus) and has 700*32 wheels on it. As for my riding style I mainly ride it on the road, pavements and bicycle trails. <Q> You might want to recount the teeth on the big ring. <S> 42 is not impossible, but 44 would be more common based on the other two. <S> Assuming this is your 11-23, 11-12-13-15-17-19-21-23, and that you're on a 700 wheel with 23mm tyres, then Saint Sheldon says this at http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/ <S> Little Middle Big chainrings <S> 4.2 <S> 5.9 <S> 7.3 (metres of forward roll per complete pedal revolution, 11 tooth) <S> 3.8 <S> 5.4 <S> 6.7 <S> 3.3 4.6 <S> 5.7 <S> 2.9 <S> 4.1 <S> 5.0 <S> 2.5 <S> 3.6 <S> 4.4 <S> 2.2 <S> 3.1 <S> 3.8 <S> 1.9 <S> 2.7 <S> 3.3 <S> 1.6 <S> 2.3 <S> 2.9 <S> (same, but for the 23 tooth gear) <S> So its a road bike with a granny gear for steep hill climbs. <S> The 42 chainring limits your top speed a little, and the 11 tooth rear will have mechanical loss of efficiency compared to a 12 or 13 tooth. <S> There is nothing wrong with your combination. <S> Use and learn what you want, and where you struggle. <S> Personally I have a 25 in the rear and a 22 on the front, and I still struggle with steep 20% grades. <S> Once its a bit more worn <S> and you know what you want, then replace the chain and cassette with a range to suit your riding needs. <A> There are a few things you need to check when you select a cassette+chainring wrt the derailleurs: 1) <S> Can the front derailleur take it? <S> 2) <S> Can <S> the rear derailleur take it? <S> It needs the capacity to be sufficiently high for the chainring+cassette combo, appropriate largest sprocket (and smallest sprocket, if specified). <S> Both need to have the same type of cable pull as your shifters. <S> 3) Is the cassette compatible with my wheel? <S> Campagnolo cassettes don't fit on Shimano freehubs, for example. <S> And if you put a Campagnolo wheel on a Shimano system, the spacing of the cogs may cause problems. <S> If all these are OK, you're fine technically, but you may want to change the gearing, for the type of riding you do. <A> Yes that is narrow cassette that would be more for flat roads <S> They may have done that because that is all they had as that set up does not make much sense for that bike. <S> so they had to keep ratios tight. <S> If you need a lower gear now then get a bigger cassette now otherwise wait for it to wear out and then get a bigger. <S> If you need a higher gear you may need to switch out both the 24 and 42 as the derailleur may not have the capacity for 24 to 48. <A> It is a narrow range road cassette. <S> The chainrings are very small, with a more common 11-30 cassette most of the gear combinations would be too low to be useful unless you ride in the mountains. <S> The narrow range produces more gear combinations in the useful range, and 22/23 lowest gear is still extremely low by road standards.
|
It may also have low capacity derailleur I read that as you already have a bike with this gearing, you're asking if its okay, not whether it will fit and work. The front derailleur has a certain number of teeth it can shift between chainrings, and a largest and smallest cog rating. That bike currently comes with 11-32T cassette and 48/38/28T chainrings
|
Can I put a rack on a carbon road bike? I got a carbon-framed Kestrel Talon Road Bike recently but I also want to use it for commuting to and from work and I want a place to put my lock and other stuff on the bike. Is it possible to have a rack on this kinda bike. <Q> It is (strongly) not advisable to put a rack on carbon. <S> You could probably put a lock mount on the handlebar stem (I do). <S> Possibly a handlebar bag. <S> Bottle cage bag <S> but they don't have much capacity. <S> They are good for like wallet, cell phone, and keys. <S> Don't like to do product recommendations but <S> Revelatedesigns have a lot of bags. <S> Not easy to find but there are carbon forks with rack eyelets . <S> But I would not do that to that bike. <S> Not a typical commuter bike. <A> I suggest looking at frame bags. <S> They don't carry much, but they have more capacity than the more sensible under-seat bags. <S> You can get various sizes (up to 'fill the triangle'), and could even do both a frame bag and a seat bag. <S> There's a cycle tourist with a carbon bike a bit heavier than yours here <S> so it can be done. <S> Most of the carbon bike people tape their frames where the bag will rub to prevent the bag slowly grinding through the frame, but that seems to be the main concern. <A> It's been there for around 7 years. <S> I did it by drilling and tapping holes into the rear dropouts, which are aluminum. <S> So none of the weight is on the frame at all — it's taken by the wheel directly. <S> A single stay at the top anchors the rack to the brake bolt. <S> Now, I would not think of using the bike for a loaded tour. <S> But for holding my briefcase on for a trip to the office: no problem at all. <S> Of course, many newer carbon frames don't have a flat place on the dropout where you could do this. <S> A better alternative might be a racks that mounts to the axle, attached by the QR skewer. <A> Namely, Tailfin makes racks explicitly designed to work with CF frames without rack eyelets, like "racing" road bikes. <A> You could get a beam rack that attaches to a seat post. <S> Only issue is that you'll be limited by weight you can carry. <S> If you have a https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/carriers-racks/tubus-adapter-set-for-quick-release-axle-mounting/ <S> https://www.tredz.co.uk/.M-Part-Seat-Clamp-Mount_34111.htm?sku=79197&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=google_shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQjwyJn5BRDrARIsADZ9ykEEpZRlvyZUEBcTRVOSNHR2I2tft31vzRVSBLG6GW9dD0YVcvufXaQaAlmbEALw_wcB <S> Then stress is transferred off the brittle frame. <S> Toured like this on a carbon frame. <S> Just be prepared for fun and games when changing an inner tube.
|
Yes, you can put a rack on a CF frame, given the right rack. You could get an over-sized seat bag. I have a rack on Carbon Fiber Trek 5000 series frame.
|
Will strapping salsa anything cages on my suspension fork damage it? Will strapping salsa anything cages on my suspension fork damage it? I'm considering bikepacking, and don't have a rigid fork on the bike I would like to use. I would likely be carrying something of moderate weight like a couple litres of water on the front of the bike. I won't be using panniers as I would like to keep the weight mostly centered and plan on quite a bit of off road riding. Is it generally safe to use something like the salsa anything cage (or big bottle cages) strapped to my fork? Could this damage the fork, more than just messing up the paint a bit? Likely mounted like this, with intertubes protecting fork, and hose clamps holding cages: Source http://www.bikepacking.com/plog/bikepacking-the-appalachian-trail/ <Q> Jeremy at Cleaveland Mountaineering has a similar product to the anything cage and a shows a regular suspension fork as one of its uses. <S> http://cleavelandmountaineering.blogspot.co.uk/p/everything-bags.html <S> He also has a degree in mechanical engineering, so if there were a problem i'm pretty sure he wouldn't be recommending it. <S> From my own perspective, the vast majority of force the load is going to apply to the fork will be vertical and simply cause the lower leg to slide up and down the upper. <S> Fork lowers are also by nature pretty robust as they have to resist the twisting forces applied under braking etc. <A> Don't over tighten the hose clamps, and check it occasionally to make sure it doesn't slide down into the brakes. <S> The rubber under the hose clamps is definitely a good idea. <A> The only thing that I would worry about is your comfort/security because of the efficiency of the suspension. <S> Suspension only works if most of the weight is suspended. <S> When you are putting the weight in non suspended areas you are effectively reducing the efficiency of your suspension . <S> So if you are only doing light offroad and are using it for comfort it should be ok, but if you have some downhills with sticks, stones and roots where you really use the suspension it could get dangerous ! <S> This could be avoided by putting in only light things like clothing. <S> Also your load will be shaken pretty good, but that should be no problem if you are putting in what you are describing. <S> But avoid electronics, cameras, cookies ... <S> A bottle might jump out of a bottle cage. <S> Else the mounting looks good and stable, and I think there should be no damage to the suspension fork.
|
It will add a little stress to the shock and possible make it wear more than normal, but it shouldn't be a problem if there's not a whole not of weight in the bag.
|
Cycle law: definition of Dismounting Some area requires you to dismount your bicycle. So what is the exact definition of dismounting your bicycle? Can you just simply dismount from your bike seat, but keep one foot on the pedal to propel the bike forward? Or do you have to completely dismount and walk the bicycle? <Q> That means you should not be straddling the top tube, but should be standing next to the bicycle. <S> Then, you can walk the bike if needed. <S> This is the safest bet, and the one you should use unless you have additional information. <A> Dismounting: to get off your bike and walk besides it in any fashion that does not involve straddling it, in any way or form, or carry your bike. <S> That way <S> the Observer: aka police or civic duty personnel, can easily distinguish the difference between "riding" vs "walking" <S> It is part of the enforcement of the law itself, so that there is no, gray area to challenge, whether you were riding vs walking the bike. <S> Straddle walking: as in two feet firmly on ground and is the only means of forward and backward movement, is quite safe, so long as you are mind-full of who is around you, because you are only moving the pace (walking while straddling) of a pedestrian with the width of your shoulders and length of your bike. <S> this is especially true when carrying loads on saddles, baskets or handlebars. <S> Where walking besides the bike would be dangerous due to the bike fighting gravity and trying to keep it upright, when it starts to go over gravity kicks the tires out to the side when you hang onto the handle bars trying to stop the downward pull. <S> (9 years of direct experience as only means of transportation of myself and goods I carry. <S> It is extremely dangerous for self and others when walking "besides a bike" loaded with a 40-80lb load for example. <S> When you are not seated and using one pedal or kicking off the ground with the other foot for forward movement, while balance on the other pedal is quite dangerous to self and others. <S> If you need to come to a stop right now. <S> Body in motion stays in motion unless acted upon outside force. <S> Meaning balancing on that single pedal and no contact with seat means the bike is NOT going to stop you when you squeeze the brakes sending you flying forward or other dangerous direction. <S> In fact its more dangerous than having both feet on the pedals where you lift off the seat. <S> At least them your center gravity is in the middle due to equal pressure on both pedals and there is more friction between you and your bike when you squeeze the brakes suddenly. <S> Again: Dismounting, is entirely about making is easier for observer to know which you are doing, thus making it easy to enforce the law/ordinance. <A> You would have to be off of your bike completely. <S> You may be able to get by with straddle walking it (both feet on the ground). <S> This rule is usually in place to keep pedestrians from getting hit. <A> Answer: <S> Dismount means get off and walk beside the bike. <S> You cannot scoot with one foot on the pedal either, however you can jog or run with the bike beside you. <S> I guess nothing says the bike must stay on the ground <S> either - you can carry it fore/aft or even sideways, and you're obeying the letter of the law.
|
By definition, dismount means to get off the bicycle. You shouldn't just get off the seat and pedal with one foot or waddle, unless you have additional information that says its okay in that area.
|
What's this part of the bike, and is it safe to alter it? The video shows someone installing a gps bike tracker, however there is not much room in the top of the head tube, so he hammers down what's already in there in order to make room for the tracker. In this video, (starting at 1 minute 30 seconds) I wanted to make a custom gps tracker for my bike as I'm into electronics, but I have no idea what this 'hammering' does. What is this part he's altering? And is it safe to do so? <Q> What he hammered down is the star nut. <S> It's a gription <S> (yes I made that word up) device that serves as an anchor point in the steer tube to allow the top cap to properly compress the headset during a headset adjustment. <S> Old or damaged star nuts are often driven all the way through the steer tube to remove them (that's why your steer tube is open at the bottom). <S> They are generally only hammered in a short ways because being longer serves no purpose. <S> In this case, so long as that GPS unit is as stiff as a steel bolt and allows for proper compression during an adjustment, it should be fine. <A> The hammering is to make room for the unit. <S> I would not use the unit for compression. <S> I suggest: Remove unit Loosen pinch bolts <S> Use the bolt (shown in video) to put proper compression on headsetbearings <S> Tighten pinch bolts Re-install GPS unit <S> Mainly I suggest you start with a seat tube based unit. <S> Headset is a lot of fabrication. <S> In a headset during test you could just let the unit rattle around (pack it with some something). <A> It's purpose is the attachment point between the fork and the headset.
|
The purpose of the bolt is to compress the bearing on the headset. The part he hammers down is called the "star nut". Having it moved that low, and something inserted between it and the top cap seems like a bad idea.
|
Why do skinny tires require less pedal effort? Everyone knows (citation needed) that (at fixed rim diameter) tyres with smaller section require less effort to move around (at least on a paved road). TL; DR. Why? A bit of context. I always thought this phenomenon is due to the size of the contact patch between each tyre and the road. Notably, the area of this patch decreases when you decrease the tyre cross section. [This assumes that a tyre with smaller cross section will have a higher minimum pressure, which is generally true] . Friction is proportional to the contact area, QED. However, I recently considered that friction (as almost everyone knows) would generate a torque that causes the wheel to spin faster [note 1] . So I had to come up with an alternative explanation.My best attempt is this.If tyre A has a smaller cross section than tyre B, tyre A will have a higher manufacturer pressure than tyre B, and therefore will be less subject to deforming.In terms of conservation of energy, deforming a tyre continuously requires a fair amount of energy, and it's here that our precious kinetic energy goes when we stop pedalling and our expensive toys (or in my actual case, inexpensive toy) come to a sad halt. So tyre A sucks less energy than tyre B, and therefore requires less effort.How can we put this in terms of forces? There must be an asymmetry in the forces near the contact point, causing a torque that slows down the spin of the wheel. Can you describe this asymmetry? [Note 1. Friction is a force applied at the contact patch, with direction opposite to the direction of motion. Therefore, friction generates a torque that spins the wheel faster. For instance, in absence of any friction, a wheel would slide seamlessly without rolling.] [EDIT. I apolgise for the sloppy formulation of the question. I edited to add clarifications where necessary. I opted for adding text rather than removing because some comments would otherwise look out of place] <Q> Your opening claim: <S> Everyone knows (citation needed) that (at fixed rim diameter) tyres with smaller section require less effort to move around (at least on a paved road). <S> Is actually not true . <S> Your next claim isn't true either. <S> The contact patch area for a tire will be nearly the same regardless of what width tire is used, for a given pressure. <S> If I have a tire that is pumped up to 100psi, and the bike and me weigh 200lbs, the contact patch between both wheels will be nearly 2 square inches. <S> Pressure is force divided by area. <S> Your third claim is also not true, as static friction is roughly proportional only to the normal force, and it doesn't even matter, as when the contact patch is touching the ground, it's not even moving ! <S> This translates to less vertical displacement of the rubber in the tire as the wheel rolls. <S> Ross Millikans answer describes, the deflection in rubber is the primary source of tire-related rolling resistance. <S> It turns out, that for fixed pressure , wider tires have less rolling resistance than narrow tires. <S> The key element isn't the width of the tire, it's the higher pressure. <S> It is much easier to make a small high-pressure tire than a wide one, for reasonable weights and costs. <S> Furthermore, because making a high-pressure wide tire is more challenging, it may require measures such as thicker treads that increase the energy cost of tire deflections such that it is a net negative over more deflection of software rubber, and so on. <S> I'm not even going to address your torque theory because you are obviously confused as to the forces at play. <A> The loss is friction in deformation of the rubber of the tire. <S> When you flex the tire from round (when not on the ground) to flat (when touching the ground) there is heat generated. <S> If the tire is narrower and the pressure is higher, there is less rubber involved in the flexing. <S> It is true that higher pressure means less contact patch, but that is not important here. <S> This is an energy, not a torque argument. <S> If you want to talk about torques, I don't understand why you think friction should accelerate the wheel. <S> I would say the part of the tire just coming into contact produces a retarding torque and the part leaving contact produces an accelerating torque. <S> Both torques are reduced because the (almost vertical) line of action is almost along the wheel radius. <S> The retarding torque is greater due to the losses mentioned above. <S> This is really the same as the energy argument above, as it must be. <S> The losses are the same, whichever way you look at it. <A> One answer I've never seen for this question is the moment of inertia of the fatter tire is greater than that of a skinny tire. <S> Even at low pressure, a fatter tire will hold more air than a skinny tire. <S> This means there is a larger mass of air that needs to be spun - this is why fatter tires require more effort. <S> At equal pressure there will be even more air in the fat tire compared to the skinny one. <A> This question is confusing with some misstatements but I am going to try your "asymmetry of forces". <S> If this is not what you mean on "asymmetry of forces <S> " then I suggest you clarify <S> as many people have tired to answer the question in a number of ways. <S> Work is done on the rubber to deform it. <S> Work is the integral force in the direction of the work. <S> Work and heat have the same unit of measure. <S> Yes conservation of energy applies. <S> On the front edge work (integral of f x ds) is performed on the tire to displace it. <S> The tire is not like a spring where the work is given back on tailing edge. <S> Virtually all the work is translated to heat (friction in the rubber). <S> Heat is more intense than you would think - it takes a lot of work to produce a heat. <S> You get a very small spring back from the rubber back on the tail end. <S> The heat does not just accumulate as temperature - the heat is then transferred to the atmosphere. <S> The deformation on the front end also does work on the air in the tire. <S> On the tail end the air in the tire does work tire to push it back out. <S> Most of this work is given back. <S> Some of this work on the air in the tire is translated to random kinetic energy (temperature) and that equates to work not given back on the tailing edge. <S> The other problem there is on the tail end due to the delay most of this work pushing back <S> is not even against the road to propel the tire. <S> It is is work done on the rubber and atmosphere. <S> A tire with more displacement has more resistance. <S> That resistance is more more heat. <A> At constant velocity , instantaneous equilibrium, the moment of inertia indeed won't have any effect on pedal effort . <S> However, if there are any accelerations then the moment of inertia of a fat heavy tire will play a significant role. <S> Since velocity changes are common even and especially with the Eddy Merckx types, in general the moment of inertia of a bicycle tire+wheel matters with respect to pedal effort.
|
By varying the width of the tire, while the contact area stays constant, the shape is different, notably the patch gets shorter as the tire gets wider. There is conservation of energy.
|
Are 29" and 26" bikes come with different size frames? I am going to buy a cycle. In this regard I got my framesize 20". Now I would like to know is it for 26er or 29er ?? Is frame size will be different for 29er and 26er ?? I am going to buy a GT Timberline. My height is 5' 11.5" inseam is 34.5". I am from Bangladesh. May be I am going to have 18.5" frame size. <Q> With identical main frame geometry, a 29er will be taller than its' 26" counterpart. <S> You really have to test ride or test fit each to determine which size is correct for you. <S> Brand "A" may require a size 20", Brand "B" may require a different size. <A> The frame size not only varies with wheel size, but also with manufacturer and type of bike. <S> So, if you ride a 20" 29er with brand A, theres a non-trivial chance that brand B's 29er will be too big or small for you. <S> If you have a regular old road bike which is a 58 cm, for example, you may find a 58 cm cyclocross bike too big for you. <S> Examples go on and on. <S> The only way you can be sure of if a bike will fit you is to try it. <S> The second best thing to do is look at the geometry chart (such as this one for the Trek Madone): and see if the measurements are appropriate for you, for a given size. <S> The two most important ones are typically (effective) top tube length and standover height. <A> There's no telling. <S> You must get the dimensions of both bikes and compare. <S> The 20" measure only tells you the (theoretical) seat tube length, and there are many other variables. <S> [On re-reading your question, it sounds like you've been told a 20" bike "fits" you. <S> This is an approximate measure that primarily takes into account your leg length. <S> It would only be a starting point <S> when you walk into a bike shop and ask to try out a bike -- you need to actually ride the bike to see if it fits you in all regards.] <A> The frame size will not be different, as it's 20" on both. <S> Only wheels will be different size.
|
So, you need to know the frame size you need for the particular model of bike you're going to ride. And theres a good chance that if you ride a 20" 29er, a 20" 26er will be too small for you. When 29ers first became popular many buyers found that many manufacturers did not adjust their size charts to allow for the increased standover height. Whether this is the case for the models you are looking at is impossible to tell without more information. If you are comparing sizes between different brands there may also be a size differences.
|
Disadvantages of run 650B wheelset on a 29'er I am in need of a new wheel set for my 29'er, and wondering if 650B's are an option. My current bike handles more like a supertanker than a bike. Great for straight lines once up to speed, but if there is a corner, watch out... The 650's are supposed to more responsive than the 29er and roll better than the 26". Additionally my wife rides a 650B, so we would be able to reduce pare tubes and tires. Bike has disc brakes so that is not a problem. Apart from lower BB, hence increased risk of pedal strike, if I were to put 650's on my bike, what disadvantages would I have. <Q> But you don't know your bike would handle any better with 650. <S> In an earlier post you said you liked your wife's bike. <S> Wheel size is not the only difference unless they are otherwise the same bikes. <S> Put your wife's wheels on your bike and try for yourself. <S> My 29er is better than my old 26 is every way. <S> The clearance is only 1/2 the difference so a change of about 2 cm. <S> But 2 cm is enough to notice. <S> Not just clearance you change geometry. <S> But that may be a good thing for your supertanker. <S> Also the weight of the wheel and tire will effect the performance. <S> Even how easily it turns Angular_momentum . <S> A lighter wheel and tire will be more nimble to turn. <S> A lighter 29er might give you (a bit) or what you are looking for. <S> In the end a different frame geometry may be what you need. <S> I think you are putting too much on wheel size alone. <A> I would be wary. <S> Can you do it? <S> Yes. <S> Will it affect the geometry and handling of the bike? <S> YesIs there a chance you will pedal strike more frequently? <S> YesThe drop will reduce chainring clearance when doing log overs as well. <S> Anything from a 650x2.8 to a 3.0 will be in about the same range of tire size as a 29er wheel/tire combination, but will have a wider / rounder tread profile. <S> A wide rim will be needed, 35mm to 50mm rims are typically used for a 650b+/27.5+ setup. <S> You'll need to check and be sure you have the frame clearance as well, but if you can fit 29x2.4 tires, you should be good using a smaller tire like the wtb trailblazer which is 27.5x2.8 and should work well with a lot of frames. <A> For a given rim design, the larger diameter version will be heavier and weaker. <S> Lighter wheels have less angular momentum. <S> Although a smaller wheel will be spinning faster, the change in circumference is proportional to the radius, wheras angular momentum is proportional to the square of the distance from the axis. <S> I don't know how to calculate the impact of larger heavier wheels on steering. <S> 650b (584mm) is a compromise between 26" (559mm) and 29"/700c (622mm) <S> To summarise: The differences in your subjective experience will be too small to outweigh any biasses created by your expectations. <S> Get a fatbike.
|
When rolling over the same rough surface, a larger diameter wheel won't drop as far into holes that are smaller than the wheel, so the larger wheel will follow a shorter path and the force experienced at the new contact point as the tyre bridges the gap will be at a smaller angle from the tangent at that point. One thing you may want to consider is getting wider 650b rims and going for 650b+ (aka 27.5+) tires as they will fit a lot of existing 29ers and will not alter your geometry significantly.
|
how to remove oil from mtb disk brake at home My cycle has got an front disc brake I not know how but unfortunately few drops of oil got on my disc brake now it was making a very bad sound like a violen and and could even not able to stop my cycle at all now I have only one way to fix it,s you please help me <Q> I use Carplan Brake and Parts Cleaner, purchased from my local auto parts shop. <S> This contains about 30% IPA (isopropanol) and 70% Naptha. <S> If you don't have many bikes, it may be easier to visit your local car mechanics' workshop and ask to use a little of theirs. <S> If you have contaminated the rotor, you will also have contaminated pads. <S> There is a procedure to restore pads using brake cleaner, an oven and a blowtorch... <S> This isn't worth the effort and risk, so buy new pads . <S> You don't have to buy your caliper manufacturer's own pads, so long as they're the right shape; I've had no problems using Clarks and Ashima pads. <A> An abrasive (scouring) household cleaner also works really well. <S> The pads are another problem altogether as they absorb the oil. <S> If you want to try to save them you need to remove them from the brake and give them a really good clean. <S> Put them in a container with solvent and let it soak in, then wipe off and sand/file the surface layer off - again, an abrasive cleaner can be used effectively. <S> Some people suggest trying to burn the oil off - place on a metal tray in a safe place, a couple of drops of meths on the pad, and light it. <A> There are many ways to remove grease/oil from a rotor at home. <S> A simple degreaser will do the trick. <S> Make sure to use a towel that doesn't already have grease on it. <S> If the degreaser isn't cutting it, you can move on to using ethanol or isopropyl alcohol, which most people have in the house. <S> If you are still having a hard time, try pure acetone (nail polish remover). <S> Get the non scented, non colored kind. <S> It's usually less than a dollar for a bottle at the pharmacy. <S> I'd also suggest using rubber gloves to protect your skin while using any of these chemicals.
|
The disc is the easy problem - as already suggest, brake cleaner, alcohol, methylated spirits all work well. If you can afford it, by far the best solution is to replace them.
|
How can I paint a kryptonite key? I now have 4 kryptonite keys on my key ring that I carry around for my family. These are the ones with a black plastic bulb on the key's bow. In order to make my life easier, I would like to paint it for easy identification. What type of paint do I need to use along with techniques or other advise. <Q> I used nail varnish, it sticks well to the plastic and is very tough. <S> It's easier to apply than spray paint, but a bit more fiddly and forms a thicker layer of paint. <S> I also used it to mark the locks. <S> You get bottles in the most absurd colours in a 1-pound shop in the teenage cosmetics section. <A> Paint (and even nail varnish) will chip off the plastic sooner or later. <S> The important thing is to get the paint into the grooves where it's protected. <S> On my recent series 2 this means the logo on one side, the key number on the other. <S> I've got an older series 2 with a slightly different key body, and the grooves on that aren't as deep (and in the case of the logo they're wider) which wouldn't be as good. <S> An alternative: buy a pack of coloured cable ties, put one through the hole on each key, with colours to match on the locks themselves. <S> My adventures with a failed Abus were the result of attempting to avoid having identical keys. <S> When buying new, it's possible to get keyed alike Kryptonite locks (in some countries), but they won't sell a lock to match an existing key. <A> So long as you cover the metal part of the key (i.e. the part that goes into the lock) with some tape (e.g. painter's tape), painting is easy. <S> You may want to roughen up the surface of the plastic a bit with some sandpaper. <S> Krylon sells suitable paints under their Fusion for plastic line. <S> Alternatively, you could just put colored pieces of tape (e.g. colored duct tape) on each bulb.
|
Then, you could use spray paint (there are ones which are marked as specifically good for plastic -- some of the ones which aren't marked this way will peel off), or if you go to a crafts/hardware store store there will be paints specifically marked for plastic use (but crafts store paint is likely be less durable in the long run than the others).
|
Is it possible to move a wireless computer between two bikes? I have a cateye velo 7 wireless computer on a Hybrid bike and I use it mostly to check the speed and track my miles like an odometer. I love it, its simple and cheap and works. I recently got a road bike that I am going to use on the weekends and but I want the same computer to track my miles. It is possible to have two sensors on two different bikes and use the same computer? the wheel size on both 700C <Q> It depends on the bike computer. <S> Some computers have this feature, others don't. <S> A brief look at the manual of this computer says yours only supports one bike <S> and you'll need to get another computer for the other bike (or recalibrate it each time you swap them). <S> If the tire sizes are the same, you might be able to get by by just swapping the computer between two sensors of the same type, but there may be enough sensor variation that the results may be off by a measurable amount, so I wouldn't recommend that. <S> In any case, you need 2 sensors, and if you're using a cheap bike computer, the cost of the other sensor will be close to getting it with another of the same bike computer. <A> I have been using Cateye Mity 8 for my 2 bikes. <S> It has a dual bike function, where you can select Bike A or Bike B. Upon setting up, you can specify the tire sizes for respective bikes. <S> Odometer count is for the total mileage done on both bikes. <S> However, there is a trip meter which tells you the distance for the current trip, independently for Bikes A and B.Not <S> wireless, no backlight. <S> Odometer can be programmed i.e. you can set the odometer count (say for transferring the odometer count from previous cyclomemeter). <A> If the tyre sizes are the same there is no reason you can't just get a second wiring kit and swap the computer between bikes. <S> The computer won't distinguish which bike you rode <S> but you'll be able to keep track of total mileage. <S> A wiring kit like this would do the job: (for example, from fawkes cycles ) <S> If you have different sizes of tyre on each bike then the mileage captured would be inaccurate. <A> I have a GPS/watch/activity tracker/HR computer that I wear on my wrist. <S> It will connect to the two cadence sensors I have on two different bikes, but measure speed/distance/HR on ANY bike I ride. <S> The newer wrist enabled GPS/HR stuff is spendy, but much more flexible than older style setups using a computer designed for X number of bikes. <S> It also connects to the manufacturer's website which allows me to track the totals from any activity and/or the mileage on individual pieces of equipment. <A> There are several bike computers that support different settings for two bikes. <S> Cat Eye Velo 7 is not one of them.
|
If the tire sizes are different, you'll obviously need to either recalibrate or have the computer have settings for 2 bikes since the circumferences are different.
|
How to proceed when pedestrians occupy the dedicated bike path? I go to work every day on my bike. In my town there are only few bike roads but luckily one is about half of my way to job, but a lot of pedestrians believe they are bikes and occupy bike path. At this point there are several scenarios. Sometimes they hear/see me and move away, this is not ok because they don't have the right to be there in first place, but it looks like they understand that. But there are other cases when people ignore me or even try to get run over. Those scenarios are really scary for me. I usually just avoid them which is actually make me the offender because I have to invade the side walk. Or like this morning: a woman was on my side of the road and was completely ignoring my bell, I could not pass her on her left side as there were another bike coming, and just when I was passing her for some reason she thought that it will be the perfect moment to move away from the bike path. Lucky for her she saw me and just end up with a scare. Should I lecture people about how ignoring roads can be unhealthy? Should I pass them at full speed leaving a nice scare? A bike + driver hitting someone it is a few broken bones at best. How I should face a pedestrian completely ignoring bike path, bikes and bikers, or even trying to cross my path? One more thing bike paths are not optional if there is one and you are in bike you must use it. Edit: I live in Spain. Here each town hall write they own rules for bikes use in their territory. In mine, pedestrians can´t remain on a bike path. Bike drivers also are enforced to drive on a bike path if there is one. <Q> Whatever you do, don't be a prick . <S> Noone likes a cyclist who reinforces the bad stereotypes. <S> Do Share <S> The Road <S> Even though you're in the right, there's no need to be offensive. <S> Personally I find bells lazy, most cyclists have a good loud voice and a "Hi there, just gonna pass on your left" is far nicer than "ringring" Absolutely never try to scare someone with speed or proximity. <S> Think how bad you'd look if it went wrong <S> and you couldn't stop or swerve in time. <S> You would be at fault even though they were in the wrong. <S> Conversation and lecturing has no effect, and is more likely to make people defensive and negative toward you and all cyclists. <S> A rhetorical question like "Where's your bike?" is about as much as you could say safely, and <S> even that much might get you into a physical altercation. <S> My solution is to anticipate the up-coming blockage, look behind over the shoulder at driver of oncoming traffic, speed up and take the road lane. <S> Give the obstruction a wide berth. <S> Making eye contact with the following driver helps them anticipate your action. <S> The driver can see exactly what you can see and won't get mad because you telegraphed the intent by looking. <S> Of course this assumes you can ride fast enough to "merge" with the traffic for a moment. <A> In my country, pedestrians are also forbidden to walk on bike paths, however, cyclists are not obligated to use them, they just have to give preference to riding on bike paths. <S> So I usually avoid riding on bike paths that I know pedestrians use. <S> There are some cases where paths are shared among pedestrians and cyclists, but those are the exception and are properly signposted. <S> Now, how to deal with such pedestrians. <S> Perhaps this is more opinion based. <S> Excuse me! <S> followed by <S> Thank you! . <S> This kind of works and it is more likely that people will end up with a smile in their faces rather than almost faint from scare. <S> Also, in my experience, bells are not useless, as opposed to Daniel's comment. <S> Of course, if your bell sound is too low, then you will need to replace it. <S> I use it on cycle paths and most times people listen and move away. <S> Furthermore, I try to predict if someone is walking towards the cycle path and the bell is useful to call their attention, people tend to wait and cross the path after you. <S> Bottom line, I think it is better to educate by being nice rather than hostile. <A> You don't say where your jurisdiction is, but I think you need to check your local laws. <S> Many designated cycle paths do not prohibit pedestrians from using them, and in many cases where pedestrians are allowed on the path, they will have priority. <A> I don't think my approach has been mentioned, yet. <S> I use the bell and say "thank you" <S> .If <S> people notice me in time and move out of my way, I pass them without using the bell and still say "thank you" . <S> Reason: Just using the bell might seem unfriendly, so I try to mitigate that with the thanks. <S> On the other hand I want to encourage people who pay attention to their surroundings and move out of my way, so I say thank you to them, too. <S> I think people appreciate it. <S> Every now and then I get a "you're welcome" back. <S> Location: <S> Germany, in a town where many people commute by bike. <A> Here are a few choices: <S> Get a louder audible signal, like an AirZound. <S> Of course, this doesn't guarantee anything. <S> Signal with your bell and pass them, accepting your fate. <S> Start a public campaign to get the rules enforced. <S> In my case I pick number 1. <S> On some days I use number 3.
|
You really need to check this for yourself, but don't be surprised if you find that pedestrians will have right of way over cyclists, and if there were a collision then the cyclist might be presumed to be at fault. I would say the best approach is not to scare them, do not pass too close and at high speeds. Wait patiently while you ride very slowly and safely past them until you either get their attention and they move over or until you are safely past. Try to slow down a bit and shout
|
If I currently have 700x23/25C tires on my bike, will 700x35C winter tires fit? I understand that the first number is the tire diameter, so on that part I know it will fit, and that the second number is the tire width and that's my main concern. I want to put winter tires on my bike and all the studded winter tires that I find are 35C. Will they fit on my wheels if I currently use 23C and 25C? <Q> 35c might be a bit too wide for your rims, maybe 32c would be a better choice. <S> They may fit your wheels just fine, but they may or may not rub on the chain <S> stays, seat stays or the brake caliper. <S> 35c tires are not only wider, but also have a larger outside diameter than than their smaller counterparts. <S> If you have enough clearance on your frame & calipers, you should still consider how big of a change in size you want to try. <S> Consult the chart below to help determine if they will fit. <S> From Tire Sizing Systems Width Considerations <S> Although you can use practically any tire/rim combination that shares the same bead seat diameter, it is unwise to use widely disparate sizes. <S> If you use a very narrow tire on a wide rim, you risk pinch flats and rim damage from road hazards. <S> This combination causes very sloppy handling at low speeds. <S> Unfortunately, current mountain-bike fashion pushes the edge of this. <S> In the interest of weight saving, most current mountain bikes have excessively narrow rims. <S> Such narrow rims work very poorly with wide tires, unless the tires are overinflated... <S> but that defeats the purpose of wide tires, and puts undue stress on the rim sidewalls. <S> Georg Boeger has kindly provided a chart showing recommended width combinations: Which tire fits safely on which rim? <S> Note: This chart may err a bit on the side of caution. <S> Many cyclists exceed the recommended widths with no problem <A> You need to check your frame/fork and brakes for available space. <S> Many road frame/fork combos I have seen will accept much larger tires (32c or maybe 35c) <S> however, the brake arches are very tight and will not allow a tire larger than say, 28c. <S> If you carefully follow along the entire edge of your wheel (front and back) you can check for any tight spots. <S> If you don't have at least a fingers worth of room <S> every where the frame, fork, brake or anything else gets tight, it probably isn't going to work. <S> If you have at least that much room, it may be worth having a shop ready to sell you those expensive tires trial fit one on your rim, and see if the studs will tear a whole somewhere or not. <A> They will fit on your wheels. <S> All tire sizes that start with 700 and end with C have the same rim size (see the Tire Sizing Systems for a full explanation). <S> A different question is whether the wheels will fit your frame when the larger tires are installed. <S> That can only be answered by measuring the free space when your current tires are on. <S> Keep in mind that you need some extra space for snow and mud that stick to tires.
|
If you use a very wide tire on a narrow rim, you risk sidewall or rim failure. That depends on a number of factors specific to your bike (for which you have listed no specifics), but the likely answer is no.
|
How can I mount my phone and my battery pack to my bike? On long bike rides, my phone dies often. Is there any way I can mount my phone, a galaxy s5, and my battery pack, pictured, to my bike? I'd say that mounting to the handlebars would be ideal, but I'm open to suggestions. Battery pack is a "Fremo P130" <Q> How about a top tube bag? <S> I've had a couple of handlebar mounts and they haven't lasted long in crowded bike sheds. <S> Even mounted quite centrally they're vulnerable to knocks and aren't very strong. <S> A top tube bag with a clear lid works better for me. <S> Do be sure to get one big enough though. <S> It will take the battery pack as well and should do a decent job of keeping everything dry (even if you have a waterproof phone you probably want to keep water out of the charging socket). <A> I use a phone and a gopro, both of which have somewhat small batteries. <S> So to power them <S> I use a USB battery which has two USB ports, one for each. <S> Its a little heavy <S> but I'd rather lug that around than have my camera go flat in 90 minutes. <S> 9 <S> Ah battery <S> 2.5 Ah battery USB connectors are friction fit, which is fine at home on a desk but is not overly secure in the bumpy outside world. <S> There are also USB power generating hubs, but they're pretty pricey. <A> This one looks like it will do the job for you, if you are willing to buy a new powerbank: https://r2-bike.com/TOPEAK-Smartphone-Mount-with-Powerpack <A> I find that Finn (and other silicone clones) is really great. <S> Very safe, also easy to use on bikes other than yours. <S> I wouldn't use it with a too-large/too-thin smartphone though. <S> Useless with rain. <S> For the charger, either use a bike bag, or get a long roll of Velcro™, and then you can easily attach anything to the bike. <S> Put some old tube (or any other elastic material) between the charger and the bike metal parts, to minimize vibration.
|
So I use quite short USB cables to do the connection, and lay the phone on top of the battery inside a top-tube holder like this: Some people ride wearing cycling tops, which generally have a couple of big pockets in the small of the back, so you could put a phone and a battery in there on a short lead and ignore it for the ride.
|
How to play video games while cycling on trainer? I'm interested in playing video games while riding the bike trainer this winter. Using a controller with a regular setup would likely require me to sit up on the saddle, possibly setting myself up for some weird / painful conditions due to unusual posture for extended periods of time. I would likely plan to ride for at least an hour, if not longer each session. How can I set up my bike so that I can be comfortable holding a controller and riding at the same time? <Q> I can play like this for an hour or so <S> Get a multi elevation desk (Like this one around $35 from Amazon) <S> it allows you to lower and tilt the TV UP toward you reducing neck strain adding cheap armrest bars/aerobars ( like these around $20 from Amazon) allows you to rest your elbows comfortably while riding the bike, keeping your weight forward. <S> Adding a heart rate monitor that beeps when you slow down is a good way to remind yourself to speed up. <S> Tips Sweat will be a pain with the controller so keep a towel handy. <S> My Trainer is rather loud, so I use (in the ear) - ear buds. <S> I originally used a cloth - full headset, but the sweat made them stank up. <S> Doing both tends to create a seesaw effect - Games that require alot of concentration will naturally make you slow down. <S> Going faster (higher heart rate) tends to increase the games difficulty. <S> As mentioned by @AndyP below, this will likely decrease performance (at least initially) in both gaming and cycling while doing both, so I wouldn't recommend using this as a method to increase performance in cycling or gaming. <S> With that said - <S> it is a decent way to burn excess calories and build muscles while performing an otherwise stagnant activity. <A> Buy a recumbent exercise bike instead and you'll be much more able to play games. <S> But if you're training for serious upright riding rather than general fitness that will not be what you want. <S> I have used one of these for a while and used to read while riding it. <S> That worked fine, but once my broken collarbone healed I lost interest (but I live in Sydney where the weather is nice year-round) <A> How about aerobars without the bars? <S> You just need the tv set on floor <S> slightly tilted so you don't break your neck. <S> For example Zipp Alumina Clip has several possible setups for comfortable "riding" position. <S> Remember to keep your back straight and shoulders down. :) <A> Tilting your seat back a bit should do it. <S> This will allow you to be comfy in "no hands" position, leaving both your hands free for the controller. <A> Have you tried Zwift? <S> It combines the 2 things that you want to do - cycling indoors and gaming. <S> I know this is not a direct answer <S> but it is something to consider. <S> And NO I don't work for them. <S> RideOn!
|
You can ride in sitting position every now and then to stretch your hip and back.
|
suggestions of affordable clothes for beginner rides? I am new to riding. I have done some research, and found out there are plenty of guides telling people how to pick up cycling gear. But I want suggestions for affordable, good quality clothes. I need advice from someone who actually bought the clothes. I don't need expensive cycling clothes like alpha, as I only ride once per week. Any tips for beginners are welcome. I need suggestions for both summer and winter. I am a man. I've been thinking about around 20 miles at the beginning. <Q> For a beginner, as long as all the required naughty bits are covered, and you're comfortable standing and walking in those clothes, then they're generally fine for cycling. <S> A beginner is anyone tootling 3 kilometres/2 miles each way. <S> If you're regularly doing rides of 16 km/10 miles then that's about where cycling clothing will come in handy. <S> There's no need to go silly with race gear. <S> The first specialist items to consider are Padded pants or shorts or bibs like <S> http://www.dx.com/p/top-cycling-cycling-silicone-cushion-underpants-for-men-black-l-258557#.VnPkpW_4ugo <S> for $10 US or bibs like <S> http://www.dx.com/p/2012-bike-bicycle-cycling-padded-bib-shorts-black-size-xl-125561#.VnPioW_4ugo <S> You're after something between your backside and the seat, and ideally pants to give some compression on your knees. <S> High visibility top (NOT BLACK!) <S> like http://www.dx.com/s/NJ600 <S> Under <S> $20 US or http://www.dx.com/p/spakct-stylish-sleeveless-cycling-jersey-t-shirt-fluorescence-green-l-227832#.VnPknG_4ugo Gloves, I just wear $2 white gardening gloves from the local hardware shop. <S> I have bought all these things and they work fine for me. <S> My longest ride was last weekend <S> were <S> I did 118 km. <S> Other than that, check this site for "what tools to carry on a ride" and nutrition/hydration questions. <S> However that's bike gear not clothing so only a brief reference. <A> Start out by wearing what is comfortable and in your wardrobe. <S> It is much more important that you actually get out there and ride, rather than sit at home planning your cycling wardrobe. <S> You said you only ride once a week, but you did not specify the ride conditions and circumstances. <S> Commuting in mild weather, recreational riding in sunny weather, gravel grinding in a state forest, etc. <S> As you ride, you will discover how committed you are to cycling, which will in turn dictate what you want or need next. <S> Some people, like me, are psychologically predisposed NOT to wear spandex. <S> As such, the cycling shorts I have could pass for ordinary shorts. <S> In terms of what's most important, first things to get are a helmet (if you desire), gloves, and eyewear. <S> I recommend full finger gloves, even in warm weather, as they protect your hands against nicks, scratches, and scraps. <S> After that, a cycling jacket for weather and road protection plus visibility so some reflective surfaces are a plus. <S> Shop in the store <S> so you can try it on to ensure it fits and suits you. <S> Your backside may next demand padded cycling shorts or cycling shorts with separate padded underwear. <S> You may also be thinking about a better saddle. <S> At some point, you may get the desire for clips and shoes. <S> This is a serious transition as one can fall over and go boom if one is not unclipped. <S> I bought a set, and they sat for weeks until I broke one of my conventional pedals. <S> That forced me to cross over to clips. <S> And you will eventually fall, but you likely will walk away will just a bruised ego. <S> I did. <S> Finally got a jersey, one, in 2014. <S> However, I mostly still ride in casual clothes, including T-shirts during the summer. <A> The most affordable clothes are the ones you already own. <S> So start with those. <S> Your legs will be moving a lot, so pick something that doesn't restrict leg movement. <S> Shorts are the way to go, unless it's below freezing. <S> If you're a man, wear snug-fitting briefs to keep your family jewels tucked up and out of the way. <S> If you do this for a while, eventually you'll figure out which parts of your wardrobe are lacking - and then you can start looking for cycling-specific items. <A> If/when you feel comfortable wearing Lycra, then full bib shorts is what I'd recommend if you're spending anything longer than an hour in the saddle. <A> I have one in mind, I bought their cycling underwear, around $15, You can get it at baleaf.com , or you can search baleaf on Amazon. <S> I recommend this item simply because it is cheap and the quality is not bad. <S> If you just want to ride once per week, you can wear it for almost 1 year, mine is around 10 months. <S> They use Nylon-spandex mesh, and helps keep body dry. <S> 3D padding reduces chafing, It won't be a problem if you ride 10-15 miles per time.
|
I would look at using a pair of shorts like these under a normal pair of shorts so that you've got a pad to protect your under carriage. For shoes, ideally you want something with stiff soles that doesn't restrict your ankles (like low-top hikers), but really, any comfortable shoes will work.
|
What can I do to stop my front dérailleur rubbing against the crank arm? I recently changed the crankset of my Cannondale Synapse 5 from the stock FSA Gosssamer crankset to a Rotor 3D24 crankset with power2max power meter. This was a bit of an iffy modification to make - the Cannondale frame has a BB30A bottom bracket with a 73mm shell width for 30mm spindles. However, the Rotor cranks are 24mm. I took the bike to my LBS and we eventually got everything to mount using some Wheels Manufacturing shims (BB30-UNIV). However, there is a problem now - the front derailleur now rubs against the crank arm as the crank passes over the derailleur, causing a very annoying clicking noise. I can stop the rubbing by tightening the high limit screw in all the way, but now the derailleur itself rubs against the chain, and doesn't have that 1-2mm clearance that is recommended. I have a bunch of spacers that came with the Wheels Manufacturing shims, and I've taken the crank off and installed some on the drive side. This has the effect of pushing both the crank arm and the chainrings out - so the clearance between the chainring and the crank arm is still constant and small. Is using these spacers the right thing to be doing? I'm wondering if this is a chain line issue? I am also considering getting http://kogelbearings.mysimplestore.com/products/cannondale-bb30a-24-for-rotor-cranks but I don't really see how that will solve my problem - it seems to be the distance between the crank arm and the chainring itself... <Q> If you already adjusted the front derailleur, there is not much to do. <S> As you wrote yourself, the distance between crank arm and chainring is too small for your derailleur. <S> Ask Rotor about compatible derailleurs. <S> The main reason to have derailleur not touch is not noise. <S> The derailleur scratches the crank, which creates a starting point for cracks. <A> Kind of a cheap-shot answer, <S> but you could revert back to the original. <S> That would certainly cure your noise problem. <S> I'd be concerned on the follow-on effects of upgrades, where one simple change creates an avalanche of changes and new parts. <S> Perhaps your choice of power meter needed more research? <S> Is it too late to return the power meter and find a better-fitting one? <A> so it fits into the narrower space. <S> Without seeing it, I have no idea if that's practical or not. <S> If not, there's nothing you can do besides replacing the crank and/or derailleur.
|
You can try modifying the derailleur
|
which type of bicycle should I consider for bicycle routes I have no experience in biking and have never made any tour/route. I just like riding it. I love extreme and travelling in general and I am planning to start from small bicycle routes. I understand that it is a very general question, but what kind of bicycle would you recommend me to buy for it ? The tracks I am observing and choosing for future are mostly with surface: Paved, Unpaved, Gravel. So, I am more like a nature person, so I suppose I would choose mostly off road tracks. I was thinking generally about Touring Bikes. Maybe you would also give me some specifications I should pay attention. Any suggestions? <Q> I'm going to suggest you try a cheaper used bike before committing to anything expensive. <S> Off road benefits from wider tyres than on-road. <S> In a year or so you can take your learnings, and decide what kind of bike will suit you best. <S> Your riding conditions may change as you grow fitter. <S> Many keen cyclists own more than one bike. <S> There's a running joke that all cyclists own <S> N bikes each <S> and they always want just one more ( ie N+1 ) <A> You also have cylcocross (CX) and gravel. <S> They are going to more nimble than a touring bicycle and more design to handle unpaved. <S> Many people use a CX with touring tires as a city, commuting, or all round bicycle. <S> Then you have a class called endurance. <S> It is a versatile bike that is (typically) more roady than a CX. <S> Look for one that will take 32mm (or even 35mm) tires. <S> If it only goes to 28mm it is too roady for what you describe. <S> Also have bikes called adventure. <S> They are designed for all round use and many are also designed for touring (rack mounts and a little longer). <S> They are typically steel. <S> If you want to tour with a load then go with this as the above more race inspired bikes and will typically not come with rack mounts. <S> This style of bike is not going to be as nimble nr fast as the above race inspired bikes. <S> Salsa Fargo is an example. <S> If you have the coin something like a Moot Routt 45. <S> You could even go with a mountain bike with proper tires. <S> You don't need dual suspension. <S> You don't even need single suspension. <S> You are not going to get very good road performance with the upright position. <S> And drop bars let you spread out upper body fatigue. <S> Look used. <S> At the end of race season you will often find some really good deals. <S> You may be better off getting an inexpensive bike that fits in the space and get some miles under you before you settle on the perfect bike. <S> If you have the budget for 2 then maybe start with an endurance bike as with smaller tires <S> it is a pretty legitimate road, trainer, and city bike. <S> No matter what get a bike that fits you. <S> Consider retail just to get advice on a good style of bicycle and a good fit. <S> Look for a shop that at least carries adventure type bikes. <A> One way of doing it would be to equip one bike so it only takes a short session to change it's set up for different purposes. <S> I have a Scott Aspect 45, 26" wheel, mountain bike. <S> I have mudguards, carriers and fat but smooth tyres. <S> it came with suspension forks but, for loaded touring, I prefer rigid forks. <S> It would take me less than 45 minutes to get the mudguards and carriers off and replace the sprung forks. <S> I could then do some, unloaded, trail riding without the weight and bulk. <S> It has a sloping top tube so it's a good stand over height, useful <S> i stop/start traffic with 4 panniers, a rear top bag and a handlebar bag all <S> loaded up with heavy gear. <S> PS... <S> my n+ stands at 11 bikes and 3 trikes!
|
The top thing you need is a bike on which you feel comfortable. Your only real requirement is to make sure it takes larger-sized tyres.
|
Is there a preferred frame size calculator? I am buying a new road bike. I have looked online for calculators but I am getting different answers on which frame size I should get. I've got 53 cm on a calculator that only considers inseam height and 56 cm on another one that also considers riders height so I don't know which one is correct because I don't want to end up with a bike that is either too big or too small for me. <Q> IMO Frame size is more than just measurements. <S> A proper bike fitting pairs your riding style & level with the frames own handling characteristics. <S> (defined more by tubing and angles than measurement alone) <S> BUT... not everyone's out to get a custom bike frame made or go research their frames butted tubing or headtube angles... <S> But I always suggest visiting a place where they know how to "fit bikes" (for racing, touring, etc) and getting advice from a bike fitter. <S> Don't forget to buy a water bottle and power bar while you're there, chances are they don't charge you for the advice. <S> #smallbusiness <A> As I have written in another thread , the seat tube length (a.k.a. "frame size") is not the most important measure for how a bicycle fits you. <S> Bicycle fit is mostly about putting the contact points between rider and bike (saddle, handlebars and pedals) into the correct positions with regard to the rider's body. <S> Where these points should be is a matter of body geometry, riding style and personal preferences - and not an easy question to answer (although there are some general guidelines that work pretty well for many riders). <S> As the starting point should not be the bike but the rider, it is especially hard to answer bike fit questions over the internet without seeing you sit on a bike. <S> Guidance from someone who knows about bicycle fitting is a good investment. <S> In order to determine if your contact points could be positioned correctly on a certain frame, the measures stack and reach are more important than the seat tube length. <S> Stack is the vertical distance between the bottom bracket and the top of the head tube, and reach is the horizontal distance between these two points. <S> These two measures (plus handlebars, spacers and stem geometry) determine basically where the hands will be in relation to the feet. <S> When these two points are fixed, the saddle can pretty easily be positioned correctly by using an appropriate seat post (length and setback). <S> tl;dr: <S> Compare frames by their stack and reach measurements instead of the seat tube length to see if they could fit you. <A> I have found that the one from Competitive Cyclist is pretty good: <S> http://www.competitivecyclist.com/Store/catalog/fitCalculatorBike.jsp <S> It takes into account the lengths of your legs and arms, so prepare for some measuring. <S> Also, if you have no idea what you are looking for, do not buy blind but try the bikes in person.
|
Try to find out what stack and reach you need, either by consulting a bike fitter or by measuring a bike that fits you very well.
|
Would a moist cloth wrapped around the nose be reasonably effective as compared to an anti-pollution mask? On looking at the prices of masks and filters , I figured that it could eventually get rather expensive for me. Moreover, there's an article in a newspaper that these masks don't really help: Don't be fooled by safety masks (Sep 30, 2001) According to a two-year painstaking study conducted by a group of researchers in the department of chemical engineering, Indian Institute of Science, no mask being sold in Bangalore is effective against the most common and harmful pollutants: carbon monoxide (co), sulphur dioxide (so2), suspended particulate matter (spm), oxides of nitrogen (nox). The study, commissioned by the council for scientific and industrial research (csir), has been examining all the material used in the filters inside the plastic masks. To their utter dismay, researchers found that people using these masks are being fooled beyond imagination. says senior scientific officer Mr.J.R. Mudakavi: "we have tested more than a dozen such masks available in the city's markets. I am sorry to see that none of them informs the buyer what it is effective against, what load it can take, if the filter is recyclable, et al". The most injurious of all, CO, is not filtered by any mask. sulphur dioxide is absorbed by some filters to some extent, but given its concentration in the atmosphere, these masks are effective only for 2-3 hours. no user is told that if the filter is washed it can be used efficaciously a few more times. one of the dreaded pollutants is spm (small particles from industry, stone crushing, construction materials, exhaust, etc) which when inhaled in large quantity gets deposited in the lungs and can cause silicosis. Ok, so if even the anti-pollution masks can't filter out CO or SO2 properly, then that leaves the danger of the particulate matter which in my opinion, could be prevented with just a cloth wrapped around the nose and mouth. Not a thin layer of cloth. A cloth where the folds form a couple of layers over your face and nose. If this cloth is moistened a bit, shouldn't it be effective against particulate matter. For a short ride of maybe 30 minutes, won't a simple cloth be more cost effective and offer a reasonable amount of protection against pollutants? <Q> that leaves the danger of the particulate matter which in my opinion, could be prevented with just a cloth wrapped around the nose and mouth. <S> Diesel particulates are mostly in the 3-30 nanometre range of sizes. <S> This is very fine and will not be stopped by normal cloth. <S> 3M say <S> a P2 (EU rating) filter should reduce exposure to diesel particulates. <S> A P3 mask should remove a higher proportion of particles. <S> I suspect these filters might not remove the finer diesel particulates. <S> Most of these masks are not intended to supply a large volume of air, they are workplace masks not sports masks. <S> Some cycling mask makers write about PM10 filtering. <S> Note that PM10 are coarse dust particles 2500 to 10000 nanometers in size. <S> That's a lot larger than most diesel particulates. <S> The key to an effective filter is a good air-tight closure against the skin around the entire perimeter of the filter. <S> If anecdotal stories have anything to teach it is that you should expect a white filter to become blackened even on short rides and that you therefore need to replace the filter every ride. <A> No. <S> The typical "pollution mask" I have seen are modified or styled after surgical masks. <S> Surgical masks are NOT designed to filter intake air. <S> They are designed to direct exhaust air away from a patient who is opened up and vulnerable to infection. <S> The masks shown on your links appear to have possibly a sealing face mask, but the filters look clearly inadequate. <S> Interior Alaska has some of the poorest air quality in the world during both the winter (inversion layer) and summer (forest fires) months. <S> What I have taken to using are the rather inexpensive "paint style" masks that 3M and other companies make that are available from home improvement stores like Home Depot. <S> The masks are rated for organic vapors and have replaceable filters, although I find it easier to simply replace the whole mask. <S> As for the difficulty breathing in these masks, I find that I cannot get enough air through them to maintain a full sprint, however, I can get enough to maintain a "race pace". <S> After a bit of use, I get even less air, or I can change the prefilters and filters and get back to where I started. <A> I don't think I would make decisions based on masks available in the city markets of Bangalore. <S> You need to decide what is reasonable for you. <S> A cloth is not going to be as effective as a mask designed for particulate matter (and other pollutants). <S> Cloth will only get large particles and nothing for other pollutants. <S> But large particle is better than no particles. <S> On a dusty trail most particles are large. <S> If you get 40% that is still 40%. <S> As for CO and SO2. <S> If there is source (delivering dangerous levels) of CO or SO2 then don't ride there. <S> If there are pollutants in your area then what about the 23 1/2 hours in the day?
|
To properly filter air, you will need a mask that seals around your mouth and nose and has a proper one way valve(es) and appropriate filters. You cannot obtain the necessary fit using cloth alone.
|
Should I change my chain? It broke once, but its condition seems rather good Expanding a bit on the title, I ride a 27.5" KTM Peak XT with a 3x10 setup. The chain I'm currently using is of unknown provenience (it was already there when I bought the bike, and it wasn't new). It's been almost one full year with me, probably around 6-7 months with the previous owner and it was never changed. The chain broke once, but I replaced the broken link with a quick release link and it worked well from that point on. I'm always carrying a QR link with me since that day, in case bad things happen while on track. Having this said, I am wondering whether or not I should replace my chain ASAP or it's just a normal thing for chains to be reliable for this long. Also, how often should this (change the chain) happen? Thanks! <Q> The tool to check for "chain stretch" is incredibly cheap -- something every halfway-serious cyclist should have. <S> And chain breakage is most often caused by poorly executed shifting under load or a poorly adjusted derailer. <S> (Though another cause is a poorly joined chain.) <A> There are two strong reasons to change your chain immediately: <S> Firstly, chains are supposed to be replaced regularly. <S> Professional mechanics have a tool to measure chain wear (or can say by eye), but the rule of thumb for someone who replaces their chain on their own, is about once per year. <S> In other words - bicycle chains are in no way recommended to be used until failure (because this wears off the much more expensive drivetrain components). <S> The second point <S> (you really shouldn't be needing a second reason) <S> is that if the chain broke, then probably the whole chain is damaged (e.g. due insufficient lubrication) and will soon break again. <A> If it is still in tolerance then maybe ride it given you used a QR. <S> But if it is over a year old the safe bet it is replace it. <S> Order <S> a cassette and two chains mail order to save some money <S> and you have them on hand. <S> If you have a spare QR you are probably going to make it home. <S> But save it as a spare. <S> I use them on kids bikes that are not going (well supposed) to ride far from home anyway.
|
(Poor lubrication is unlikely to cause the chain to break as a first indication -- excessive wear of chain and cogs is far more likely, and the chain will only break when wear has reached extreme levels.) If the rear cassette is near worn out is when I might ride it to get some more miles.
|
How to get this dustcap off? I have this problem where my pedals seem to be able to be able to rotate on an axis perpendicular to the straight travel of the bike. To take off the cranks, I need to get past a dustcap. Unfortunately, the dust-cap looks like this: That hole in the middle is supposed to be slot for a screwdriver, and I can't get it off. Whenever I put enough force piece to move it (it's been cross-threaded) the metal deforms - it even feels soft. Could someone please tell me how to get this thing off? <Q> At the stage you're at I normally vandalise them out. <S> Plastic caps usually shatter while I'm doing that and all the bits fall out. <S> If not I remove the bottom bracket bolt or nut now it's exposed <S> so I have better access <S> , then I get a knife and shave away the plastic until that remaining threaded ring falls apart. <S> With aluminium that will be harder but is usually still doable. <S> One alternative that I usually try early on is to cut a groove across the ring (parallel to the BB axis) and try using the screwdriver to turn the ring using that. <S> So far that hasn't failed for me, so I have no idea what to do next. <S> I'd probably use a dremel or a drill to try cutting that ring. <S> (I've done this quite a lot, I've been a bike mechanic. <S> But 90% of the "stuck" ones shatter when levered open as described, leaving you picking out loose pieces.) <A> That's a plastic dust cap. <S> Best bet is to use a dremel to cut a new slot. <S> Cut the slot to try to unscrew it as normal. <S> After you try that, if it is really stuck or you make the problem worse <S> , you can dig it out, pick it out, or whatever it takes. <S> But don't use any hard steel tool as you might damage the thread in the crank <A> A simple solution - get a hot soldering iron and melt two slots, one on each side, <S> then wedge/rotate the two parts out with a pointy pair of pliers.
|
Get a big flat head screwdriver and use it more like a chisel - wedge the flat under the parts I can see and break them off, trying to break the part that has the thread on it at the same time. Upside is that since it is plastic you'll be able to dig it out.
|
How to reduce vibrations to handlebars on aluminium road bike Question : How can I reduce the vibrations to the handlebars on an all-aluminium road bike? Either to the rider's hands or to the camera, or both. I have been riding an all-alloy road bike for the last couple months, and while its so much faster than the MTB its terribly tiring. I've suspected that its a harsh ride because there are lots of buzzes and rattles that come and go with different road surfaces. A recent night ride demonstrated the problem in pictures.... I have a gopro on the stem and here are some comparison shots. Example Smooth Here's some tarmac which is less than a couple months old. Its really nice on which to ride: Example Buzzy Here are two stills cropped to show lights at night. The road is chip-seal which is quite common locally. A video at night time was no good, but here's a short clip showing the buzz in sunlight. Hand interface I've tried Padded Cycling gloves - helped a little with the hands, but they were cold. I've been wearing my full hand cycling gloves with no padding. Hand positions - I'm 99% on the hoods, either near the bend or up on the brake hoods. I never use the drops, they're out of reach, and the tops only occasionally. On a long ride I might put hands on top of the brakes for some variety ("high hoods") Bar tape - I've fitted some bar tape which is labelled as "cork" but was really a diamond-shape of firm foam. This helped, but the hand position is now unnaturally squishy. Yet to try: A shorter stem, the old one is 120mm long. Finding one is difficult because its an odd sized quill stem. Still searching. A replacement front fork of steel or carbon ? Seems like an expensive solution for an older bike. Lower tyre pressure helps, but I'm over 100 KG so I can't really go lower than 100 PSI on 25mm tyres. Replacement bars ? Would carbon bars be any better at damping the vibrations? Other suggestions? Camera mount I've got one of these on my stem. There's a layer of dense foam underneath which helps a little. There are other mounts like this one, but they have no vibration take-up mechanism, so I'm leery about dropping money on them. Searching web sites like instructables.com has returned steadicam-type mounts for hand usage, but not for biking. Summary : How to reduce the road buzz that is transmitted through the fork/frame/stem and the handlebars? <Q> I have an aluminium bike with a rubber dampener built into the handle bar, it's part of Specializeds range, not sure if there are general versions. <S> A suspension fork would iron out more bumps than a carbon one, but may not fit your bike. <S> I've taken videos from a handlebar mounted camera too <S> and I think there will always be a lot of jolting that is impossible to dampen. <S> Low light will make this worse. <S> I think the best answer is to use a helmet mounted cam, so the suspension system is your body and neck. <S> I've seen some fantastic videos of the New York alley cat races and they all use helmet cams. <S> They also need strong necks! <S> How much image stabilization can your camera provide? <A> E.g. <S> I have a aluminium "hybrid" without suspension, with 700x32 Marathon Plus tires, which don't seem to me especially "buzzy" (I do like padded gloves though). <S> If the tires were e.g. 32mm instead of your 25mm, that means the contact patch is bigger and so the pressure can be lower. <A> For your hands, doubling up on padded bar tape is a cheap solution which a lot of the pros will do when racing cobblestone or bumpy roads. <A> Besides double taping the handlebar, the wider the tires the less pressure you can use: from http://oaksandspokes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/pressurechart121405B.jpg <S> Also you can use slightly less pressure in the front tire than in the rear because this is the one that bears most of the weight, for example: your could try 87 psi in the rear and 80 psi in the front for 32mm tires. <S> I'm not very sure <S> but I think that in old road bikes (from the 90's) you had clearance to put up to 28mm front, and 25mm rear tires. <A> Old question <S> I know <S> but still relevant, to reduce/eliminate the gopro shakiness <S> try a k-edge or similar solid, one piece mount. <S> I tried all of the mounts shown above with poor results before trying the k-edge out front mount which secures tightly to the bars & provides excellent quality footage. <S> There are too many moving parts in the gopro mounts & it's impossible to lock them down tight enough. <S> I also use the saddle mount with a hero session which again provides excellent shake free footage. <A> Updated - I have fitted two layers of new bartape in the hooks, and one layer elsewhere. <S> Padded gloves were moderately effective, but came with new problems like sunburned wrists and blisters on the web between my fingers. <S> So I still wear my $4 gardening gloves but with the padded half gloves over the top. <S> The camera is still poor at night, but the image has been improved by removing some of the padding and clamping the mount directly onto the stem rather than through layers of spongy shock absorber. <S> I think the foams let the camera wobble about more than mounting it hard. <S> Tyres, for other reasons, I changed the front tyre from a thickslick to something with a little tread. <S> This has also reduced the perception of buzz. <S> Its still a heck of a noisy bike ride though. <S> The only other options short of a new bike is a replacement front fork in steel or in carbon, and I doubt 1" threadded steerer tubes are available on carbon forks! <A> If the vibrations in your handlebars are so strong that they feel nasty, then you have too much pressure on your tires. <S> Every road/bike combination has an optimum tire pressure at which the tire has the least rolling resistance. <S> If your pressure is too low, you deform the rubber too much, losing energy; and if your pressure is too high, your bike vibrates too much, losing energy. <S> With your light-weight bike and your slim tires, you seem to have too much pressure for the chip-seal roads that you ride on. <S> Racing bikes are built for the smoothest roads, only, and the roads you ride on seem to be too rough. <S> So, I would recommend to lower your tire pressure if you hadn't said that you are already at the minimum that you feel safe with. <S> As such, the natural option is to put on wider tires that allow for lower pressures. <S> This will very likely reduce your rolling resistance on those chip-seal roads . <S> Another theoretical option would be to increase the mass of the frame, especially at the front. <S> Like a really, really heavy steel fork. <S> Carbon will only make things worse. <S> The heavier the frame, the less it follows the vibrations of the road. <S> But I would go for wider tires, if I were you.
|
In theory, wider (and possibly thicker) tires ought to help though that may be anathema on a road bike. For video, I'd opt for an inexpensive helmet mount (straps preferably but sticky pads do work) but if you've got cash to burn then you could look at either a bike or chest mounted gimbal which will produce smooth video regardless of terrain.
|
How long will this alum frame last? I picked up this very cool 96-97 GT rage from Craigslist with the intention of restoration- a few rusty pinch bolts, spider eggs in the brake hoods, grinding bearings and pitted races, and all the good stuff that comes to a bike living outside for 5 years. I was excited to get my first aluminum frame for the project as I knew it wouldn't be rusted like steel would have. (It spent a lot of time in the rain.) It wasn't for another day until I found hairline cracks forming under the seat post clamp and around the GT rear stamp. I suspect the clamp was over tightened at one point, but it was very normal when I got to it and the little slit cut into the back of the tube isn't squished or malformed which I've seen happen on steel frames that were over tightened. How long will the frame actually last? It's a GT so it's got the triple triangle so I'm not worried about my seat stays coming loose or my seat post falling into the tube. Should I be? I know fatigue cracks in some places means it's time to trash the frame, but I'm not a pro racer and I ride pretty lightly. I'm interested in other people's experiences with aging aluminim and possibly hearing thoughts aside from putting it on the curb for trash day. I can feel the cracks with my fingernail but they're too small to actually fit my nail inside. I've read 7005 aluminim cannot be repaired since it requires heat treatment. I love this bike because I love 90s and GT (and its so hard to find tall frames that aren't 70s gas pipe builds)but I'm not sure it's worth being a money pit. Are there other repair options? Does drilling cracks actually work? Can I permanently install the seat tube? <Q> The biggest problem with a crack in this location, is that it then causes most force to be placed on the join between the top tube and seat tube. <S> Drilling a crack is to minimise crack propagation. <S> And there are few repair options with this style of frame (for sensible money). <S> This can be welded, but you would risk this just getting worse. <S> If I remember correctly 7005 using artificial ageing rather than a traditional heat treatment - a filler material could be used between the post and frame to bond them and strengthen the seat post. <S> The sensible money "option" if you really want to keep the frame is to get a very long seat post (ensure that there is a lot in the frame, around 20cm+) and keep checking for further crack propagation. <S> To answer the question in the title - aluminium work hardens quicker than other materials, and tends to crack due to fatigue much quicker than say carbon, steel or titanium. <S> Unfortunately I think it could be time to consider a new frame. <A> I have the same kind of issues - needing a tall bike for long legs. <S> In the past I have cracked my steel MTB in the same way, which was due to having a long seat post, up high, with the bare minimum inserted into the frame. <S> Plus my 100 KG mass on top was too much leverage. <S> So you should buy and fit a longer seat post straight away. <S> I personally reinforced my seat post with a second steel tube up the inside, and it now extends 8" down into the seat tube. <S> As for the crack, watch it and if it grows, discard/recycle the frame. <S> My steel bike came 3/4 off before I noticed, but steel fails slower than aluminium. <S> It could go from its current state all the way to fully broken in one ride, or even in one pothole. <S> Answer <S> The crack is not good, so watch it, and look out for a replacement. <S> UPDATE <S> I found cracks in my aluminium 7005 road bike, in the same general area. <S> After much thought and talking to aluminium welders, I scrapped the bike and took all the usable bits off for later projects. <S> Heartbreaking but frame failure can be sudden and deadly. <A> I've seen this kind of crack on a few frames - not just alloy. <S> So it is not uncommon. <S> If it were steel it would be easier to repair - I've not heard of anybody who has repaired their alloy frame either - so probably not such an economical repair to have done. <S> How long it will last will depend on a variety of factors - so its difficult to say. <S> I certainly wouldn't go mountain biking on it. <S> Personally - as said before - its probably best to find another frame. <A> Those cracks are not terrible but not good. <S> The upper is terminated and the lower is less than 1/4 around (from what I can tell). <S> There is only one crack to drill and that is questionable. <S> Do you have a drill press. <S> For sure not something to try with a drill. <S> With a long quality seat post and light use the chance of a catastrophic failure is very very low. <S> You might get 5 years out of it or 5 minutes <S> but I would give 5 years a much better chance. <S> Thing is this is a restore. <S> Not worth putting money in it. <S> You can find good frames for $300. <S> If you have a lot of the component already then maybe. <A> I would not worry too much about that crack. <S> As long as the seat-post is deep enough in the seat-tube and the bolt on the clamp is tightened to the required torque. <S> What could be of some help (if the clamp is removable) is a double post-clamp where the lower part is around the seat-tube and the upper part of the clamp holds the seat-post thus distributing the pressure and putting vertical load on the seat-tube. <A> Alu has a limited lifespan due to work hardening. <S> Work hardening is where the metal has become brittle after many vibrations and the only way to repair work hardening is to completely melt the piece down and start again. <S> So where you see a crack, its quite likely the entire area is kaput. <S> While its unlikely that a failure of the top of the seat tube will cause a fatal accident, and a longer seat post will probably delay the inevitable for a while, this frame has had its day.
|
You also have to think about what would happen if the frame were to suffer a critical failure in this position - it will most likely be landing from a drop or, more likely, while sitting and hitting a hole/bump; neither great options and the more likely of the two being much more painful! A crack developing there, is most likely too much seat post out of the frame, or in actual fact, not enough seat post being in the frame. The best thing to do here would be to contact a specialist aluminium frame builder and ask their opinion. You could make a funky wall art bike out of this, but I'd not ride it again.
|
What to wear under tights with fabric padding? I have a pair of performance bike cold weather tights that have some fabric padding where a chamois normally would be. Should i wear these tights over underwear (worry about chaffing), bike shorts (too much padding) with chamois or nothing at all? Never had a pair like this before, so I'm wondering what the best practice is with these type of tights? There is no kind of foam or gel, just a thick piece of fabric. <Q> TL;DR <S> If it's got a pad, don't wear anything under it. <S> - Benzo <S> I've owned several pair of cold weather cycling tights, including some that were questionably "cycling" tights because they had no padding/chamois. <S> I've always found it best to wear nothing underneath when there is any sort of padding. <S> If there is no padding whatsoever (just a tight) putting a set of bike shorts/bibs underneath is your best bet. <S> For anything with a pad/chamois/additional material, any additional warmth requirements should be layered on top (long underwear, shell pants, rain pants, wind fleece, etc). <S> In your case, I may consider either getting rid of them in favor of something with a real winter chamois (should be thicker) or possibly try to remove the extra "pad" and use bike shorts/bibs underneath. <S> Seat fit is a dicey enough proposition without mixing pads and hoping the combination is not worse than nothing. <S> FWIW Disclaimer: <S> I wear bib shorts down to about 10F (usually with over baggy shorts or a wind pant up to 40F). <S> I wouldn't ever wear my winter bib tights at a temperature above 10F, so it's rare that I would ever want to take them off and have something underneath. <S> I won't ever buy a winter tight unless it has a thicker pad in it. <S> I'll take all the insulation I can get sitting on a -20F seat. <S> For that reason I find my lightly "race padded" bib shorts to be inappropriate for actual winter riding. <A> I would try removing the padding since it's so awful. <S> I try to buy non-padded poly-pro tights, because I care less about speed and more about warmth. <S> I wear those over my padded knicks, and sometimes under lycra tights that I add for their slight wind resistance (better than polypro, anyway). <S> This is also "try it and see". <S> If you can ride with just the tights do that, if you can put up with the extra padding I'd go with knicks under tights (makes removing the tights if you heat up easier). <S> You might find that lowering your seat 1-2mm when you're using both lots of padding helps, or it might not be worth the hassle. <A> Of the two varieties of winter tights - padded or unpadded - I prefer the unpadded because it allows for better layering with your favourite padded bib shorts. <S> Proper cycling lycra should not be worn with underwear as this would chaff and irritate.
|
The tights your have - err towards the unpadded variety and without actually seeing the level of padding - I would guess a pair of padded shorts should be worn with them.
|
Why (and how) would someone steal only my innertube? Upon my return from winter holidays, I found that someone had stolen the rear innertube from my locked bike. They took only the innertube : the rear wheel was still there, the chain correctly attached, and the bike otherwise seems untouched (so far at least, for obvious reasons I haven't ridden it yet). I had the front tire and the frame locked to a bike rack.The bike is stored indoors in a common bike room for my apartment building, so access is somewhat restricted to those with a key. Why (and how) would someone steal just the innertube? <Q> Occam's razor says that you should try the simpler/null hypothesis first, in this case that your tube wasn't stolen. <S> There are two alternate hypotheses that you should test: 1) <S> Are you sure that you had one in the first place? <S> Perhaps you were running tubeless and never knew it? <S> 2) Are you sure the tube is actually gone? <S> One thing that can happen (either by prank or accident) especially with schrader valves if you don't have a valve cap (but also with presta if you don't have a locknut) is that when the tube deflates, the valve can retreat back into the rim and get lost (I'll avoid making any dirty jokes about this). <S> I grabbed the following image off an unrelated page <S> but you can imagine what would happen if the valve got pressed in even further and got lodged inside the rim. <S> It would look like there was never any inner tube in the first place. <S> I've almost done this (gotten the valve lost inside the rim) trying to inflate a tire. <S> It's not hard and it could even conceivably happen as a tire self-deflated. <A> It would be very easy (less than a minute) to deflate the tube, cut it, then pull it out. <S> You actually wouldn't need to touch anything else on the bike and depending on the tire size, might not even need to remove the tire. <S> I have used cut tubes as a "tie-on" bungie cord in several instances, so it's also possible MacGyver was stuck in your bike room and needed it to thwart some dastardly plot. <A> That's pretty funny. <S> Here's my guess... <S> Why: Seems like someone found themselves in need of an innertube and convinced themselves that, under the circumstances, it would be okay to take yours <S> (also consider that this may be a prank). <S> How: By removing the rear wheel, it would be easy to remove the tire, pull the tube, put the tire back on, and install the wheel again. <S> This also means that it would have been easier for them to steal the whole rear wheel, reinforcing my "non-malicious intent" theory. <A> To me too weird to be a prank. <S> Take a tube is the not what I would pick as a prank. <S> Why? <S> If they were a pure thief looking to steal what ever they could they would have taken the whole wheel as they were actually more exposed (more time) by replacing the wheel. <S> Another remote why is to delay detection. <S> Another tenant may see a missing wheel and know you are gone and report the missing wheel. <S> A missing tube is not obvious. <S> How? <S> They removed the wheel, removed the tube, and replaced the wheel. <S> To me <S> it was kind of like <S> I know what I did was wrong <S> but I did not take more than I needed. <S> I would suggest a lock for your rear wheel even if just a cable. <S> This was most likely a crime of opportunity and need so not likely that they had a cable cutter with them. <A> I think this is the tip of a major crime wave. <S> We will look back on this as the very first instance of The Great Tube thief. <S> With her cunning and guile she will continue to evade detection as she travels the world stealing inner tubes, willy, and quite literally, nilly. <S> Whether they are beautifully crafted, lightweight sleek handcrafted latex tubes, with long, elegant, smooth presta valves. <S> Or fat, dumpy and heavy butyl ones with dented capless, Schrader valve. <S> She won't care, she'll have the lot. <S> We'll never know what she does with them all, it will be the eternal unsolved mystery of cycling. <S> Just be careful the next time you pull up at the lights, watch out for her ninja like skills. <S> Or before you have chance to pull off before that rogue BMW, your tubes will gone forever... <S> P.S. <S> I do apologise! <S> it seems the urge to write something stupid in this place just overcame me ;)
|
Pretty simple they needed a tube and decided to steal yours. Perhaps someone was playing a prank on you.
|
Are there fenders designed specifically for bikes with racks? I have a bike with a rear rack and want to buy a rear fender. Is there any fender that is specifically designed to be used in a combination with a bike rack? <Q> Fenders don't fall into an "ok with racks" or "not ok with racks" category. <S> There may be certain combinations of fenders and racks that are problematic, but those are the exception. <S> An example of a problem would be a bike whose rear rack is very close to the top of the rear wheel - it would be hard to fit a fender in there, but that's a specific problem which requires a specific solution. <S> That said, when putting a lot of accessories on a bike, we should expect to be bending and cutting and filing as we go. <S> We should not expect a front/rear set of fenders and racks to be a perfect fit on a frame out of the box unless each of those parts were specifically designed to be a fit with each other. <A> Most standards fenders will work with a rack. <S> You do have bikes designed for both - you will have two bosses. <S> You can double up and use the same boss for both but a separate is much preferred. <S> If a bike will take a rack then it will (almost always) take fenders. <S> But you can have a bike designed to take fenders but not a rack. <S> People use fender mounts for a rack on bike not actually designed for a rack. <S> Notice <S> the two bosses on the rear of this bike <A> If its better integration of rack & fender you seek, look into getting a rack with a centerline stud or nut that you can attach the outmost half of the fender to. <S> See this pic for a rear fender+rack example.
|
Generally speaking, most traditional fender designs will work on bikes with racks attached.
|
Gear shifts and drive speed on bikes If I am driving in the 5th gear, can I know what is my velocity? Let's assume I am on a perfectly flat surface and moving monotonously. <Q> 1) RPM to rad/s:Firstly determine how fast the front gear is turning, assuming that you are pedaling at one complete revolution per 2 seconds: 30 RPM / 60 (convert from minutes to seconds) <S> * 2pi rad <S> /rev: pedalSpeedRPM = <S> 30speedRadPerSec = <S> pedalSpeedRPM <S> * 2 <S> * pi / 60 2) <S> Next determine how fast the rear wheel is spinning by using the gear ratio ; the ratio of the number of teeth on the front ring to the number of teeth on the back ring. <S> For example , if the front ring has 53 teeth and the rear ring has 13 teeth, then the ratio is 4.08. <S> That means that the rear wheel is spinning 5.2 times faster than the pedals. <S> Thus: gearRatio = 4.08speedRearWheel = <S> speedRadPerSec <S> * gearRatio 3 <S> ) Rotational to linear motion: If you know the diameter of your wheel, you can determine how far it moves with one revolution, for example, a 26" wheel (in metric because that's what I know) <S> has a radius of approximately 0.33m. <S> Using the formula velocity = <S> radius x angular velocity gives wheelRadius = <S> 0.33velocity = <S> wheelRadius <S> * speedRearWheelvelocityKPH = velocity * <S> 3.6 <S> So to bring it all together, you need to know the following variables: pedalSpeedRPM = <S> 30gearRatio <S> = 4.08wheelRadius = <S> 0.33Calculations <S> :speedRadPerSec = pedalSpeedRPM <S> * 2 <S> * pi / <S> 60speedRearWheel = <S> speedRadPerSec <S> * gearRatiovelocity = <S> wheelRadius <S> * speedRearWheelvelocityKPH = velocity * <S> 3.6 <S> Running this on MATLAB gives the result: velocityKPH = <S> 15.2274 <S> Which isn't a bad estimate for middle gear, non-frantic pedaling. <S> Another example, with (maybe) more realistic numbers: pedalSpeedRPM = 60; % Faster pedallinggearRatio = 4.2; % AbitrarywheelRadius = 0.37; % 29"velocityKPH = 35.1507 <S> So I guess to (finally) answer your question <S> , yes, you can determine it, but you need to know the gearing ratio, your wheel size, and an estimate of your pedaling rate. <A> If you don't have a cycle computer, paint a white mark on the front tire and count how many revolutions the tire does in a minute. <S> Multiply the circumference of the tire by 60 to get speed. <S> You could use the tire radius and calculate the circumference, or using the mark or tire valve, roll the tire along the ground and measure one full revolution (ideally with you weight on the bike). <S> An alternate (and more accurate) way to measure speed is from GPS <S> - most cell phones have one. <A> If you don't feel like doing all these mental calisthenics on the bike, get a cheap speedo that runs off a magnet. <S> Mount the readout on your handlebars and simply look at it to learn your speed. <S> No need to overcomplicate this. <A> You can calculate your speed on a bicycle based just on the gearing, and it doesn't depend on the slope of the road, but you are going to need more information than "5th gear". <S> You need to know a few things. <S> W. <S> How many teeth on the front chainring of whatever gear you are on. <S> X. <S> How many teeth on the rear cog of whatever gear you are on. <S> Y. <S> The circumference of the rear tire, in CM Z. <S> The cadence at which you are pedalling, usually in RPM <S> Now that you have the required information, you plug it into the following formula. <S> W/ <S> X * (Y /100000) <S> * Z <S> * 60 <S> Let's look at an example. <S> Assuming you were in a gear with a 50 tooth chainring and a 16 tooth sprocket, pedalling at 90 RPM, and your bike rear wheel circumference of 210 cm (rough circumference of road bike tire) and are pedalling at 90 RPM, then your speed would be as follows. <S> 50/16 <S> * (210/100000) <S> * 90 <S> * 60 = 35 km/h <S> The 100,000 constant in the equation converts the diameter of the wheel to km, and the 60 constant in the equation converts RPM to revolutions per hour allowing us to calculate the speed in km/h. <S> Hopefully somebody else can check this equation as I just derived it in my head, but the numbers seem accurate based on my experience with riding.
|
For this you will need to know the gearing ratio from front to back (or number of teeth on each gear), the wheel diameter, and the rate at which you are pedaling. A simple way is to count wheel revolutions directly, this is how most cycle computers work, as you can ignore the gear you are in.
|
Is it better fitness-wise to ride at the maximum gear? I just wanted to know if I will be doing more effort while riding at the maximum gear all the time, rather than changing gears constantly. My commute is an hour long, but I want it to be tougher on the muscles, I've tried going at the maximum gear all the time but I'm not sure I'm doing more effort by it. Could someone confirm? <Q> No - Struggling away in the small rear cog/large front chainring combo is bad. <S> Fitness is an overall term that has many components, <S> so: <S> If you want power you need to work on intervals, which is as fast as possible at full power for short burst times, then recovery time at a middling state. <S> If you want to get somewhere and not be too stinky, riding at 10-20% less than your steady state is good. <S> I (try to) do this on the way to work, but its not easy. <S> I leave the fast run for the scenic route home. <S> Instead you want to pick a gear that keeps you around 90 RPM <S> is the common thinking, but personally I pedal faster. <S> Any lower than 60-70 is going to damage/hurt your knees faster and produce no gain in fitness. <A> No, the ideal is to keep up a constant high cadence rather than to apply maximum pressure. <S> Gears were invented for just that reason. <S> Explanation: <S> Muscles work better and develop better under lower strain. <S> The evacuation of waste (lactic acid) is blocked when the muscle is under higher load. <A> Cycling in a big gear is a very common training session for cyclists. <S> Big gear & low cadence seated <S> hill climbs are sessions I have done in the past. <S> The idea is to build muscle and consequently strength. <S> This on its own is not ideal - since one must also have the ability to spin a bigger gear. <S> So other sessions are designed to improve pedal action & leg speed. <S> Bring leg speed together with more strength <S> and you simply get faster. <S> Not so sure about the point about additional strain on the knees - since in theory by pushing a bigger gear in lower cadence <S> doesn't mean you are going to be going any faster than if you are pushing in a smaller gear in faster cadence. <S> And this means the power you can make is the same regardless of gear - for the same power output.
|
If you want to train for endurance, being at the steady state for as long as possible, but working to nudge the steady state up to a consistently higher average. Simply pushing really hard on your gears means you're exerting a lot of force through your knees, and mine ache just thinking about it.
|
Bike bag options for commuting to and from Airport I've got a quick trip later in the year to Italy and I'm considering biking on my full sized road bike to/from the airport at both ends of the trip. I'll have my trusty Chrome Industries Rolltop 37 with me for clothes/tools but I was wondering if there's a fold-able or collapsible bike bag that I could use to transport the bike that would be small enough to fold up in to my backpack? When I get to Italy, I'll have an 80Km cycle so it would have to be lightweight. An alternative and front runner for now is, getting a ride/taxi to my local airport with bike in a cardboard box (that they ship to shops in) and then hopefully obtaining a box from Safe Bag when I depart. UPDATE This is not available at the airport I'm travelling to but looks like a good product. This is an EU to EU flight. Cost of bringing the bike on the flight will be about €100. I'm flying with Ryanair and their bicycle policy is as follows: Bicycles - MUST be contained in a protective box or protective bike bag in order to beaccepted for travel Bike rental is not something I'd like to consider at this time. The return flight is quite early so I'm not even sure I'd be able to return a rental I was to consider that option. Any suggestions would be great. <Q> You could pair a Burly Travoy with a bike suitcase if you're willing to put up with a trailer while you're touring: + <S> The bonus is that you get to use the bike suitcase to hold all your belongings in a nice, watertight compartment while on the road. <S> The downside is that it looks wonky. <S> I'm not sure if the Travoy is designed for hundreds of miles of touring. <S> It's certainly heavier and more unwieldy than an axle-mounted trailer. <S> And you'll likely get hit with extra baggage fees for the bike suitcase. <S> In any case the Travoy+bike-suitcase combo what some Bromptoneers and other folders do, albeit our bikes are much smaller and so it's actually workable since we don't pay extra fees for our bikes. <S> Here's a youtube video of someone doing it with a Tern. <S> Alternately: there's nothing that stops you from doing this with another type of trailer (such as an axle-mount). <S> Or that would stop you from designing your own bike suitcase with detachable wheels so that it turns into a trailer (or trailer into a bike suitcase ): <A> The bag itself was small enough to fit in the bottom of a pannier when folded, and doubled as a groundsheet for camping CTC (Cyclists Touring Club) provide documentation showing the best way to use it; lower saddle, twist handlebars, remove front wheel and attach to frame, remove derailleur and cover any vulnerable bits with pipe insulation - all things that can be done at the airport if you're riding there. <A> I've finally found what I'm looking for, both of which are manufactured by Ground Effect . <S> There are two models which I'm considering, either the Tardis or Body Bag . <S> Thanks for all the suggestions! <S> Right now I'm leaning towards the Tardis but both fold down in to A4 sized packages which is exactly what I'm looking for. <A> This is a service recommendation and is not going to help our American readers, but... <S> airshells.com rents bike transport cases on many European airports, including Dublin. <S> So, you ride to the airport, pick up the case there and check it in. <S> At destination, leave it at left luggage office - which costs some money but saves a lot of hassle. <S> I rented a case from them for a 10 day trip, and the service was excellent. <S> On return flight the case was handled roughly and lost one wheel, there was absolutely no problem for me.
|
Check your airline's policy on how bikes should be packaged, but I've managed to fly with British Airways Budapest-London using a giant polythene bag , which I just wheeled in and taped up as the front quick release had jammed.
|
How useful/valuable is internal cabling? I'm in the market for a new bike. I'm not a club rider but a utilitarian one: I commute on my bike, visit friends and run errands. On average I probably ride 2-4 miles per day, almost entirely on good roads. Very occasionally I'll ride on a rough track like a riverside path. I picked the model I was interested in and asked a cyclist friend if he'd go for that, or a more expensive version. The extra money buys: An aluminium fork instead of a steel one A few extra gears Internal cables The extra gears are of no value to me. I tested both in the bike shop and couldn't tell the difference between aluminium and steel forks on a good road surface, which is where I do almost all my riding. That leaves the cables. I can see that internal cables look much neater, but my friend says they'll save me money on cable replacement because they won't get dirty from road spray working into the internals. The price difference is £100. Are they really going to save me £100 over the likely lifetime of the bike (let's say 10 years)? <Q> One difference that internal cables make is if you transport your bike by car or have to haul it around by hand. <S> Because the cables are inside the frame, they are less likely to get pinched by the clamp on your car-mount (especially if you use a trunk mount that clamps the top-tube). <S> This is also true for car/bus bike mounts that clamp the down tube. <S> If you are carrying the bike up flights of steps, having internal cables means your hand/shoulder isn't rubbing the cables when you carry it by the top-tube. <S> Nothing critical. <S> These are all really, really minor. <S> Internal cables are more about the aesthetics than anything else. <A> I use two bicycles daily: one with all cables internal, including those on the handlebar and one where only top tube cable is inside, other cables are outside. <S> While riding it makes zero difference. <S> When changing the cables, I finish the bike with outer cables in less than a hour, while the bike with the internal routing takes several hours and sometimes massive amount of PITA with things like accidental cables lost in the tube. <S> To summarize: cable routing makes no difference for riding, internal routing is slightly better when cleaning the bike, external is way easier to maintain. <S> It may point to a groupset which is newer (those tend to have more speeds as time progresses). <S> If it is a "granny gear" and you are not into climbing, then it is not worth getting. <A> I transport my bike on a standard mounted hitch rack and I've been doing it for years. <S> With external cables, you will end up damaging your shifters since the cables have constant contact/tension with the rack. <A> in addition to @RoboKaren's answer: Race drivers prefer them because it makes bikes more aerodynamic. <S> For off road (and not) makes cables catch less dirt which makes them last longer and need less maintenance. <A> I have internal cables on my bicycle. <S> I ride about 4 miles every day in an area with four seasons. <S> The largest advantage I have found with internal cables lays in the ease with which I can clean the frame when road salt or muddy splash collects on the frame's surface. <S> but if you wash your bike down a couple of times a month, internal tubing may make cleaning the bike easier. <A> External cables can reduce your options for mounting luggage (frame bags) and lock holders. <S> If you can fit such bags it's often with extra fiddling. <S> I've seen brake cables running up the seat tube on a step through. <S> These make fitting a child seat bracket a little interesting.
|
If you have external cables on your downtube, they can get banged a bit if you lock your bike with a U-lock through the front wheel and triangle. While cleaning the bicycle I find the internal routing handier, because the surface is featureless, thus easier to clean. As many people have pointed out, it is not an especially strong feature And when it comes to the rest of extras, my opinion is that the only extra worth looking at is extra gears.
|
How to equip a bike to avoid parts being stolen I'm looking for a bike (road bike) in Paris , to move around and avoid train and subways. The only thing that I don't want, is to see my bike stolen a week after I bought it. What are the good ideas to keep it's bike when riding in town ? What equipments can be put to avoid parts to be stolen (like the seat, the wheels etc.) ? EDIT Are there any cheep brands that sell bikes with equipment that cannot be taken from the bike ? <Q> There are various proprietary brands of security hardware such as pinhead and pitlock . <S> I use the former on both my bikes, for the wheels (QR and nutted), headset, saddle and seat post. <S> Pinhead fittings at least are stocked both side of the Atlantic (I suggest with either that you buy a spare key at the same time). <S> The bike I keep outside has further features: <S> wherever possible, accessories (such as the bottle cage and pannier rack, even the bracket for a removable light) are attached using anti-tamper torx screws (picture is of the tool). <S> The tool is readily available if uncommon, so it is mainly a deterrent against casual thieves but so far so good. <S> I had a whole front light attached this way and half the light was taken/vandalised shop that may give you an idea of the limits to this approach. <S> You need a good locking strategy. <S> I use a D-lock through the back wheel, both chain stays and a bike rack, work a separate cable lock through the front wheel, front triangle, helmet and rack. <S> This means both wheels are protected by locks not just security fasteners. <S> Consider not always locking the bike on the same place. <S> I have a choice of racks outside the station overnight, but lock it inside the station for weekends or longer (it takes long enough getting it out of the station that it would be quicker to walk than do it every day). <S> I use a cheap bike for this, which is a further deterrent. <S> We have questions here about how to make bikes (and by extension their components) unattractive to thieves. <S> I have failed to find lights etc. <S> designed for secure mounting, instead the manufacturers have gone the opposite way and made them easy to remove. <S> (e.g. glue the 2 parts of the clip together) <A> For those of you that want to commute on a nice bike in bad neighborhoods, let me give you a few tricks that have served me well. <S> Replace all quick release fixtures with tooled fixtures. <S> This is generally a small investment. <S> Take a black marker to all component markings, making all those Deore XT's look at first glance like no-name-brand cheapo components. <S> Either give your bike a crappy paint job <S> -- spray paint some garish, noticeable color. <S> Dont' bother making it beautiful, but make sure any brand markings or indication of quality of bike disappear. <S> An easy alternative here is to wrap the frame in packing tape, which will make your bike look like a beater, but preserve the original finish if you ever want to resell it. <S> Use a good lock, but it should look old and beat up, not like you take your bike too seriously. <S> Camouflaging your bike as a beater will cause most to simply scan right over it. <S> Incidentally, the following happened to my roommate in Paris, with a brand new $3K mountain bike: <S> He pulled up to a fixture of some sort, leaned his bike against the fixture, and started fishing around in his bag for a lock. <S> Whilst doing so, a thief road up on a beater bike, sprung off said beater, sprung on roommates fancy pride and joy, and road off while my roommate looked on in shock and horror. <S> Probably wouldn't have happened if his bike looked like a beater. <S> A further tip is to look for a good locking place -- somewhere with nice bikes on parade, in view of gendarmarie, or in view of many cyclists (where a thief might suppose you are among said cyclists) are good choices, as is underneath a security camera, such as those typically found in car parks. <S> Finally, workplaces often have a sheltered area where you can lock your bike in relative safety. <S> This tends to be quite discouraging as it both makes your bike look like an abandoned beater, and makes riding off on your bike uncomfortable. <A> This has to be a dup. <S> First step is get the cheapest bike that does what you need. <S> One <S> it is a lower theft target and two <S> if it gets stolen it hurts less. <S> Buy used. <S> Single speed is cheaper, less to steal, and rear wheel is already semi secured. <S> This is my $400 used city commuter - add $80 big u lock. <S> Just remove the front wheel and lock it all to something solid. <S> Take the lights with you. <S> If they steal the post and seat I can still ride home and I am out all of $40. <S> And this bike is a very nice city ride. <A> <A> I would highly advise to just get a cheap second hand bike and a good lock. <S> A new bike is the main target for casual robbers which are the most <S> and there isn't much you can do against professional ones(who <S> go for expensive stuff manly in order to sell in pieces). <S> So getting a cheap in first place and second hand(dirty old looking) in second place will make them just unwilling to make the effort to steal it and even more if it have a quality lock on it.
|
Some ideas to keep the equipment on the bike are: superglue small ball bearing in any hex heads to deter quick removal of that particular part, and wrap a section of old bicycle chain through the seat stays and a rail of the saddle to prevent the saddle and seatpost from being removed. In my experience, which is sadly rather high, bike thieves tend to look for shiny, and easy targets of opportunity. Last but not least, you can leave the QR for your bike seat, and take the seat with you when you are leaving the bike for an extended time. I've had some success modifying clip-on lights to fit with screws
|
Can an aluminium frame rust from the inside if water has been in it for some time? My bike has been sitting out in the open for a few months due to lack of space. When I finally decided to strip it down and bring it inside, a lot of water came out of the frame. It could have been sitting there for a few months. The chain and the cables have started to rust but that's an easy fix. I'm worried if the frame could have began to rust from the inside and should I expect it to break unexpectedly in the future? <Q> Technically rust is limited to iron. <S> What is bad is the rust starts and continues. <S> The water / oxidizing agent is not consumed. <S> Aluminum will oxidize but it forms a protective coating. <S> An aluminum frame will not "oxidize out". <S> I don't know why you don't seem to see stainless in bicycles. <A> Even if the water didn't cause the bearings to rust, a freezing/melting cycle can cause damage to the bearings themselves, force lubricants out, and otherwise mess-up the bottom bracket. <S> Your seat stem <S> might also have corrosion problems caused by galling between the metal seat tube and seat post to the point where it'll be impossible to remove or adjust the seat height. <S> You will want to remove it and put some grease or other anti-seize lubricant on it. <S> tl;dr: <S> You should have your bottom bracket checked out, <S> make sure your seat post can actually still move, and clear your drain holes (if you have any). <A> Is the frame pure aluminium? <S> Aluminium does not rust. <S> If the frame is an alloy you would need to check whether or not the other materials are susceptible to rust.
|
Some iron alloys such as stainless steel prevent rust. While the aluminum frame itself will be relatively ok, the problem will be your bottom bracket (almost certainly made in part of steel) which was most probably sitting in a big puddle of water.
|
Worries about a gear ratio of 1:1? I'm planning a randonneur-like bike with drop bars, STI shifters, and nevertheless some low gears. The crankset could be a "compact plus" (I guess from Sugino), 44 and 28 teeths, and the cassette a normal Shimano 105 11-32. With this setup, the second lowest gear ratio would be 28/28 = one . I can imagine that this could add some particular mechanical stress on the the entire rear wheel, from the cassette to the spokes. But on the other hand, given that it's not the lowest gear, I probably won't use it for more than a few minutes in a row.Should an exact gear ratio of 1/1 be strictly avoided ? Edit: imagine a cyclist pushing from side to side as she/he stands to climb up a mountain road. As long as the 1:1 gear stays in, the rear wheel always get flexed in the same way. <Q> 1:1 and similar ratios are considered bad in automotive gearboxes. <S> If there is one bad tooth it will soon take others with it, if it is always meshing with the same teeth. <S> Automotive gearboxes tend to use coprime ratios (where the 2 gears have no common multiple) to avoid this. <S> There really isn't a similar issue on a bike. <S> I suppose it might be a good idea to have a prime number of links on the chain to even out wear in case of a bad tooth, but the sprockets never come into direct contact, so that shouldn't be an issue. <S> Resonance shouldn't be an issue. <S> the resonant frequency of the bike is going to be way higher than your pedalling frequency. <S> It'll be in the audio range. <S> Just give it a tap and you may hear it ring. <A> I have a half-decent hybrid with the option of 28/28 from stock, and there are places where I used to use it quite a lot with no trouble. <S> More importantly though, I'm not sure what you think is special about 1:1 gearing. <S> The load is spread over a good (large) number of teeth front and rear. <S> There are no sharp bends or cross-chaining effects to worry about. <S> If you're concerned about some sort of resonance, it would be small compared to resonant effects of stomping on the pedals a couple of times a second, or riding over cobbles. <S> Both of these are normal and handled sensibly by ordinary frames. <A> I think that 1:1 is only a problem if you forget that you will end up coasting a bit. <S> Any amount of coasting, or even switching gears for a few seconds will end up making a different part or the wheel undergo the stress. <A> The side to flex is from the bar to the crank via the frame and headset. <S> My single speed mounting bike is 32 x 16 <S> so it gets repeated stress and zero problem. <S> 32 x 16 is a pretty common SS mountain set up. <S> Some SS cyclocross racers go with with that. <S> In loose gravel/dirt at my max torque if the wheel spins it does not spin to the side.
|
Unless you are climbing for a long period of time without any changes in gradient that would require changing gears, then I really don't think it's something that will have any real effects. I don't think that 1:1 would be particularly worse than 2:1 (42:21), or 3:1 (48:16). There is very little to no side to side stress in the wheel.
|
how to increace the friction between tyre and road While designing a bicycle what are the designing factors to be considered to increase the friction to give more efficiency to the cycle.And what are the other factors that can be considered while designing.my interest is to design a modified bicycle to improve efficiency and decrease man power <Q> Increased friction between the tire and the riding surface is the goal of nearly every tire manufacturer. <S> You could easily coat your tire in oil to accomplish the lower friction you are talking about. <A> What you want to minimize (within reason) is "drag" or "rolling resistance" caused by the tires in contact with the road. <S> This is a function of tire width, tire pressure, tread design, and the characteristics of the rubber. <S> Plus, of course, the characteristics of the road. <S> Generally, higher pressure reduces contact area (for a given weight) and hence rolling resistance. <S> Smooth tires produce fewer losses than lugged tires, and hard rubber fewer losses than a softer rubber. <S> (But at some point the tire is harder than the road and no additional gains can be made.) <S> Further, having tires that are too hard can reduce overall (human-operated) bike efficiency because vibrations are transmitted through the tires and bike to the rider's body, where they are dissipated as heat (and fatigue). <S> Ideally, the tires are soft enough to absorb moderate bumps, but the rubber and tread are designed such that very little energy is absorbed, but rather "reflected" back to the road as the bumps go the opposite direction. <A> The ONLY thing bike design has to do with the friction between the tyre and the road <S> is weight related, assuming tyre design does not count as part of bike design. <S> Heavier design of bike = more friction, Lighter design of bike = less friction. <S> I for one would not consider "designing a bicycle" in the context of this question to be designing the tyres, any more than I would consider it to be designing the drive terrain. <S> As far as I understood it and I may be wrong <S> it is reasonable to consider "design a bicycle" in the above question to be frame design + component selection. <S> Then you should (after inventing a method to do so) coat those wheels with Cerflon for minimum coefficient of friction. <S> You should design and integrate into your bike a device to perfectly smooth the path ahead of you and coat it in an extremely hard substance which is then in turn coated with Cerflon. <S> Diamond and poly(1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethylene) would be reasonable substitutes for wurtzite boron nitride and Cerflon respectively.
|
Reducing friction (or grip in layman's terms) would cause your wheel to simply spin in circles when you pedal and you would fall down. However if the question actually means, as Mσᶎ believes, the design of any part of a bike then following should be done: You should design tyres (or tyreless wheels) as thin and hard as possible (maybe out of wurtzite boron nitride) for absolute minimum contact area.
|
Hard to pedal even on flat street I have a woman's cruiser bike with pedal brakes only. Everything has been working great but when I took a bike ride the other day I was on a flat street and it was extremely difficult to pedal...why and what can I do to fix it? <Q> Start with the easier things before busting out the spanners! <S> Check the bike over. <S> Low pressure tyres are very hard to ride, so add air with a pump. <S> Walk the bike around and make sure it coasts <S> okay. <S> Rotate the pedal crank while lifting the rear wheel off the ground and make sure it looks right with no bad noises/feelings. <S> If it is the back wheel not spinning freely even when off the ground, sounds like your brake may be the cause. <S> A teardown can be a complex and messy thing, how's your mechanical skills? <S> Final point - if there is only one brake and its not working right, don't ride the bike till its fixed. <S> Many locations require two separate braking subsystems. <S> Where's your front brake gone ? <S> Also, riding it in the current state may worsen a repair into a replacement. <A> Edit: I agree with Criggie about the check list first, I just assume people check for the obvious, I probably shouldn't assume that though. <S> What can you do to fix it: Unless you are happy getting your hands dirty and doing something like in the youtube link below then taking your bike to a bike shop would be the best option. <S> If you are happy getting your hands dirty then the model of your rear hub/brake is needed to provide accurate information. <S> Until you open it up you won't know for sure if part of the brake is actually broken and replacement parts are needed or if just a service will suffice. <S> However I would guess just a service is needed since you merely found it hard to pedal on a flat and did not mention variations in difficulty or other strangeness. <S> Why it happened: <S> You only really find this out while fixing it. <A> If it is a cruiser bike it might be the laid-back angle that makes it feel a bit more difficult to pedal as you generally push bigger gears with such bikes rather than spin due to the position of the seat in relation to the cranks.
|
It is impossible to accurately answer this with the information provided in your question, however assuming it is because the brake is no longer functioning correctly, I would guess: insufficient grease and/or rusted bearings and/or too much gunk and dirt in the hub. Look for anything wrong, that's anything rubbing or otherwise out of line.
|
Is it worth wearing a headlamp when cycling as well as having a bar mounted light? Most bike lights seem to be the bar / seatpost mounted variety. Is it worth also having a headlamp for riding? I go cycle touring, ride in the city and do mountain bike xc trail riding. I've got a budget enough to buy something decent. <Q> This is always going to be a matter of opinion but here are some reasons why I think the answer is "yes": Cornering <S> : you don't have to be cornering hard for a bar-mounted light to point the wrong way, and cornering is a time when you really don't want to hit a pothole. <S> Signaling to others: if a bus starts indicating out while you're alongside, lifting your head to flash their mirror is quite effective. <S> If you come off in the dark: you don't want someone to swerve round the bike towards your head. <S> (my head torch has a rear light as well, thanks to my modifications). <S> I also like the fact that when riding with my bar light quite dipped (e.g. on a busy, two-way but unlit bike path), I have hands-free control of how far in front the road is illuminated, and can avoid dazzling people coming the other way while still illuminating the road ahead. <S> I use a head torch with a narrow beam. <A> My tuppence - ALL THE LIGHTS! <S> A handlebar lamp is what vehicle drivers "expect" to represent your forward direction. <S> So I have a high-power chinese thing with 4x18650 in a pouch. <S> I only take it in winter or when I expect to be riding in the dark. <S> I'm <S> not sure if it works better on the bar or on the head-tube... <S> with the headtube the light doesn't wiggle as much, but it doesn't light up around corners <S> so well <S> Stays on upper rear of helmet all the time <S> In addition I have blinkies on the front and rear, because winking gets attention at the sides of the driver's vision as opposed to direct-on. <S> Again, always on bike. <S> Multiple lights works well for me, because I've had the occasional one go flat while riding. <S> If its a rear, then you won't know till you get to your destination. <S> A super-bright headlight has caused me problems on a night ride <S> - it was dusty, and the head light illuminated the dust right in front of my face, obscuring vision and making me go slower. <S> Another reason for putting the big light on the handlebar. <S> Some locations have restrictions about what you can have blinking and what must be on solid. <S> Bear that in mind, and do what keeps you safest. <A> What is your budget? <S> Don't split between two cheap lights. <S> I would start with a good (like $80+ USD) <S> bar light before spending money on a helmet light. <S> The nicer lights even have a broad low beam and more focused high beam with multiple power settings. <S> Then you can add a nice helmet light. <S> It is good for riding trails as you can direct the light. <S> Bar light is still good for staying on what is in front of the tire. <S> For city riding I do not use the head light much. <S> Riding up and relaxed it points to far forward. <S> Riding down in drops and fast it is pointing too close. <S> And I notice the extra weight. <S> Riding country roads where you don't have lights for reference <S> the headlight is very nice.
|
I also use a blinking pinpoint torch on the helmet which I use to light up reflectors and point out to drivers where I am.
|
front wheel takes more impact than rear? I was commuting to work this morning and was following a bus, suddenly I saw a huge crack, no time to steering around so just run over it. Then I felt my bike not steering properly. Pulled over and had a check I found the front tyre was complete flat. That must be from the impact because a puncture should take longer to flat a tyre. The inner tube may have exploded (haven't checked). Never MTB before so wondering is front of a bicycle takes more impact than rear? Is that why MTB has longer travel in the front? Thanks everyone for the inputs. I have checked the front tube, there is 2-3 mm slit, so definitely from an explosion. That means the front tyre hit the crack, then deformed too much at the impact. Looking at vehicles in crashes (front ), they all have badly deformed front, rear is relatively intact. If front doesn't deform, then the force will go through all vehicle and cause even more damage to the driver. I think it's similar here. <Q> It's more likely a combination of the front wheel hitting before you had time to react properly and unweight it, and you also probably pushed down on the handlebars to shift your body back ready to do that. <S> Even just the first could have been enough to pinch flat your tyre. <S> There's a whole lot of more factors, from the size and pressure of your tyres, what suspension (if any) <S> you have, how you sit on the bike, how fast you were going and so on. <S> Mountain bikes have different travel balances depending on their purpose, and riding style can make a huge difference to what makes sense or what's desirable in terms of suspension travel. <S> One factor is that it's simply easier to build a bike with huge travel in the front suspension and much harder to get the same at the back. <S> There have been a few MTBs with an intermediate drive, for example, that runs up to a cog on the suspension pivot, allowing them tom have a longer rear swingarm and hence more travel. <S> But if you want more travel on a front fork you just lift the headset up and have longer sliders. <S> It's not quite that easy, but it's easier than doing the same at the back. <A> The principle is very similar to braking Front wheel: when front wheel hit an obstacle, the speed of bicycle suddenly decreases. <S> The centre of mass would shifted even more towards front wheel, making it harder to roll over an object (easier to brake). <S> This contributes to a larger impact, comparing to the rear wheel. <S> Rearwheel: as weight is shifted towards the front, it is easier for the rear to roll over an obstacle. <S> If something resist the rear to roll over, the process repeats itself (even more weight to the front). <A> Hard-tail mountain bikes have the front suspension in order to absorb bumps and help the rider steer in a stable and predictable way. <S> As a plus, they provide some protection on the front wheel an the inner tube. <S> In general though, the impact is shared all around the frame. <S> Suspension just reduces a percentage of it (depending on available travel, rebound and lock-out settings). <S> That's why, apart from anything else, the frame geometry, helps the rider tackle the terrain designed for. <A> When you hit a bump, with no avoidance maneuver, the front wheel is forced up abruptly, and most of that force is transferred to the cyclist's body. <S> When the rear wheel later hits the same bump, at normal cycling speeds, the cyclist's body is still "up in the air" from the front wheel bump, and much less force is transmitted. <A> Plus once you've lost momentum from the first impact, there's less energy for the rear wheel impact anyway. <S> A MTB might have more rear travel than it appears to have (smaller rear shock than front), because of the geometry of the rear linkages. <S> A Full sus bike might well have matching travel at both front and rear but not look like it does.
|
A rider's weight is positioned behind the front wheel more compared to the rear wheel, so probably contributes to higher impact force at the front over a single crack or bump.
|
25 degree rise stem vs 6 degree rise stem with taller head tube - how is handling affected? All, I’m shopping for a new road bike with endurance geometry (more upright position and shorter top tube), 9mm drop saddle-to-bars. I’ve had a Guru fit done by a professional fitter. The main problem is I’m 5’5” with 29” inseam, and one arm is 2” shorter than the other. So it’s been hard to find a small frame with a short enough reach and tall enough head tube (enough stack) to put the bars close enough without compromising handling. Most of the 48cm or 49cm frames I’m looking at have a top tube that is too long and/or the head tube is not tall enough. Many 50cm frames don’t have enough standover clearance. The fitter has spec’d a 70mm 6 degree stem as a minimum and doesn’t want to go shorter. I thought it might work to use a 70mm stem with a 25 or 30 degree rise, to effectively reduce the reach and get the handlebars high enough. It’s sort of like making the head tube taller and the top tube shorter, but with a riser stem. However, my fitter has advised against this, saying that using a riser stem with that much rise may adversely affect handling and weight distribution. My question is, how is using a stem with 25 degree rise different from having a frame with a taller head tube (more stack) using a 6 degree rise? Is there a handling difference, and why? Thanks <Q> The weight distribution is affected only by the location of saddle and handlebars related to the wheels. <S> It does not matter whether it is by higher rise stem or higher head tube. <S> The difference that might affect handling is that system of frame with high head tube and short stem is stiffer than one of lower head tube and longer angled stem. <S> You can feel the difference when pedaling hard, but any modern stem will be far stiffer than <S> old-fashioned quill stems used to be. <S> There is a financial difference, is your fitter recommending custom frames? <A> Here's some images to help see the relative differences. <S> Note they assume your stem starts at the same point, so if you're thinking of raising it, print the top one out on paper and then draw your riser in, and how the other stem sizes would work. <S> If you're feeling unsure, wimp out and buy/borrow an adjustable stem. <S> They're heavy and complex, but you can pick an angle and a length, tighten the bolts, and try it for a ride or two. <S> My personal story - I changed from a 120 mm long quill stem to a 40mm long quill stem that is also 40mm higher, and fast downhills got so much more comfortable. <S> However my climbs mean I have to get up on the front of the saddle earlier and stay there for most/all of a steep climb. <S> I suspect 10mm either way is going to be hard to feel a difference. <A> It's on a fast Cervelo, but I'm not racing anymore, as likely you aren't with your endurance bike. <S> I cringed when I saw the "look" of the bike, but it rides beautifully and I am friends with my lower back again. <S> His line was "you want the bike to look good, or do you want to look good on the bike." 'Nough said!
|
My bike fitter set me up with a stem that has a shorter reach stem and steeper rise to compensate for my aging, stiffer back.
|
Safely Switch Bicycles before a Century? I did an unsupported century last year on my 30 pound "shop" mountain bike. The first 55 miles were easy but the last 45 or so were pretty horrible. This year, I want to try it again but with more hills. I really don't want to lug my 30 pound mountain bike up the hills, but I don't have the money for a decent road bike. If I follow a reasonable training plan on my 30 pound mountain bike this year, will I be "safe" moving into high-dollar 15 pound rental road bike 24 hours before an unsupported century? WARNING: This question was edited from its original version. It originally used the term "homemade" century to denote an unsupported century. Also, the question originally asked if it would be okay to switch to a road bike the day of the mentioned century. Now, the question asks if it is safe to switch 24 hours before the mentioned century. <Q> I would strongly advise against that. <S> Your legs are not going to be the problem, and neither is your overall conditioning/strength. <S> Road bikes steer with your butt while MTB steer with handlebars. <S> This is a big deal when you are tired and running on instincts. <S> You don't want to crash or cause a crash. <S> A spin bike could help if you can get a road-bike-position. <S> Also doing lots and lots of planks. <S> Think of riding a road bike in a century like a 4-5hr plank. <S> If you can't hold it that long, you'll start to sit which causes pain in your rump and arms/hands. <S> Short story: Ride what you trained to ride, in this case the MTB. <S> I often feel 'whiny' at the 45 mile point and again around 60 miles and again at around 90 or so. <S> Usually eating something fixes it (power bar in my case). <S> Almost like someone lubed my knees or something <S> and I'm raring to go again. <S> I usually only stop long enough to refill water bottles and carry all my food on the bike. <A> No - that'd be like putting a Toyota rally driver into a F1 car, on race day. <S> You'll be able to ride, but you won't be used to the nuances, as david1024 says, BUMSTEER. <S> Road bikes need at least a week to get used to, and I went 500 km of riding in a month, before becoming comfortable on a road bike after being on MTBs for years. <S> And I still go downhills faster on the MTB than on the road bike. <S> You can prep your existing ride by removing non-essential weight like mudguards and lights. <S> Go for new tyres with mostly slick tread rather than knobblies, and go for the higher end of the safe working pressure in the tubes. <S> Lock out any suspension if you can do so. <S> Or if you're liking road riding, do consider buying a road bike. <S> I know they're stupid prices new, but riding is still cheaper than other addictions like smoking and drinking :) <S> A good used road bike could be more within your reach. <S> Consider several months practice if you're moving to cleats or changing cleat systems too. <S> Finally, remember cyclists want to own N+1 bikes.... <A> Are you sure the weight is the real issue? <S> Remember the weight you haul up a hill is the combined weight of the rider and bike, so cutting 15lbs off the bike will probably only be a change of around 7.5% in system weight - and you'll have a smaller choice of gears. <S> Putting good road tyres on the MTB will make a bigger difference in energy used on the day. <S> Where good = low hysteresis rubber, NOT racing bike narrow - look at the speed ratings on Schwalbe's site. <S> Qualifications for posting: ex-San Francisco bike messenger <S> - I KNOW about riding hills! <A> I've done pretty much exactly what you describe: <S> training on a (really terrible old beat up MTB) and then using a rented road bike (totally different configuration, weight, etc.) <S> for a century ( RideLondon-Surrey 100 ) with no problems. <S> I can't see how I wold have survived riding that distance (on those hills!) in my MTB. <S> The answers so far sound like good general advice, but it's not clear that any of those answering have actually tried what they are advising against.
|
Your core and arms are probably not going to be strong enough to hold you up for a century on a road bike unless you've trained on one. So I strongly recommend switching! If you are going to be around other riders, you need to be able to stop and start and steer safely. Use a rigid fork, use the correct gear for climbing, have comfortable grips on the bars.
|
How many watts is a good push worth? The other day as I commuted home a stranger gave me a helpful push as I approached the top of a steep hill. It was wonderful, and I immediately wondered if this is what an e-bike boost would be like. Is there some way to calculate how many equivalent watts a nice push produces? Very curious to know if it's on the low end (20 or so) or the high end (200 or so). <Q> Ad bsdl says, power = force times speed, so the same force at a higher speed requires or provides more power. <S> Going slowly up a hill even quite a strong push doesn't cost much power. <S> A 200W "push" at 10kph will take you up most road hills with little to no pedalling, since that's all the power that's required. <S> A 200W push at 70kph on the flat is noticeable but only just, because 200W requires less force and the rider is already having to put out 500W or so to go that fast. <S> The extra 40% power also has a reduced effect since air resistance goes up as the cube of speed. <S> Adding means 1.4x as much power but the speed change is roughly 1.4^1/3 = 1.11, so you'd only go ~8kph faster or 78kph. <S> You can experiment with this if you are the one giving the push. <S> The relationship between how fast you're going and how much effort your legs have to put in for a given push force is quite perceptible even at relatively low speeds. <S> It's very easy at a moderate speed to push someone and find that you're going backwards relative to them quite dramatically, but without their speed changing much at all. <S> They'll be saying "go on, push" or " <S> that did nothing!" <S> while you're sprinting frantically to catch back up to them. <A> As others has said P = <S> F X V <S> Lets say it felt 10 KG - under the force of gravity that is <S> 98 newtons - lets just round up to to 100 N <S> Let say you were doing 15 kmh 100 N 15 km <S> /h <S> * 1 h/3600 sec <S> * 1000/1k = 100 <S> * 15 / <S> 3.6 = 41.67 watts <S> If if felt like about 10 KG and you were doing 15 kmh then about 40 watts Something like Gruber power assist is 200 watts <A> I had a 400W motor for a while, and that felt like a good solid continuous shove. <S> Given the other rider is also going up the same hill, they have to keep powering themselves too, so anything they give you is in addition to what they need to keep pace. <S> It doesn't take a lot though - a push can be enough to take the edge off your muscles for a moment. <S> So I'd guesstimate somewhere between 20 and 100 W, probably in the middle. <S> TBH <S> I'd be more worried about random strange cyclists coming close enough to push me, and if I was offering the push that someone would take it the wrong way. <S> I mean - where do you push? <S> Their arse is probably convenient, but you're gonna get yelled at. <S> Saddle would be a second best, or pushing their shoulder could put them off balance. <S> It would be different if you know the other rider.
|
The faster you're going the more power you get out of a given amount of force or "push".
|
Presta valve on new tube won't inflate Just replaced a bad inner tube with a new, Presta valve tube. Unfortunately, I seem to be unable to get any air in the tube; I hear air leaving the pump and not going anywhere. I tried investigating the usual suspects: The pump is not sealed on tightly enough: Doubtful; several times I was able to lock the pump head so far down on the valve that it took considerable effort to remove it again. The nut on the valve was closed: Nope. Opened and closed the valve several times, pushed down on the valve enough to hear a minuscule hiss of air. The valve is open. Wrong pump type: Nope. Managed to inflate my other Presta valve tire just fine. The only thing I can think of is that the complete lack of air pressure in the tube means there is nothing closing the valve, so the pump has nothing to depress and the sealing nut sits on the air opening. However, that sounds wrong to me. Any ideas? <Q> Perhaps its obvious, but maybe the tube has a leak? <S> Is it an old tube that has perished and is just letting air out as fast as you pump it in? <S> Perhaps try taking the tube off the wheel, put it in a bucket/tub of water, and then pump. <S> Can you see bubbles somewhere? <A> If you hear air leaving the pump and it is not going in the tire <S> then you don't have a seal. <S> If you have a seal and valve is blocked then you would not hear air leaving the pumpt <A> A presta valve on some brands have removable valve cores. <S> If the pump is good, and the tube is not punctured, then there are 2 more options: <S> The valve core is bad/leaking, and should be replaced. <S> If it is removable, replace the core only. <S> If it is a one piece valve, replace the tube.
|
The removable core is not seated properly, and needs to be tightened with a valve core tool.
|
Shimano Ultegra 6800...what do I need? I'm gearing up for my first bike tour. I have an old motobecane cross bike, I think it's a 2007. I need more granny gears. Right now I have a 9 speed 12-26. I'm looking into the Shimano Ultegra 6800 stuff, and so far it seems affordable with great reviews. My question is, I know I need the cassette, chain, derraileur & shifter. Anything else? <Q> Shimano 11 speed road cassettes are wider than previous models, so you most likely will need a wider freehub body. <S> In some cases it can be bought separately, but given that you have 9 speed at the moment, I find it unlikely, so add an 11 speed Shimano road rear compatible hub to the purchase list. <A> See Klaster_1's comment. <S> You could save a lot of cash by going for a 9 speed cassette with a larger large. <S> Something like a 32 or 34 tooth will be available standard. <S> Your rear deraileruer might be okay, and a new chain might be a good idea if the current one is worn. <S> However you could get away with just the cassette. <S> The other option is to put a triple on the front, but that's a lot more fiddly. <A> So you currently have 9sp, and you want to go to 6800, which is 11sp? <S> Most likely Shimano would advise you that what you need to do is to buy the entire groupset. <S> As Klaster says, you'll also need a new 11sp freehub body to bolt onto the hub (if one exists) - although this shouldn't require a wheel rebuild. <S> This part does not come as part of the groupset (as it is hub -specific) so would need to be bought separately. <S> If you can't get a compatible freehub body, you need to get a new hub, or a new wheel. <A> I ordered 9 speed cassette 12-36 <S> and I'm just going to start with that. <S> My current chain is pretty new, so I'm going to buy 1 piece at a time and see how it fits together. <S> I'm going to do a little tour on it and see how everything feels. <S> If I need to replace a lot of things, I should consider a new bike, but I love my bike and I'm definitely on a budget. <S> Thanks for your input, everyone.
|
In reality, you could probably get away without replacing brakes and bottom bracket, although you'd probably find it cheaper to buy the set, rather than to buy the individual bits and bobs.
|
Bike won't shift at all I have old old 90's Cannondale that has been sitting in a spare bedroom for the last three years just collecting dust (has not been ridden in those three years). I bought a bike trainer over the weekend and so I wanted to throw that bike on the trainer and use it for indoor use. I set it all up and when I got on the bike and started shifting the bike shifting in the back to the largest cog (so lowest gear) but now I am unable to make it shift at all to a higher gear. Bike was shifting completely fine the last time it was ridden but now not at all. It also doesn't feel like there is any tension in the actual shifter when I push on it. Does this type of problem sound familiar to anyone? For what it's worth, the shifters are Shimano RSX. <Q> I'm familiar with RSX brifters (brake and shift combo units) <S> You might be able to finangle it a couple times by manipulating the underlever carefully, and you'll feel it catch. <S> A blast in the guts of the brifter with brake cleaner or similar can help short term too, but for the long term fix its at least an hour of messing around. <S> Here's a pre-existing answer where I wrote up the full procedure for cleaning a RSX brifter: <S> STI shifter sometimes doesn't catch in cooler weather <S> And here's the howto video showing... <S> how to. <S> Answer : <S> if a squirt of brake cleaner helps, then the full fix should make it right again. <A> It sounds as though the return spring in the rear derailleur is no longer strong enough to push it back. <S> Most likely the grease or oil in the system has dried out and become glue, probably dusty glue, over the time the bike wasn't used. <S> One easy test (that may also fix the problem) is to leave the shifter set to high gear and while pedalling the bike on the trainer with your hand, use your other hand to push the rear derailleur back and forth to shift gears. <S> Just wiggling it might free it up enough to fix the immediate problem. <S> What you should do, though, is get some chain lube and go over your whole bike. <S> Get something that's a solvent+wax, solvent+grease or solvent+teflon <S> (any of the wax lubes, TriFlow or whatever). <S> First lube the chain, obviously, but drip a bit of chain lube into all the joints on the deraillers as well, then shift them back and forth 10 times or so to work that lube into the pivots. <S> The solvent should help loosen that dried out grease. <S> I'd also pop the gear and brake cables off and lube those too. <S> This answer talks about how to do that a little. <S> Basically get a little slack in the cable, normally by shifting gears into the low-rear and high-front, stop pedalling then click the release lever on the shifters. <S> You'll get slack gear cables. <S> That should let you pop the outers out of the frame mounts, dribble lube on the inner cable, slider the outer up and down to spread the lube, then re-assemble them. <S> I'd do the same with the brakes just on general principles, even though you currently plan to just use the trainer working brakes <S> is always a good thing. <S> But that tends to wash the existing grease out, so if they're working ok leave them alone. <A> You should look at your barrel adjuster on your rear derailleur. <S> During those three years your cable tension probably loosen up. <S> Here is one of my favourite videos on how to readjust your rear derailleur
|
If you have any doubts about the shifters, putting a few drops on chain lube into the mechanisms there is probably a good idea too. If that's what you have then its likely the grease has gummed up, stopping the under-lever from engaging the release.
|
Is the balancing easier on big cycles after the kid learns to ride pedal less bicycle? Is the balancing easier on big cycles after the kid learns to ride pedal less bicycle? Kid is 2 years 8 months old. Is this a correct age to go for such a cycle? <Q> If they are steady on their feet and tall enough than a balance bike is fine. <S> The advantage of a balance bike is it develops balance first as small children don't necessarily have the strength or co-ordination to ride a pedal bike to begin with. <S> We found the wooden balance bikes to be inherently bigger - so for our child we went with the much smaller dimensions the aluminium balance bikes. <A> Is the balancing easier on big cycles after the kid learns to ride pedal less bicycle? <S> The world is full of variation! <S> This worked well for my mine and the neighbour's kids as we all seemed to transition without any major crashes. <S> It did take some time to figure out the process of pedalling and braking. <S> That said, my nephew received his first bike (a pedal bike) at 4, and in two weeks had learnt how to ride it on his own. <S> He was seriously motivated watching all the other kids ride their bike. <S> Kid is 2 years 8 months old. <S> Is this a correct age to go for such a cycle? <S> Assuming you child has hit all the major developmental milestones this seems to be the age many parents try balance bikes. <S> This is of course anecdotal evidence, but the fact I have seen so many different families consistently start at around this age seems to suggest it is a good starting place. <A> My oldest is now <S> 12 - Balance bikes were not readily available 10 years ago in my country. <S> If I did it over again, I would use a balance bike (or take the pedals off a normal bike). <S> Balance bikes provide a natural and safe learning progression. <S> Most kids have come off some sort of sit astride plastic toy, a balance bike is really a 'big kids' version of what they are used to. <S> They then naturally progress on it as the build confidence and competence. <S> Eventually they will be able to everything you do on a normal bike except pedal. <S> The transition to a real bike with pedals is then another natural progression. <S> Other options - trainer -teach bad habits that need to be corrected, or straight onto a proper bike wheeler "deep ends" them - they have to learn a lot very quickly, or get hurt... <S> Neither experience makes for a great way to teach someone or for them to learn. <A> A person is better-trained to understand the mechanics and physics of balance, so for example coasting down a gradual hill on a pedal-bike the first time will be easier for someone who has ridden a stride-bike, but the mechanics of moving the feet in circles while pedaling and balancing will still take some time. <S> The transition from striding to pedaling could still be tricky and require some courage, but it should be easier than of the stride bike was not used. <S> I can't comment on whether a particular child is ready for a stride bike, but if the kid can operate it, go for it.
|
Anacdotally, learning on a balance bike (no pedals) first, then transitioning to a pedal bike seems to work very well.
|
Hybrid, touring, or road bike for new commuter? I live in Los Angeles and have a 2hr commute to UC Irvine by train with bus connections on either side. After doing this for a year, I am looking to start bike commuting to and from the train stations to get back in shape. Because the routes are so different, I'm wondering which bike type is best? The ride to school is 2 miles with a downhill incline to Union Station on a busy street without bike lanes. Then I can hop on the train with plenty of bike racks. The ride to school is a nice 6 mile ride in paved bike lanes and paths the entire way, and very flat. I would ride the opposite way home, but the ride is slightly uphill the entire 2 miles home in busy traffic. A road bike sounds like a great option for the 6miles near school, but would this hold up well on a busy paved street in Los Angeles? I'm just starting to get back on the bike after 15+ years with I borrowed mountain bike, so I know I can make the trip at least :) <Q> 8 miles each way is a reasonable commute. <S> In the city a pure road bike is not as stable. <S> Drop are a little more efficient but that is not a long commute. <S> For an uphill I think flat bars are fine. <S> A full touring bike is probably more than you need unless you are looking to mount racks and also using it for longer rides. <S> And you probably don't want rack or fenders loading it on and off bus and trains. <S> Look for mid sized tires (like 32mm). <S> A light bike is also nice for getting it on an off bus racks. <S> The also have styles of bikes called urban or city. <S> Even a mountain bike with street tires would work. <S> Not a first choice <S> but if you found a good deal used. <S> A local bike store (LBS) will help you out with fit and selection. <S> You can get some decent new bikes for $600. <S> If you are on a budget then CL but be careful. <S> but maybe not the optimal for you. <A> Having ridden most bikes I found the best was a hybrid style bike for a similar commute, 4miles in town, 1 massive hill and 4 miles in the countryside with a back pack on. <S> Dropbars in town makes it harder for you to see around /over traffic and makes you slightly smaller when people are looking at you about to pull out and harder to hit your brakes. <A> I would say the distance is a bit short for a road bike. <S> Road bikes are incredibly uncomfortable for riding without kit, and with instances like these you probably wouldn't want to bring out a full kit and deal with showers etc. <S> That said, there's no better riding than road bikes once you're out and about. <S> For the need you're outlining I would look into a folding bike, Brompton have really nice ones. <S> Since the train ride is such a large part of the commute you would have a much easier time on the train with a folding bike than a full, large frame bike with large wheels. <A> I'd go with hybrid, personally. <S> Straight bars so you can see around you. <S> Of course, for my part I need a strong bike to deal with the road conditions where I live, so your milage may vary. <S> Always assume the cars are actively trying to kill you. <A> I'm using my drop bar touring bike (Kona Sutra) as a commuter and it fits the role really well. <S> Tourers tend to have more upright position for the rider, which is great for city traffic. <S> They also typically have racks and fenders. <S> I don't like hybrids that much. <S> They tend to have mediocre aluminium frames and cheap drivetrain components. <S> I would rather invest a few hundred $ more and get a real bike.
|
I like a cyclocross bike fit with touring tires for commuting I'd definitely stick with something that has a comfortable riding position that is going to provide plenty of visibility if you're going to be riding in the city though. You should test both flat and drop bars to see which is more comfortable for you.
|
Safe to ride with Kenda 27 x 1/38 inch studded tires in snow/ice? I currently have Kenda 27 x 1 3/8 inch tires on my road bike. I live in a snowy, icy city and am a bike commuter in warmer months. I would like to occasionally commute this winter. I am wondering about the safety and challenges of riding with this size of tire width? I can have these tires studded at a bike shop in town, but I am hoping for advice whether this is a good idea. We have some ice and snow on the side roads here, as salt is not used. <Q> It will depend largely on your handling skills and the conditions of the snowy, icy city you live in. <S> Narrower tires, like what you have will cut through small amounts of snow quite easily, but will quickly bog in deeper snow and can be difficult to control when you can't see irregularities underneath the snow. <S> Since they also need to be run at higher pressures, they tend to be a bit twitchy, which is fine on slick even surfaces, but can easily cause slips and crashes where surfaces are uneven (transitions between roads, bike paths, sidewalks, etc). <S> I often commute in the spring on narrower studded tires, but am very careful around transitions, or uneven slick surfaces (jumble ice). <S> By contrast, I can maintain more speed or jumble ice and the like with the studded tires on my fat bike. <S> TL;DR <S> I skip using them on days where you have deep snow, or in areas likely to have slick and uneven surfacing. <A> I know it is not cheap <S> but if you are going to try spikes then go for some good tires that come with spikes and save your existing for summer riding. <S> The base is imbedded in the tire so it has an anchor . <S> As for if it will work for you? <S> I think you just need to give it a try. <S> Clearly studs will help. <S> Again not cheap but a mtn bike with bigger studded tires would be your best bet. <A> They should be safe to ride. <S> For comparison, your tire is is 37mm wide. <S> Schwable makes a Marathon Winter tire in 35mm and 42mm for a 700c tire <S> so the width isn't an issue. <S> The only problem you will have is soft snow where the studs don't help.
|
They are great for icy patches left by melt/thaw cycles, but definitely less forgiving than a wider tire. If your tire doesn't have a more aggressive tread pattern then you may still have traction issues.
|
Pedal on exercise bike fell off, not going back on My pedal came off my exercise bike/cross trainer. I have tried putting it back on, but the big screw will only go in so far. It is turning twice then getting stuck. Can anyone tell me what I need to fix this. I don't know the names of the certain parts etc to search myself. <Q> Which side pedal came off? <S> This answer might help , pedals don't both screw in the same way. <S> If not, can you attach a photo? <S> If you don't know the names we can help figure it out for you. <A> Two things may have happened: It may have just unscrewed itself. <S> As @likeprogramming notes, the pedals screw in differently. <S> The left pedal must be screwed in counter-clockwise ("left") while the right pedal screws in the normal clockwise ("right") way. <S> I find it is helpful to rotate the pedal bolt in the "wrong" direction for one total revolution before then reversing it and screwing it in, this helps prevent a cross-thread. <S> However, your description of the pedals only screwing in <S> a few threads bothers me. <S> If it's not because you're trying to screw the left pedal in the wrong direction and if it's not because you're cross-threading then ... <S> there's a chance that the crankarm threads were worn or damaged -- and that is why the pedal came out. <S> In that case, you will need to drill-and-tap a helicoil into the crankarm. <S> This isn't something a normal DIY person can do, but it is relatively easy for a bike-shop and should only cost around US$20-40. <S> Here's a labelled diagram for the crank part names: <A> If you are talking about the threads on the pedal there are three (or more possibilities) <S> It is cross threaded <S> But if only one pedal come off then that isnot the case Not cross threaded and everything is fine <S> But you are just not lining it up correctly <S> It can be hard to get even good threads to align some times <S> Threads are damaged <S> If it worked its way out then when it was barely in there was a lot of stress Clean both pedal and crank threads with solvent and brush <S> If you don't have a parts cleaner type solvent then just a de-greaser or even dish washing soap Put a dab of grease on the pedal threads <S> If you don't have grease then just stop and get some Come in from the back side. <S> If just the first few thread are messed up then coming in the back side should work. <S> If you get several easy turns in before it sticks then most likely just some messed up threads on the front side. <S> You typically don't want to force <S> but if you have several turns in then you can force with a wrench to clean out the threads. <S> If the works then try coming in the font side. <S> If this does not work then take it to a shop.
|
It is easy to cross-thread the pedal by having them at a slight angle when screwing them in.
|
Choosing the right size frame I'm planning to buy a bike. Based on my height (I'm 5 foot 6 inches / 167 cm) people suggested me to go for anything between 17"-18" frame. When I calculated its coming as 17.5" My dilemma is if I go for 17" (43 cm) as the frame is readily available is that right fit? Does 0.5" (12.7mm) makes a big difference in terms of comfortability and ride quality? I'm looking for MTB or Hybrid. I'm 27 and my height is just below average. <Q> Common wisdom is that upper body length, true inseam and riding style are important to bike fit, as is where/what you will be riding. <S> You should have 4 inches/10 cm for true off-road mountain biking, and 1-2 inches (2.5-5 cm) for road or commuter riding. <A> Fit is an incredibly subjective issue. <S> The size of the frame is only one factor in fit. <S> You then have to address stem length and height as well as saddle height and position. <S> Geometries differ across brands so one cannot simply use height as a measurement as one's leg length will be the dominant factor. <S> Firstly, what type of bicycle is this? <S> Road or mountain? <S> Secondly what is your riding objective? <S> Competitive, recreational or commuting? <S> These sites might be of some help. <S> https://www.cyclingweekly.com/fitness/bike-fit/set-up-new-road-bike-370764 <S> https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/bike-fit.html <A> The frame model is an influencer of riding conform which you mentioned later in your comment. <S> I'm looking for MTB or Hybrid. <S> I'm 27 and my height is just below average <S> ;) <S> My suggestion for you is to take it simple by going to a store which offers bikes for test and then test the following before confirming the buy. <S> Test the three 17 , 17.5 and 18 <S> While you’re seated at a stop, your both feet should be kept flat-footed on the ground <A> Old school answer is that when you stop you stand. <S> You should have an inch of clearance from the frame and your crotch.
|
One of the better bike fit sites: http://www.competitivecyclist.com/Store/catalog/fitCalculatorBike.jsp Riding offroad needs more frame/rider clearance than street or park riding. Do you feel natural in your back, neck, and legs while trying that size Choose a comfortably padded seat
|
Does (square-taper) BB spindle length affect Q factor? I am having knee and ankle trouble on my commuting bike (1993 Specialized mtb) and this has a 73mm BB with a spindle length I haven't measured but there is space between crankarm and frame. I wanted to lower the Q factor and thinking that lowering the spindle length will be the easiest way - but does it actually affect the Q factor? As the cranks sit at the widest point which isn't necessarily related to the overall length. <Q> Yes, spindle length is a factor in determining the Q factor. <S> A longer spindle moves the cranks further out while a shorter one moves the cranks further in. <S> Whether or not you can get the chainline and Q factor you want is a different matter (and dependent on your setup). <A> I had that problem once when trying to install a shorter spindle. <S> Are you sure that your knee and ankle problems are Q factor related? <S> Andy Pruitt's 'Medical Guide for Cyclists" has a lot of info about the causes of various knee pains and recommended remedies. <A> But as Batman pointed out you may have chain line issues. <S> You also need to consider clearance with the crankarm and the chainstay. <S> Narrow crankarms will buy a little. <S> Clearly another bike is going to be more expensive but a mtn frame is going to limit how much Q factor you can gain. <S> Article on Q factor <A> All things being equal, yes the bottom bracket spindle length is related to Q factor. <S> I'd encourage you to rethink your problem. <S> I've never heard of someone solving a knee problem by reducing the Q factor. <S> Most want to reduce the Q angle which is accomplished by increasing the so-called factor. <S> You should do a search for <S> pedal axle extender as I believe this might lead you to the cheapest, fastest, least complex, and widest solution. <A> Any bike circa 1993 is likely to have a narrower Q than a lot of newer bikes. <S> Specialized is annoying for having very slightly different taper to their square taper BB axles, meaning you can't swap a Shimano or other brand and use the Specialized crankset. <S> It's all or nothing. <S> Description sounds like too low a seat, maybe? <S> Frames and older steel like this have pretty straight chain stays, so may find interference with the crankarms hitting. <S> Narrower BB and axles have offset for the crank to keep the chainrings out, and frames usually have a dent to miss the inner rings, but going from a 73 to 68 for example likely will cause clearance problems. <S> If using cleats, some inward movement can be gained by adjustments but if ankle bones start hitting the crank arm <S> you're stuck. <S> There used to be a brand that made laterally adjustable BB spindle, but what you gain on one side you lose on the other. <S> Not a Q factor adjustment.
|
The type of crankset will also affect the Q factor, as some will sit further out than others even with the same spindle length (I've seen cranks which on the same bottom bracket can have more than 1 cm difference in Q factor). In addition to crank arm / chainstay interference, your small chainring may get too close to the bottom bracket shell and not be able to rotate. If you have a triple then a double would be narrower.
|
Tyre rubbing against frame Bicycle : Fixie, it came with fixed gear and freewheel, I use the freewheel cog. Today, after a tire and tube replacement it now rubs on the frame. The new tire is a little bit bigger but this problem existed even with the old smaller tire, just that I managed to keep it clear. It rubs onto either one side, no matter what I do. (Refer to pictures 3, 3a and 4) Also, I have been told that the frame is bent, which I actually don't buy since I have never got into an accident, unless it's a factory defect. (Refer to pictures 1 and 1a) My brother decided to tinker around with the screws between the frame and rim housing, they now both spin whenever one side is being screwed, what do these screws do anyway? (Refer to picture 2 and 2a) What are your suggestions or options that I have? <Q> What you call screws are really axle nuts. <S> Fortunately your hub appears to contain sealed cartridge bearings, so there are no cups or cones to tweak up. <S> The axle nuts should be done up close to the bearings and then locked in place against each other. <S> Your frame has horizontal dropouts so try sliding the axle back a bit to see if that provides enough space for the tyre between the chainstays. <S> I can't comment on the chain length, never owned or worked on a single-speed bike. <S> Otherwise, the tyre/tire is too wide for the frame. <S> Its possible the rims are not original either and the current ones are a bit larger in circumference than the frame was built for. <S> Sell off your trendy red tyre and go for a rear tyre that is smaller in width by 5 mm. <S> Or store it away as a replacement for the front tyre. <A> I can think of three things to cause your problem. <S> The tire is to large for the frame, the chain is too short. <S> Can you post a side view photo of the rear axle with the wheel installed on the bike? <S> The third option is that you didn't slide the axle far enough back. <S> The additional photo will help narrow the option. <A> There could be a multitude of reasons, Does it rub consistently or does the wheel appear to have a wobble to it when spun where it makes contact once every turn in the same spot. <S> The inner nut on the axle closest to the hub bearing should not have been loosened with the other one and could cause serious and dangerous issues if left loose. <S> It can be done by hand but is a lot harder to get perfectly straight. <S> One other thing to look at is the brakes, if the caliper is not set up right it can pull the wheel to one side putting constant pressure on the brake surface, Look at picture 1a <S> and you can see the difference with each pads location to that of the frame. <S> Their not centered. <S> Being that there are so many factors I would highly recommend having a shop fix it up for you, they can also rule out a bent frame using a frame alignment gauge. <A> The two nuts on each side need to be tightened with flat wrenches: first, screw them back down towards the middle of the wheel. <S> When one side is snug, put one wrench on each nut and tighten the nits against each other (turn the wrenches in opposite directions). <S> Do the other side <S> and you can put the wheel back on the bike. <S> Put the chain on the cog and the chainring before you tighten the wheel nuts. <S> The chain should be taut but not tight <S> - everything should move smoothly when you turn the cranks. <S> Make sure to tighten the wheel nuts <S> well, especially drive side (rider's right). <S> Part of the reason it rubs harder when you pedal is that every time you push on the pedals, the chain pulls the wheel forward. <S> Most likely the tire you got is too big for your frame/wheel combo. <S> Some notes: <S> make sure your brakes don't rub on the tire, if they do they'll eventually cut thru it <S> it's a fixie <S> , so don't let the chain cut your fingers off. <S> Careful when the back wheel is spinning.
|
Another issue could be how the axle sat in the drop outs, you have to make sure the wheel is completely straight which is often done by drop out tensioner screws. You really should take it to a shop to have it looked at. These fixies are shiny and tight, but the tolerances are narrow and can be annoying to work with.
|
Need help identifying an old bicycle, unusual frame I was recently given a bicycle by an Italian restaurant, the owner had brought it back from Italy years ago and used it as wall decor. I have since replaced the chain, brake etc. However I am very curious as to how old it is, what it is, or any information. The decal says "Freyus" but when I search for it I can't find anything remotely similar to this bike. Does anyone know anything about it? I have done a web search and index search of the bike frames serial number and it has turned up nothing. http://s23.postimg.org/l922ca617/image.jpg <Q> Looks like a generic beach cruiser - not very old either. <S> The brazed lugs on the downtube suggest it was a geared bike, converted to single speed. <S> The V brakes say its no older than the 90s, and probably post-2000. <S> Still if it rides nicely, then ride it. <S> There's likely no museum or vintage nature there. <A> <A> The Freyus name in bikes has been around since 1896. <S> According to the following Italian Wiki page, Bianchi did purchase the name in the 70s, which had already morphed into "Frejus" (and while my Italian is.. almost non-existent, I'm pretty certain <S> there's no change in pronunciation.) <S> Then, in 2006, the Masciaghi Brothers (Fratelli Masciaghi) bike company - who already had several brands under their domain - bought the rights to Frejus. <S> I would ask Bianchi if they can trace the serial, and if not, perhaps it was made under Fratelli Masciaghi. <S> The Wiki page: Frejus (company) <S> The Fratelli Masciaghi catalog page for Frejus (note the wreath and font combined with your head-badge and top-tube name): <S> Masciaghi - Frejus Good luck!
|
Its doesn't appear to be anything specifically Italian. I agree with the above, I do know that Freyus (frejus) was a french vintage bicycle company that made very nice bikes at one point, however in the mid 80's they were sold to Bianchi, so if I had to guess, It is a new bicycle made by Bianchi but sold under the generic name Freyas as to not tarnish their name with an entry level product. Which would make sense judging by the color of the fenders and graphics, it looks similar to Bianchi's Celeste Green, just a little more bold and flashy
|
Is there more than one ideal seat post height based on type of riding? Assuming one has the correct frame size for one's height, can there be more than one perfect seat post height for the type of riding? I usually ride only in the city with traffic and less than 3 miles one way most of the time. But when I am doing longer rides I prefer to the seat post higher and my riding body said that there should only be one height- its either perfect or not.. I should say that my bike is an aero carbon road bike which I prefer to use even in the city but also on longer rides in the weekends about 25 miles or so. <Q> Yes. <S> However, it varies by type of riding and conditions. <S> All Mountain is probably the extreme example of this (and the main market for dropper seatposts). <S> All Mountain bikes are designed to be able to climb and for that generally one would want the seat in a "high" position to be efficient. <S> During a technical descent, however, the seat is generally preferred to be low and out of the way, useful for providing additional movement if necessary, but low enough to get behind for extreme braking. <S> Other riding types may have only one "ideal" position. <S> Trials bikes, for example, will most often have no seat, since it is rarely used and only adds weight and gets in the way. <S> So there is an "ideal" position. <S> Most road disciplines generally have what is considered an ideal position and will not vary by riding conditions in that discipline. <A> Yes, there is. <S> If you spend a lot of time standing on the pedals and not using the saddle then you will probably want the saddle to be low so that it doesn't get in your way. <S> so you can pedal efficiently from that position - probably high enough to almost straighten your leg at the bottom of the pedal stroke. <S> Trials bikes have extremely low saddles, and at the more extreme end some don't even have seatposts because they are designed for a style or riding that doesn't use a saddle. <S> I think 'Dropper seat posts' are a relatively well known optional feature on mountain bikes. <S> With these you can adjust the seatpost height during a ride, which you might want to do when you transition from one type of terrain to another. <A> I am a daily commuter and I have been riding (mainly) road bikes on the road for over 40 years. <S> Comfort is important to me and more so as I spend longer periods in the saddle. <S> A setup that suits another, may not suit you and vice versa however <S> , there is plenty of information on settings to get you into the ballpark. <S> Improvement requires a bit of experimentation and sometimes a good "eye" comes in handy. <S> Body position, especially when in motion, is not static. <S> I consider riding position to be somewhat "dynamic" therefore, some range of movement must be accommodated within your static bike setup. <S> I have found that riding position (mainly fore-aft along the saddle) changes in varying degrees dependent upon multiple factors, E.g.: cycling-fitness level, energy levels, pedalling technique and predominant workload characteristics (E.g.: climbing, time-trial, interval, climate, load carrying, etc.) <S> Given the same frame, changes in equipment such as, shoes and/or cleats, bars and saddle, can also have an impact. <S> I generally won't make adjustments to my normal, stationary ("static") setup if changes due to the above-mentioned factors are temporary and I can make "dynamic" changes by moving my body around to accomodate. <S> Otherwise, I have found that minor adjustments to the saddle/seatpost/bars (1-5mm) may be necessary if "dynamic" adjustments aren't sustainable, E.g. induce significant discomfort, or risk <S> If you find that you can't comfortably accommodate minor changes in riding position, consider further adjustments to static setup. <S> The important points are: Make minor adjustments in one aspect at time (eg. seatpost height). <S> Record your changes (via marks or notation) and allow sufficient time for your body to adjust to the change before making another change or reverting to a previous setting. <A> Your buddy is arguing one set up is optimal regardless of type of riding? <S> Would he argue one handle bar height is optimal period? <S> Is there even one bike that is optimal for all types of riding? <S> Ideal can mean a lot of things. <S> For city stop and go I go just a tad shorter as I feel it is both more convenient (e.g. on off) and more efficient (but <S> that is probably more perception than reality). <S> On a long ride I like a little taller - <S> but I also have a separate long ride bike. <S> On multi-day road race it would be interesting if they had a different height for flat versus hill day even riding the same bike. <S> Not sure if it is true <S> but I read Lance once complained the seat felt low and when they checked it as off by 1 mm. <A> With a high bottom bracket the ideal seat post may be impractically high in certain situations. <S> Depending on your preferred foot for putting down and the typical camber the bike may have to lean more than you'd like if you sit in a ready-to-go position at traffic lights. <S> The biggest example for me though is with a toddler seat on the back. <S> That's a lot of weight high up and your acceleration suffers as well as your balance. <S> So you can't lean the bike as much with your foot down and you're more likely to need to put your foot down (rather than riding extremely slowly waiting for your turn). <S> That makes a difference of about 2cm on my seat post compared to how I have it for commuting without the seat on the back. <S> Body geometry is highly variable but even with my big feet I have to tilt the bike to put just my toes down. <S> I don't recommend this for long stops if you're prone to cramp in your calves. <S> For a flat-footed stop, dropping forwards off the saddle is always necessary.
|
If you spend a lot of time pedalling hard or fast when sitting down you are more likely to want the seatpost high Based on my experience, the initial choice and adjustment of your normal static setup should allow for minor "dynamic" adjustments in your riding position -as necessary. Remember there is a difference between "uncomfortable" and "unfamiliar" in terms of position.
|
Why don't standard bike chains have inner/outer combo links so odd chain lengths are possible? I noticed while at an amusement park that on the roller coaster, each link of the chain has what can be considered a combination inner and outer plate. The side plates are somewhat diagonal so they start as an outer then become an inner. So my question is if these work well for roller coasters which have a lot of load, why not use a similar scaled down design for bikes so that odd length chains are possible? Here is a pic of a roller coaster chain so you can see what I am talking about: (you can click on it for a more detailed larger pic). Maybe this design wont shift well? I wonder what the main reason is. Motorcycles also do not use it. Maybe large pitch chains require it cuz being 2 links too long or short is a big difference but with a short pitch chain (1/2 inch or so), it is not so critical? <Q> Bike chains have to have some other method to take up the error (like horizontal dropouts or tensioners even on a single speed). <S> They'd still need this if the maximum error was halved, so you wouldn't really gain anything. <S> Chains would need thicker walls as the walls would no longer be in pure tension (the force would tend to straighten them). <S> This would make the chain heavier and wider, neither of which is desirable. <S> It would also be more expensive as parts would have to be stamped then bent rather than just stamped. <A> But you do see it in BMX, track, and fixie <S> You don't see it in narrow chians as have a derailleur to take up slack <A> My guess is there is no technical reason one way or the other. <S> Its likely a light weight half link will actually stretch while under tension unless its more expensive or heavier than a full link chain. <S> (Roller coaster chains don't have to be light weight <S> so its less of a problem.). <S> If its a material difference in performance I do not know. <S> Its entirely possible to engineer a half chain to work with derailleurs, so that is not a reason not to do it. <S> What I do know s <S> half link chains cost more. <S> Maybe they only make high quality Half Links, and you cannot buy cheap versions, or maybe they cost more for the same quality. <S> However many people buy on price. <S> On one web site I looked at, Half link chains start at $25, Full link chains start at $8. <S> This could be more about inertia in the supply chain rather than manufacturing cost.
|
Manufacturers don't use half link chains, and most people faced with that difference would need a fairly compelling reason to change to a different chain type from manufacture given the price difference.
|
brakes are wearing out very fast, why? My rear brakes are wearing out very fast. I am on my third set since Christmas (2 months). I have no idea why this is. It is a rim brake. <Q> The mud can form a grinding paste which wears the pads quicker. <S> Damaged rotors - If your rotors are scored or damaged, this can accelerate pad wear. <S> If you've worn a pad down to the backing plate this can damage the rotor and lead to shorter pad life. <S> This typically involves putting them through a few braking cycles to bring them up to a high temperature. <S> Pads which have not been bedded in, will wear quicker when subjected to wet muddy conditions. <S> Pad material - Brake pads come in different materials which can have different pad lives depending on usage. <S> E.g. sintered pads should last longer in muddy conditions than resin pads. <S> However, some brake discs are not designed for sintered pads. <A> Not having info about your brakes, the pads you use and category you ride (AM,XC,Gravity), I will suppose your problem is your riding. <S> You use the rear brake very often, even more than you should. <S> You should definitely keep your brakes clean and make sure you use original brake pads, but you have to change your riding. <S> Get used to using the front brake more often, especially if you are also riding in tarmac. <S> Don't always lock your rear brake when using it and most important, do not use any of the brakes for consistent brakings more than a few seconds. <S> Let them loose for short periods in between. <S> They tend to overheat and cause great frictions between the pads and the disc/rim and they wear off faster. <A> Get better brake pads. <S> In my experience, Kool Stop Salmon lasts far longer than anything else, and wears the rim very little. <S> The Jagwire pads that I have had for more than a year seem to be doing good, too. <S> Original pads from Tektro, ProMax etc are useless and Shimano is not very good either. <S> The point about using both brakes is good, too. <A> If you are paying a shop to replace pads every month then that can get expensive. <S> Clean the rims and pads regularly. <S> Grit will wear down pads and rims. <S> Go with high quality pads. <S> Mail order is going to be the cheaper than retail. <S> Learn to replace pads yourself. <S> Don't just slap them in - you do need to get them properly aligned.
|
Assuming disc brakes, some reasons for short pad life could be: Riding conditions - If you're riding in gritty mud, pad life will be shorter than dry conditions. Not bedding the pads in sufficiently - New pads straight out the packet need bedded in before use.
|
Custom bike to offer smoothest possible ride on bad roads So, I am in a peculiar situation - due to an injury, shaking in any direction leads to pain and my condition is improving very slowly. I'm looking to find/customize a bike so that it offers me the smoothest possible ride on the unfortunately poorly maintained roads in my city. Today I have a Cirrus Cycles suspension seat post and low pressure on my tires (which I also exchanged for fatter ones) and that helps to an extent, but my current bike is a hybrid with no suspension. I think that a full-suspension bike would greatly help, but wonder what I have to look for to make sure I can tune it to smooth out road irregularities as opposed to the harsh falls of mountain biking. Do you have recommendations as to what kinds of bikes or kinds of shocks I should be looking for? Or anything else? Thanks! edit from comments: First the road conditions. The following types of irregularities exist: concrete slab roads where over time slabs have settled at varying heights. sometimes the change in elevation from slab to slab is as much as 2-3 inches, which is similar to falling off a small curb. potholes and cracks in the pavement with a depth of up to 4 inches as well. some are avoidable, some are not. gradual dips in asphalt road surface - sometimes parts of the road sink without an abrupt edge, like a soft pothole raised linear sections caused by tree roots under asphalt pavement <Q> but you did not state a budget <S> Not worth switching out tires as they are expensive but when you wear them out go with more street (will less knobby) tires <S> If you are on a budget I think I would go with lower end fat bike before a full suspension. <S> But I am not saying full suspension would be wrong. <S> I know I usually post a Salsa if I post a bike <S> but I am not associated with Salsa. <S> I own 2 and <S> it is a brand I am familiar with. <A> Not everyone can ride a bike unfortunately, and with bad roads, it may not be possible to get enough comfort. <S> Most full suspension is setup for mountain biking and stuff so that you can keep control and likely won't be adjustable enough to add comfort <S> (you can only adjust things so much). <S> There used to be a bike in Giant's line called the Sedona DS which used full suspension for comfort, but I don't think it has been made for over 15 years now. <S> Most comfort oriented hybrids or cruisers use some or more of: relaxed geometry, big tires, a big seat, front suspension and a suspension seat post. <S> I'd look for a bike with these features (esp. <S> front suspension if you don't have it). <S> If the movement is lateral that causes pain, a recumbent trike may be a good option. <S> There are ones with suspension, but this is not an area of my expertise. <S> Frisbee also notes in the comments that Fat Bikes exist. <S> These have massive tires (over 4 inches in some cases) with insanely low pressures. <S> These might be difficult to ride, but thats a lot of cushioning. <A> Whilst you will never eliminate vibration completely it should be possible to greatly improve your comfort with correct setup and component choices. <S> Usually, for MTB applications one would set a sag of 15-20% to provide a balance between shock absorbsion, grip, brake dive and power transfer. <S> However, riding on roads with the primary goal of comfort you could set this to 30-40% to give you a much more plush ride. <S> Next would be the compression and rebound damping. <S> Again, whilst we would never do this in mountain biking <S> , you could set your compression damping to minimum and rebound damping to maximum to really smooth things out. <S> Next up would be tyre choice. <S> For your application I would be looking at 2.2" race tyres setup tubeless. <S> A tubeless setup adds further comfort by allowing you to run lower tyre pressures. <S> Depending on your bodyweight you could quite possibly run pressures between 20-30 psi. <S> Finally, select use of carbon components (seatpost and handlebar) are widely considered to damp vibration, along with foam or silicon grips. <A> I think that Frisbee's answer is excellent, but I would like to post another alternative. <S> I think that you should look for a low travel, full suspension mountain bike. <S> Relevant keywords: <S> Full suspension <S> Low travel <S> XC (cross country) <S> I think that something with 100mm of travel would be sufficient. <S> One example of such a bike is the Giant Stance 1 - This rings in at $2100 Canadian ($1551.82 USD). <S> Advantages of a low travel, XC bike over a fat bike: <S> Much more nimble <S> Lighter <S> Easier to speed up/ <S> slow down Cheaper price <S> Tires are much cheaper <S> Suspension will not bounce the same way that tires will because suspension has rebound control. <S> Disadvantages to a fat bike <S> Suspension requires maintenance <S> Depending on the extent of your condition and sensitivity to vibration, I think I would encourage you to put slick tires on the bike and let the suspension do the work. <S> This will give you low rolling resistance and still give you good vibration protection.
|
Race tyres feature lightweight compliant casings that are designed to provide lower rolling resistance whilst sacrificing durability, but for your application, these properties also add comfort. Based on your requirements I would say full suspension fat bike A few manufactures make them That bike is $6500 retail The starting point will be a full suspension frame (I would choose a 29er for your application) with a good quality adjustable air fork and shock.
|
can only use right hand to brake reliably, due to disability - safer/possible to modify bike? I'm new here and hoping someone might have thoughts on this - had a look and couldn't find an answer elsewhere! Apologies for the kind of long question, and if it's silly, but any thoughts would be appreciated :) My situation is this: I ride a simple hybrid bike just to and from work/uni most of the time, though I'd like to get a road bike one day. I do also like "mountain" biking on flat trails but borrow bikes for this. I have very mild cerebral palsy on my left hand side. It affects muscle strength and fine motor skills but only slightly. If I wanted to apply the rear brake, on my left handlebar, it's difficult for me to get up enough force quickly. (steering and controlling bike are totally fine) I'm great at using the front brakes though, and it's never caused me problems before (I don't go that fast anyway), but I just started wondering, if I want to get a road bike or do more risky mountain biking, perhaps I should consider what's safest and whether modifications would be possible. So firstly I'm wondering whether anyone thinks this is worth investigating, or if only front braking should continue to be fine. Secondly, if I should try find a way to rear brake, does anyone have any suggestions? Is there any way to control both brakes from my right handlebar (I'm pretty quick and strong on my right, due to always having had to compensate for my left)? Also, when I was a kid, my dad used to find/make me bikes that applied rear brakes when I back-pedalled - is that a thing? (Google directs me to coaster brakes) But I can't remember if I also had a front brake on those bikes. I'm not good at DIY, due to the lack of fine motor skills from one of my hands, so if I want to go the path of trying a modification I guess I also want to try work out what I'd get charged for it by a store here in Australia. I may just be overthinking this, but I've always felt kind of nervous on road bikes (only ridden my boyfriend's a couple of times), so if I do want to get into riding one, I want to know I've got the best set up for me. Thanks so much! (also my injury tag = disability, wanted to create the tag but couldn't due to being new. I felt it might be useful to link it to injury anyway in case someone looks there for answers on how to ride after an injury to a hand) <Q> Generally speaking your off hand should be the front brake, so if you're right handed the front brake should be the left. <S> They can be set up either way, though, especially if you're using cable-driven (non-hydraulic) brakes. <S> Even with hydraulics you should have no problem making the right hand brake the rear. <S> I would highly advise this, as in a panic situation while mountain biking if you grab the front brake hard, you're more than likely going over the bars. <S> There are levers that work both brakes. <S> They are out there! <S> Here is one that pulls 2 cables at the same time, so you could use it to pull both the back and the front brakes. <S> http://www.jbi.bike/web/checking_product_description.php?part_number=13748 <S> They are for V brakes only though, I believe. <S> The backpedalling braking is indeed a coaster brake: you are correct on that note. <A> I was amazed the right is the front but found this Australian Standard AS1927 – 1998 Pedal Bicycles – Safety Requirements, <S> page 16 Section 2.14 Braking System 2.14.2.1 states the following: <S> Handbrake lever location: <S> The brake lever for a front brake shall be positioned on the right-hand side of the handlebar, and that for a rear brake on the left-hand side. <S> Options: <S> Continue to use the right as the front <S> This may be your best option as most of the braking is from the front <S> If you have learned to control this (not go out the front) <S> then not a bad option Continue to use the right as front with a drop seat post Getting your weight back is the best defense to not going out the front On the street for emergency braking <S> no help <S> But on mountain bike you could drop the seat for downhill sections <S> Dual pull cable <S> This is covered in the answer from Nate +1 <S> Rear coaster With a single speed or internal hub <S> you can get a rear coaster brake <S> An internal hub with coaster would be kind of expensive and not even sure it would be compatible with your existing bike <S> Dual hydraulic Put a split on the hydraulic line <S> go to both front and rear But then would need to find a brake lever to put out twice the volume or find brakes that only need half the volume <S> Another problem there is with same in front and rear on hard braking it would not be much different than front only - <S> as you go out the front there is no weight on the rear wheel <S> You could tune it with a larger brake on the rear Cars <S> do do something like this <S> It would be an expensive custom build <S> Down hill is where you need to be very careful as easy to go out the front. <S> But down hill the rear wheel is already unweighted by the angle <S> so you need to use the front just be careful. <A> Have you thought about modifying a lever <S> so there is less pull, less reach to the lever too, and having that on your restricted side?If <S> you know any 2nd hand parts places and had a rummage through the old stuff you might find something to play with. <S> Could you operate a brake lever fitted under the heel of your hand?
|
There is also a company called Surestop whose product I believe works off of one lever and won't engage the front brake until the rear is already engaged, thus making it very difficult to catapult yourself over the bars.
|
How to fix folding lock holder I've got an ABUS Bordo Lite folding lock and the holder it came with which attaches to the bicycle's frame using two thin metal strips and/or two Velcro straps is now broken: As you can see, the soft plastic strap keeping the lock securely in the "holster" tore. Although the lock itself doesn't fall out when keeping the holster open as depicted, it does rattle around a bit and, more importantly, the strap itself is incredibly annoying because it moves around and sometimes tickles my sensitive, powerful-yet-dainty high-performance calves (no, I don't shave them ). Attempted solutions Rubber band: I had tried wrapping a rubber band around the "inside" loop on the upper part of the strap and then wrapping the rubber band around the nub (what is it called?) on the holster itself, but the rubber band becomes more and more slack with time and then itself becomes loose. Electrical tape: I tried wrapping electrical tape around the broken loop in order to try to hold the loop together, but it couldn't withstand the stress of the loop being closed around the "nub" on the holster. Superglue: I tried supergluing the broken loop back together by letting the glue "set" inside a wrapping of electrical tape, but it didn't hold. Kill it with fire: Since some plastics are re-formable, I had tried melting the broken loop with a lighter and then "re-forming" it by holding it together with electrical tape until it re-set. That didn't work at all and simply made it look uglier than before. <Q> I suggest cutting the broken loop off and using a cable ("zip") tie through the big triangular loop. <S> Two cable ties chained together may help it lie flatter. <S> Thats actually nicer than most lock holders, and seems worth saving. <S> Edit:Picture: <A> I would not be surprised if they replaced the holster all together for you. <S> This is where i would start before trying to repair it yourself. <A> I have the same lock and the same issue. <S> If the plastic strap disturbs you and the lock isn't falling out while you ride <S> , I recommend you to simply cut off the strap. <A> Roughen the plastic, and use some epoxy between them, then apply pop rivets so the flattest side is against the lock. <S> You might want to use a peening hammer to flatten and round-off the side where your fingers are. <S> Also watch out for making it too thick. <S> Contact the supplier and see if a replacement is available - looks like a good holder, just lacking in the design department. <S> Maybe a later model has more meat in that area.
|
Another solution might be to cut a ring of aluminium, and pop-rivet it around the hole. As an alternative a short loop of bungee cord would also do the trick (available from camping shops). If you haven't taken the time to yet, you should contact Abus, they are generally pretty proud of their products and stand by their workmanship. The lock holder is mounted to the seat tube on my bike, so the lock can't fall out while riding.
|
How good or bad would chainsaw bar lubricant be as a bicycle chain lube? A former coworker asked me this today, and I don't have a good answer. He has access to plentiful quantities of chainsaw bar lubricant, the stuff that helps a chainsaw's chain move around the metal support poking out the front of a chainsaw. Bar lube is primarily intended to decrease friction between a non-moving metal surface and the backside of a cutting chain. Secondary effects are lubing the chain and helping to transfer heat away from the chain to the bar. Its got to be better than CRC or WD40, but would bar lube be just simply worse than proper chain lubricants, or a lot worse? Personally I'd just use proper bike chain lube. The question is specifically about chainsaw bar lube. <Q> On a chainsaw is it called bar lube (not chain lube).It is designed to lube the bar. <S> This is chainsaw chain: Not the same beast as bicycle chain. <S> I don't even think there are rollers. <S> Bar lube is more viscous than bicycle chain lube. <S> Bar lube does not need a long life - it is going to get thrown off. <S> There is an excess of bar lube and big gaps compared to a bicycle chain. <S> The chain itself only needs to last longer than the cutting teeth. <S> Yes they are both chains <S> but that is about all they have in common. <S> It is a bar lube. <S> I would chose 3 in 1, motor oil, or transmission fluid over bar lube. <S> Yes I would use bar lube on my bicycle chain if I had nothing else in the shop <S> but I would not use it just because it was free. <S> I would even use WD 40 for a single ride and get chain lube the next day. <S> Not a great lubricant but WD 40 would not gunk up the chain. <S> You pay $20+ for a decent chain. <S> Why would you skimp using a product not designed to protect the chain? <S> A good chain lube is not very expensive and goes a long way. <A> Bar lube would perform horrible on a bicycle chain. <S> Why? <S> Well, bar lube must be fully bio-degradable , which chain lube is not required to be. <S> As such, bar lube is basically a vegetable oil, and performs as such. <S> It lubes all-right, but it's also rather sticky, <S> and it oxidizes over time . <S> On a chain-saw, that does not matter because the chain-saw is designed to just throw the old oil off the chain and relube constantly with fresh oil. <S> If any oil oxidizes on the chain during a storage period, that old, degraded oil will quickly be replaced by fresh oil. <S> On a bicycle chain, such an oil would attract much more dirt than chain oil, and stiffen on the chain over time. <S> You want neither of these features, so better use a chain oil. <A> It would lubricate the chain and protect nearly as well as proper bike chain lube, but its too thick to get into the chain and properly lube the moving parts without putting too much on. <S> It would also be prone to picking up dirt. <S> You would end up with a chain that tended to become very dirty and without regular cleaning would make a mess of anything that touched it. <S> It would be far superior to WD40, which is not a lube. <S> If I was stuck with a chain that needed lube and had a choice between WD40, chain bar or nothing, it would be chain-bar lube. <S> I like a clean chain, and normally use a dry lube unless very wet conditions so I would never use it as a long term planned lube. <A> Demands on bicycle chain lube are higher than those on a saw chain. <S> Just about any oil can be used to lube a saw. <S> The purpose is to help the cutting bits move through wood, not to reduce friction in the internal motion of the chain. <S> The oil stays on the cut surface and new oil is continuously supplied. <S> The quality of the oil is not critical. <S> I've used spent motor oil in the past with my saw <S> but I prefer to use the cheapest vegetable oil I can find. <S> Yes, you can use whatever is marketed as bar oil to lube your bicycle chain, just as you can use motor oil or two stroke oil. <S> It will probably lubricate great initially but attract dirt, the way oil does. <S> There might be more optimal bicycle chain lubricants, with many trade offs between them. <S> If you do want to use oil on you bicycle chain you may prefer a lighter oil (less viscosity) such as machine oil. <S> This will attract less dirt with the downside of lasting less long. <S> Note <S> : there is another answer that claims oil sold as chainsaw bar oil is biodegradable. <S> In the US, this is typically not the case. <S> It's a petroleum product. <A> chainsaw oil/lube needs to be more viscous than bicycle chain oil. <S> So, I think it is not a good idea.
|
Chainbar lube would be OK as a lube, but far from ideal.
|
Questions about shifting from a new road cyclist I recently purchased a used bike from my local co-op. I've ridden previously on fixed bikes with straight bars, but this bike is the first one I've owned where I have to shift and use drop handlebars. I've been practising for the last two weeks or so, but am still uncomfortable with this. I have two big questions 1) I am having a lot of trouble simply keeping my bike steady with one hand while trying to shift. I am quite confident riding one handed and even shifting with one hand on the part where the handle bars curve out on the top, but have no control over my bike if I try riding one handed from the hoods. Its almost impossible for me to shift (with down tube shifters) and have a hand on the brakes just in case. It seems impossible for me to ride on the hoods and not have the handlebars carry a lot of my weight. I'm considering brifters just because then I'd never have to take my hands off the handlebars, but that'd be almost as much as I paid for the bike. 2) I have read that you are not supposed to shift while under load, but what about no load? I guess this partially stems from the fact that I'm not really comfortable shifting from the hoods, but I really have a hard time shifting and keeping control while still pedalling. Also, when I do shift while still pedalling, my foot sometimes comes off the pedal. Is there any way to prevent this without clipless pedals? <Q> Sounds like an issue with bike-fit. <S> Try the following: <S> While on the bike and stationary, lean on the wall with elbow (of one arm). <S> The other arm/hand reaches the hood, your body should be as close as possible to the normal riding position (on hood). <S> two feet on the pedal Use your back muscle and gradually reduce the load on the hood. <S> Is this possible? <S> Keyword: 'stem threadless adjustment' for further details on the internet. <S> increase the (quill) stem height, if you have threaded headset. <S> You often seen this type on older bicycle (1980s and older), which is likely to be your case. <S> Keyword: 'quill stem adjustment' for further details on the internet. <S> However, your centre of mass also shifts forward and your body is more likely to slide forward. <S> Thus there should be a balance between seat angle and seat position (and stem length/angle). <A> If the bike is roughly correct size, I'd suggest a different approach: <S> If there is too much weight on your hands, move the saddle backwards. <S> This will shift your center of gravity backwards, even though you have reach longer. <S> Lower the stem. <S> When you are leaning more forward, your hands can reach further. <S> Also, when you are already in low position you need to reach down less. <S> Some force on pedals helps keeping weight off your hands. <S> If you don't want to go clipless, toe clips also work. <S> Practice and core muscle exercises help with keeping the bike stable and allow supporting some of your weight with your back muscles instead of hands. <A> Things to watch when changing gear with downtube shifters: <S> Keep looking forward - don't watch your hand. <S> Find the gear lever by touch only. <S> Make it more like riding hands-free but don't let go of the off-side. <S> Learn to lean forwards to change gear, don't lean out to the side. <S> Downtube shifters are slower to do the actual change. <S> Start pulling/pushing the lever as your power stroke is ending, and as the front foot passes the forward-most position. <S> Lighten up on the pressure a little early too. <S> Ideally the gear change will have occurred before the next foot hits TDC. <S> After a while you will know how far to push/pull the lever to achieve a good enough gear change with minimal trimming required. <S> Another thought - if your derailerureur spring is a bit tired or if the mechanism is full of pog and dirt, then changing to a smaller-toothed gear is slower on single wire gears. <S> That is, changing up on the rear or down on the front. <S> In short - practice ! <S> The other answers and comments are spot on. <S> I've recently bought a tandem with drop bars and downtube shifters, and while I really miss my brifters, that's impossibly expensive due to hydraulic brakes. <S> So I've been through all of this in the last couple of months too.
|
Lessen the weight on your hand that is not shifting gear. I agree this is probably an issue with bike fit, or just not being used to handling a road bike. If the answer is no, which is what I suspect, try: invert the stem, if you have threadless headset. change the seat angle: change the angle so that the seat prevent you from sliding forward change the seat position: slide the seat forward and have a more up right riding position. The fix here is to clean your dirty mech and lube all the pivots on the parallelogram, and consider replacing the gear wire if its rusting.
|
Do rollers ruin tires? I started using aluminum rollers to ride indoors this winter and noticed streaks left on the tires. I've also seen tires specifically advertised for use with rollers. I'm wondering whether using the rollers will tear up or degrade a high quality road tire in any way? <Q> It's generally a good idea to use a trainer tire for a trainer, because the tire wears down significantly faster (plus they get hotter, make more noise, etc). <S> Many people use their regular road tires on them without any adverse effects. <S> Some people experience increased wear (on the back, usually). <S> If you're really worried though, just buy some cheap 15 dollar tires and put them on your wheels. <S> On a trainer, they wont last as long as a trainer tire but they will save your good tires. <S> On rollers, you generally have less wear, but still, you're going to save your original tires (since they aren't being used). <A> There is a difference in that rollers don't generate much heat when you ride them whereas many trainers do. <S> The heat is what helps strip the tires and degrades the rubber on your tread. <A> If your tire has any amount of tread, absolutely. <S> I know you said a road tire, but some of them still have tread. <S> The trainer also has a tendency to square off the tire. <S> I prefer to use a trainer tire because they are often a little quieter, but also I don't like the idea of my front and rear tires wearing at significantly different rates over the year. <S> UPDATE <S> : I confused roller with trainer (trainers do have rollers...), so the differential wear shouldn't apply much. <S> I imagine the squaring off would still though, as would wear due to having treads. <S> They might be quieter, though you wouldn't have quite as much contact as with a trainer.
|
Rollers don't cause as much tire wear as a trainer does, but they aren't exactly the road.
|
holes on the inside of metal fork blades, what are they I noticed there are two very small holes on both blades on my new fork. They are on the inner side of the blades at the end of the fork blade just above wheel axis mounting point. They are apparently designed to put there because they are at the same position and holes are smooth and no damage. So what the purpose of these holes? I noticed that my old fork also got similar holes, which I never noticed before. <Q> The brazing produces fumes the fumes and the heat expands the air in the blade which makes that these holes are needed to evacuate both. <S> On steel frames you may find similar holes in the seat-stays and in the chain-stays where they are usually close to rear drop-outs. <S> If you're worried about rusting because of moisture that could go inside spray some wax-coating or tar-based antirust inside, or a periodic jet of penetrating oil as I do. <A> These are moisture drain holes . <S> The drain holes allow for the built up moisture to drip off. <A> Some bikes have that kind of thing to use a, kind of, washer with two tabs that locate the fork better. <S> Not seen it on many recent bikes though. <S> I think it's only on Non quick release type axles too.
|
Moisture can condense and build up inside frames and cause rusting (in steel frames) or delamination (in carbon fiber). On steel forks the tiny holes at the bottom end of the fork-blade are vent holes for the brazing process.
|
Make a Bike faster Few months ago I bought this cycle ( http://www.gtbicycles.com/usa_en/2014/bikes/mountain/recreational-hardtails/2014-timberline-2-0 ). Now I would like to make my cycle faster. I would like to know about lubrication. Which lubrication steps can make my bike faster ?? I would like to know more about other steps also which can make my bike faster. <Q> According to Sheldon Brown "New chains come pre-lubricated with a grease-type lubricant which has been installed at the factory. <S> This is an excellent lubricant, and ... is superior to any lube that you can apply after the fact. <S> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/chains.html#factory <S> If the bike is really old then repacking your wheel hubs can reduce resistance to cycling. <S> This involves cleaning and regreasing the bearing that your wheels run on. <S> Ultimately, the rider is what makes the bike go the fastest. <S> By improving your core strength and aerobic capicity you'll be able to ride trails faster for longer. <A> but they also are expensive and don't last very long elevation (gravity) <S> mechanical resistance does not even come into play on a properly lubricated bicycle even if there was a magic lube that was twice as slick <S> it would not even be noticeable <S> a lower end bike with lower end bearings will have more resistance but a magic lube is not going to make much difference <S> you have a lower end bike <S> and if you got on a $2000+ bicycle it would be faster but not much different <S> shocks absorb some pedal energy frame flex will absorb some energy <A> As far as lubricant in the bottom bracket and the wheel hubs, it depends what grease was used, age of it, and the temperature outside. <S> I have bikes, with stock grease in the hubs roll really well through all temperatures (-17c to 38) and all ages. <S> However, I do have a Trek bike for my son (20" MT-60) <S> and when the temperature approached freezing, the wheel hubs and bottom bracket became very stiff and didn't roll well at all. <S> I was only getting a few turns of the wheel even after vigorous pedaling in my work stand. <S> I ended up repacking the bearings with the common green stuff in the blue tube <S> and it was a instant improvement. <S> Repacking only applies though if there is serious drag in them to begin with, and using proven grease.
|
If the bike is new then no extra lubrication should be required. The major resistance are: aerodynamic drag tire rolling resistance racing tires are going to make the bike faster
|
Can a carbon fiber bike have rack eyelets? With the new generation of gravel bikes, I was curious if any of them are being made with carbon fiber frames and rack eyelets. Are carbon frames capable of bearing the weight of racks installed on the eyelets? <Q> I have a 2011 Jamis Xenith Endura 2. <S> It is a carbon frame with rack mounts embedded in the frame. <S> I have been commuting with this bike for 5 years, maybe twice a week, most of the year. <S> I also run errands and take recreational with it. <S> I use Ortleib Panniers and often have them loaded up. <S> So far no problems. <A> I would not call it gravel bike but more adventure bikes <S> We are seeing eyelets in carbon forks Hard to tell but that is a carbon fork A rear rack would require a bigger seat stay. <S> I think they could <S> but it just does not made that much sense. <S> If you want to carry a load then go steel or titanium. <A> I found at least one carbon bike with rear rack eyelets, <S> the Jamis Xenith Endura Elite Di2 Bike but <S> those don't look very strong to me - the eyelet seems to be a separate part moulded into the carbon frame, rather than being part of the dropout. <S> They also use electronic shifting, so you'd need to be able to charge the battery while travelling if you were away for more than a day or two. <S> Since they don't give a weight limit you might be able to get a warranty replacement if it fails. <S> I suggest asking the manufacturer about that before getting too excited about off-road cycle touring on the bike. <S> If I was building one I'd be more tempted to go for oversize lugs that included the rack eyelets so the force transfer was more contained to the metal parts of the frame. <S> But I don't have any experience of designing carbon frames, only yachts, so I could well be wrong. <A> Based on my experience with carbon fiber at JPL, if you wanted to have a place to put a load on carbon fiber you would have to make thin sheet metal parts that bond to the carbon fiber part. <S> For example, if I wanted a place to attach a rack to a tube, I would form two titanium sheet parts that are about a half millimeter thick into a question mark shape. <S> The leg of the question mark would have mounting holes and the curved portion would bond to the carbon (assuming you want to connect to a tube). <S> so you have to spread the load through a bond over an area. <S> I am not saying you can or should do this, but I am saying this is how you attach to carbon fiber if you want to carry a load. <S> The parts don't have to fit perfectly because the bond takes up fab errors nicely. <S> I would probably pattern the design after those old braze fittings which have the little pointy things sticking out to reduce stress concentration as well. <S> Whatever you do, do not attempt to clamp to a CF tube. <S> That only works with metal
|
Carbon fiber cannot take point loads like metal
|
Why are rear wheels dirtier? I have noticed that my rear wheel is always considerably muckier than my front one, after a wet commute. Why should that be? They both travel the same distance and terrain. I assume this is a common experience. Bike has mudguards. <Q> As mentioned in the other answers, there could be several reasons that your rear tire is always muddier than the front after a wet commute. <S> The front tire splashes mud on the rear of the bike. <S> There is more weight on the rear tire, causing it to sink deeper into mud. <S> Your power is being transferred to the rear tire, creating more friction than on the front. <S> You're probably using your rear brakes , causing your rear tire to slide . <S> If so, it's probably better to use more of the front brake. <S> One more thing... <S> the mudguards are probably not keeping your wheels and tires clean. <S> They're there to keep you from getting splashed. <A> My guess is, although the front and rear mudguards are within 2 inches of the respective tyres, the front one is primarily to the back of the wheel, and the rear one above. <A> The mudguard is not perfect. <S> Mud will still get flung up from the front wheel onto the backwheel. <S> It just doesn't end up in your face; which is good enough for most people. <A> Most likely cause is shape and size of the mudguards. <S> Some other affecting factors are: Front wheel's direction to frame changes when steering, rear wheel goes <S> straight More weight on rear wheel <S> Rear wheel "moves" <S> the bicycle hence there is more friction between tire and ground <A> The rear tire may be dirtier that front tire, regardless of mudguards or rain, because it is closer to the chain . <S> The chain is a dirt magnet and some of it will splash to the wheel by the mere proximity to it. <S> For instance look at the chain stay on the chain side, it is always dirty just because of being next to the chain.
|
As a result, crud will fall onto the rear wheel more regularly.
|
Is Shimano Claris compatible with disc brakes? All of the Shimano Claris groupsets I have seen come with cantilever brakes as far as I can tell. Is it possible to get this with disc brakes, would I have to buy the individual components? What would be a good, affordable configuration of components (or entire groupset ideally) to get this? I'm thinking of STI levers, is this important? <Q> The difference is the amount of cable pull (the distance that the cable moves when you squeeze the lever). <S> This distance is lower for standard road levers than for MTB levers, so the design of the brake has to take this into account. <S> I know that the Avid BB7 brakes are available in road and mountain versions, I'm not familiar with the Shimano line. <A> As far as I know all Claris brakes are rim brakes, so yes you would need to buy the brakes independently. <S> Road disc brakes are still relatively newish. <S> Or at least have only recently started to gain traction in the market. <S> I believe Shimano recently released the new version of the 105 line that uses a disc brake. <S> You could look at going that route for the brake <S> but.. Compatibility will come into play with the brifters (brake & shifter) as the Claris is made for 8 speed and the higher levels that include a disc brake will more than likely be 9/10 or 11sp, but it is doable with some creativity or use of other brands/models. <S> If my memory serves me you could use the ST-R500 from Shimano with a mechanical disc, its an 8sp. <S> Personally I don't see a need for disc brakes on a road bike as cantis are tried and true <S> but that's just my opinion. <S> Also STI in shimano terms stands for Shimano Total Integration , a fancy name for the brake lever and shifter in one unit.. aka a brifter <A> Yes. <S> My 2014 Trek Crossrip Comp has a Claris group set and Avid BB5 disc brakes. <S> Soon to be upgraded to Rd-M375 calipers.
|
You can use disk brakes with road levers as long as you buy the ones specifically designed to work with road levers.
|
optimum frame size for very small 5'2" female I have a lady friend who's interested in getting into road cycling. The smallest frame sizes I've seen so far in the market are 48 and, in one instance, a 47. Is this about the most common and/or smallest starting point for frames for these riders? She's average weight (around 100lbs). Any recommendations on frame size would be appreciated. <Q> My wife is 5' 2" and raced elite road for many years. <S> For her proportions 48-49 cm frames seemed to work well. <S> Sometime she had mentioned interest in a smaller frame, but when I looked at how she fit on the bike <S> I think it was due to flexibility issues (at that time) rather than frame sizing issues. <S> Of course this is one person's experience and therefore not a canonical answer. <S> There are a lot of factors, other than frame size, that govern fit, but 48/49cm is likely a good starting point for someone 5'2". <S> NOTE: <S> different brands will have slightly different fit dimensions (stack and reach) for the same quoted frame size. <S> Frame sizing is not standardized. <A> You have to try the different frame sizes. <S> I'd suggest looking at 650b or 26" wheel sizes if possible though, or possibly a kids frame <S> -- I would not recommend using 700c wheels, as is standard on road bikes, for someone under maybe 5'5". <S> and frame sizes aren't consistent between models of bike. <S> So she has to try a bunch of bikes. <A> Pay attention to the effective tube length (ETT, VTT and whatever it might be called) which is the horizontal length from the handlebar to the saddle tube. <S> While saddle height ('conventional' size) can be changed easily, ETT is hard to adjust. <S> The easiest way to determine the right ETT is a calculator .
|
Different frame sizes work for different people of the same height (depends on leg length, torso, arm length, etc.) Some of the women's specific marked bikes go a bit lower in size than the mens bikes and most major manufacturers (certainly Trek/Specialized/Giant) produce them.
|
Choosing a road pedal system - Focus on durability What road pedal system can you recommend? They should be durable (pedal and cleats), have no tendency to fail hazardously and work well (a bit of float, support against rotation around the forward axis (unlike SPD), fast and reliable to enter (I can click into RXS faster and more reliable than into SPD, mostly because the pedals are in a predictable angle. I miss the Xpressos more often that not) I'm especially curious about SPD-SL and Look Keo, since I have no experience with them. Backstory: I'm currently riding Time Xpresso 4. The cleats wear far too quickly to be acceptable (5 month / 4 Mm to get uncomfortable, after a bit more I rip the cleats out the pedal on hard acceleration). So instead of replacing the cleats I tend to replace the system. I had Time RXS before and switched over to Xpresso because the RXS were good while they lasted (~30 Mm) but one broke and caused a near-accident as well as a nasty scratch from the exposed axis on my shin. I hoped Time had addressed this in newer pedals, since others report the issue as well. I realize similar question have been asked, but I still could not find one that answers the aspect of durability. <Q> I'm a hugely biased exponent of speedplay pedals. <S> The cleats are metal <S> and I would say reasonably durable. <S> I just walk around in mine for short distances like cafe stops, to/from the bike racks at work, but you can also get little covers for them. <S> Or they make a walkable cleat (although I have no experience of these). <S> They have plenty of float with adjustment for heel in/ <S> out right the way down to no float at all. <S> The pedals are double sided so clicking in doesn't require you to rotate the pedal to find the right side. <S> You do need to grease them though, there's a little screw on the side that you have to undo and squeeze grease in through every month or so - depending on your mileage and riding conditions. <S> I've ridden several pairs into the ground before buying the grease gun to do it with, but my current pair are coming up to three years old. <A> For completeness - There is no cleat system that has as little wear as no cleat system. <S> So it may be worth considering toe straps, or plain old flats instead if durability is your top requirement. <S> Personally I use flats on a wet-day MTB for safety, and on a tandem for convenience, and Look Keo on a road bike to go-fast. <S> However they wear out in 3-6 months or 3-4 thousand km. <S> I loathe toestraps after an accident with an exposed root. <A> I literally only replaced my pedals when the damp in my garage caused them to rust after nearly 2 years & 8,500km of wear. <S> Walking in them isn't too bad- as they are designed to be used for mountain biking (and running/walking up hills)- though this will depend on the shoes you buy. <S> A friend has some shoes that look like trainers- <S> and the cleet is so recessed you can't tell its a cycling shoe. <S> Shimano M520's are double sided, so never going to miss clipping in, and their "hold/float" is adjustable etc.
|
I'd say SPDs, both the pedals I have used (the cheapest Shimano M520) and the shoes cleet seem to last forever.
|
Can I inflate to 8bar? I am quite new in the world of urban cycling and I am liking it A LOT.for the sake of curiosity I want my wheels to be as hard as possible, know how this feels and how my bike behaves. As of now, I have a set of Schwalbe Marathon Plus 25-622 28x1.00 (700x25C) tires with their complement bicycle tubes Schwalbe 28" 700C. They are the slimmest that I have found for my rims. The sidewalls of my tires are labelled with 6.0-8.0 bar 85-115 psi. Unfortunately, I have twice tried to inflate my tires to their maximum pressure and the inner tubes blew out while inflating! It has been impossible for me to reach the 8 bar. So I have the following questions: Am I stretching the inner tubes over their limits? Cuz the 8 bar is a limit of the outer tire. Am I using the wrong tubes? Are there other tube-brands that can handle more pressure? Is there a better tire/inner tube option/combination available for super-high-pressured-tires? thank you <Q> Safe pressure is limited by rim and/or tire strength, not the inner tube itself (and maybe by its valve, but that's not this case). <S> My guess is that your tire is little too big (or damaged) and inner tube comes out through gap between tire and rim and eventually explodes. <S> Please provide picture of blown tube ;-) <A> You don't need to obey the number on the sidewall of the tire -- most riders will use a significantly lower pressure (and the number is essentially arbitrary ; low for legal reasons, high for making people think the tire is good for some odd reason). <S> So there probably isn't a reason for you to run your tires at such a high pressure. <S> Too high pressure also compromises control, rideand makes a tire more vulnerable to road hazards. <S> You need to take the tubes and inspect where they have been damaged. <S> When you install a tire, you need to be careful. <S> First, you inflate to something like 10 psi, check if the tube hasn't been pinched and the tire is seated properly. <S> If it is good, then you inflate up. <S> If you aren't doing this, theres a good chance you've pinched the tube with the tire. <A> Narrow tyres require higher pressure as they have smaller contact area. <S> Would guess you have something bad around - nipples, sharp edge, etc. <S> I am running Schwalbe & Conti 23x622 for a few months now and have no problems to start @8.5 <S> bars (limit on petrol stations) except they drop to 5-6 in few days - normal behaviour.
|
You may be pinching the tube with the tire, have holes in rim tape, damage at the valve, something in the tire, etc.
|
Reverse Gear in Bicycles For an ordinary bicycle (neither fixed gear nor capable of changing any gears). Is it possible to modify it to have a reverse gear on it? (i.e. reverse pedaling causes the bicycle to go backward) (By modifying or attaching components to the rear wheel) Thank you in advance <Q> Such a hub exists for trike and quads . <S> Pedal forward with 3 or 5 gears then having a coaster brake to stop . <S> Sturmey-Archer has made these hubs for the niche market (velomobiles ) for some years now . <S> The hubs have a sprocket bolted to the right spoke flange to drive the rear axle , some clever types have removed this and laced it into a wheel for a single rear wheel trike . <S> Maybe this could work for a bike , still a question of balance in reverse ?! <S> model QS-RC5 with reverse+coaster brake model TS-RC5 only coaster brake and no reverse SA Specification Sheet <S> PDF 5 Speed internal gear hub with coaster brake Special use hub, includes a reverse gear on QS-RC5 model <S> There's also a 3 speed version with reverse, model QS-RC3. <S> Specs Hub Shell Material - 6061 Aluminium Axle Diameter - 13/32” <S> Slotted Axle Length - 185mm Over Locknut Dimension - 139mm <S> Right Axle Protrusion Length - 24mm <S> Left Axle Protrusion Length - 22mm <S> Flange Width - 65mm Flange Sprocket Teeth - 22 <S> T Flange Sprocket C.L. - 39.4 <S> mm <S> Sprocket Teeth - 21T through 22T Sprocket Chain Line: 53.9mm Indicator Chain - HSA585 Mark Yellow <S> Weight - 2010 <S> g <S> Gear Ratio • <S> Overall Range - 256% <S> • <S> Gear <S> 1 - 62.5% <S> (-)37.5% <S> • <S> Gear <S> 2 - 75% (-)25% (Gear 1 + 20%) <S> • <S> Gear <S> 3 - 100% Direct Drive (Gear 2 + 33%) <S> • <S> Gear 4 - 133.3% <S> (+)33.3% (Gear 3 + 33%) <S> • <S> Gear <S> 5 - 160% (+) <S> 60% (Gear 4 + 20%) <S> Chain sprockets mounting: 3 notch <S> mounting Colour: <S> silver Flange distance (right): 39 mm Flange PCD (right): 67 mm Flange distance (left): 32 mm Flange PCD (left): 67 mm Over Locknut Distance (O.L.D.): 139 <S> [EN] mm <S> There's an operation manual available at https://hfchristiansen.zendesk.com/hc/da/article_attachments/115010677845/Manual_-_QS-RC5.pdf <S> To operate reverse, you stop the bike, then start pedalling backwards. <A> While it may be possible, by creating a mechanism that shifts the chain from one freewheel to another, or disconnecting one temporarily through mechanical actuators, the hassle and engineering it would take to make happen would be outweighed by the fact that it is almost entirely pointless. <S> A fixed gear would be your best bet as it already does that. <S> Although pedalling and going backwards on a bicycle is not an easy task for any distance, and to keep momentum and balance for BMX applications, there are clutch coaster brakes that allow forward pedalling while rolling backwards. <S> You may be able to devise a clutch system hub that allows freewheeling while rolling forward and engages while pedalling backwards <S> but again the engineering behind it would outweigh its purpose most likely. <A> Have a look at the system Berg toys use for their go-karts. <S> Its called a BFR hub (for brake, forward and reverse). <S> This hub lets you go forward or backward, while always pedalling in forward direction. <S> It also has a freewheel. <S> The system needs two chains, with this being in the middle of your drive sprocket and axle sprocket. <S> Hub: BFR Hub stands for brake, forward and reverse; this hub allows the rider to pedal forward, coast with the pedals remaining static, pedal back slightly to engage the coaster brake or use the hand brake to stop, once stopped pedal backwards to go in reverse! <S> Source: Product page for Berg John Deere BFR <S> go-kart <S> Of course, it is not sold (or even meant) for bicycles, so you'd need to either adapt it for a bicycle, or build your own. <S> However, it shows how much technical effort is necessary to combine reverse gear and freewheel. <A> I have repaired a pedal powered toy that had an arrangement like this. <S> It was an Italian ride-on toy tractor that had a modified coaster brake set up so that instead of back pedalling applying a brake, the "brake" mechanism inside the hub locked against the hub body so that you could pedal the toy backwards. <S> The modification didn't seem particularly difficult, but from memory I think a lathe would be required unless you really like filing small amounts off a round part until it fits. <A> Cut then weld the bottom cranks and rear hub of two bikes to mirror the drive side. <S> You will have gears and chains on both sides of your bike. <S> -]---[- <S> To make one ride backwards full time, just swap the parts right to left.
|
At full stop with the brake engaged continued backward pedal pressure will cause the cycle will move in reverse in a reduced gear .
|
Is it difficult for one person to ride a tandem bike? About 4 miles away from me, there is a bike hire shop that has tandems. I'm trying to work out the logistics of getting the tandem to my house to pick up the other rider. I'm an experienced cyclist, but have never ridden a tandem before. It's not convenient for both of us to go to the shop. Is riding a tandem particularly difficult for one person? I suppose I'll get the bus there... <Q> I have a 1990 steel racing tandem, and sadly it gets more miles solo than with a stoker. <S> but points to note: <S> Cars may not see the rear of your bike, and may not anticipate the extra space required when pulling up or allowing room to turn. <S> Steering is a bit odd - it may be unique to mine, but if the solocaptain doesn't commit to a corner with enough lean, the bike tries to stand up straight and go straight. <S> Braking - <S> its still possible to raise the back wheel clear off the ground when doing an aggressive brake with just a captain. <S> Drag brake is less effective with no stoker. <S> So big descents you have to ride more like a solo bike. <S> You may get heckled with "Your passenger fell off!" <S> so have a witty retort like "Bugger - <S> so that's why she stopped nagging!" <S> or "Damn I thought we were going slower than normal!" <A> It should be similar to having someone on the back who's not pedaling, only lighter and faster. <A> I have a tandem and I have ridden it solo. <S> It's not hard from a handling point of view, and at least with mine <S> it's easier than riding tandem – it's just riding a bike with an exceptionally long rear end. <S> Sure, more friction and a lot more weight, but overall something any cyclist with a tiny amount of experience can handle. <A> Riding a tandem solo isn't a big deal. <S> It's just a big long heavy bike; as others have said easier than riding a tandem with a stoker if they're not putting much power in. <S> Apart from the "funny" comments you get, the only actual issue I've noticed is that you don't get so much grip on the back wheel without the weight over it. <S> I tried standing on the pedals going up a hill and found the wheel would spin. <A> Although I don't feel like it would be impossible by any means. <S> The factors to consider are: <S> Weight - the Tandem weighs a lot more than <S> a standard bicycle Wind - larger surface area means more effect from crosswinds Length - This will play very little with the transport as far as riding it to a friends house, other than turning, but plays a major factor in future transport by car or bus <S> Tandems have a pilot, and a stoker, the rear rider being the stoker, and all steering is done by the pilot or front riding. <S> Therefor the stoker is only there to help out with pedaling and enjoy the ride. <S> but I wouldn't rule it entirely impossible. <S> You will look lonely however ;) <A> It's usually easier than with a partner. <S> I've been on one home-welded tandem where the front and back pedal cogs had different number of teeth and thus were not synchronized. <S> That posed a problem for leaning into curves since the reflex of putting the inner pedal up did not match with the other pedal pair. <S> It's astonishing how much of a nuisance this can end up being (and when going solo, you had no warning). <S> I don't think that this happens with a stock tandem however.
|
Doesn't seem like too big a deal. It will certainly be more difficult than riding a standard bicycle. And the stoker's bars may get in the way of your backside if you lean backwards. Speed is generally not an issue - I've topped 40 km/h solo on my tandem, and the previous owner exceeded 70 km/h on it on a race, with two riders. The main differences between tandems and solo bikes apply when riding a tandem on your own (rear wheel cuts corners more, you can't bunny hop) So yes it will be more difficult
|
What to do with my old bike? I have an old, cheap, second hand bike which I use for commuting. I have to leave it on the street for 10 hours every day, it is old with damaged stickers and dirty which makes it less likely to be stolen. It is in awful condition though. It's previous owner drove his car over it or something. It had broken brakes, a broken back derailleur and damaged front derailleur. Worst of all is something I didn't notice at first: a bent frame. I have already spent more money in repairs than what I spent in purchasing the bike to begin with. In my last inspection I found that the back hub is also loose, I think it is related to the frame being bent. The thing is, I still want to be able to ride it to work and I don't want it to get stolen or damaged. So what are the best options for me? Is it a good idea for me to replace the frame? (without previous experience) I tried to find a donor bike but I don't feel confident in buying another one second hand. I also don't feel comfortable leaving a new bike on the street for long. <Q> If I do not easily notice a bent frame at first sight, it tells me it cannot not be that bad to compromise the frame integrity. <S> When you ride the bike, do you feel it handling weird, or shaky? <S> if it doesn't, then I would conclude the bent frame is inconsequential. <S> Personally, one of my bikes has a bent frame which I didn't noticed it for the first few months. <S> Been riding it for 4 years since then and it's never been issue in handling or otherwise <S> and I've ridden in long rides (15-20+ miles) and at considerable speeds (17-19 mph) <S> The loose hub, as it has been mentioned before, it could as easy as tightening the bearings cups or as bad as needing a new hub. <S> Without a video or personally inspecting it, it hard to give proper advice. <S> If the frame is toasted, I would consider two options: donate it to a bike co-op <S> so it can be used for spare parts; or find a similar bike on CL and keep this one for spare parts. <S> Also, a bike co-op will work with you to either fix your bike or allow you to pick another one in exchange for the one you have. <A> It sounds like the bike is in pretty bad shape if someone drove a car or truck over it to bend the frame. <S> I'd probably opt for getting another whole bike. <S> I'd donate the old bike to a bike charity (someone who is aware of bike safety), let them strip the parts they can use and dispose of the rest. <S> As for bike upkeep, on most bikes (and cars and what not), you spend more than the bike costs over the lifetime on repairs and upkeep. <S> If you buy a 500 dollar bike, you'll be spending maybe 50 dollars every 5000 miles on new cassette + chain, so at 50k miles, you've spent 500 dollars on that alone (disregarding tires, lubricants, possibly new shifters, saddle, brakes, etc.). <A> If you have a local bike coop/charity and willingness to do some work yourself, its a good time to visit them. <S> Our local refuse recycle station charges $10 for bikes in better condition than this, so be very careful spending money on it. <S> As far as a loose hub - could just be loose cones and needs a clean and tighten, or could need a new hub. <S> If you can't do it yourself (or mate) <S> its not worth getting a bike shop to look at it. <S> As far as bike security two things to keep in mind. <S> A bike stored outside will eventually get stolen, and the likelihood of it being stolen is related to how nice it looks and how easy it is to steal. <S> A manky old beater that's locked up well has the best chance of still being where you left it when you need it - so have a cheap looking bike you don;t mind loosing, and good locks. <A> Replacing frame + wheel costs pretty much like a 'new' used bike. <S> So I would say buy a bike will be better option. <S> Just remember to check well the frame and hubs when you buying a bike. <S> As you have new parts (brakes and gears, as you said), you can save them for new bike if there you will have to replace something. <A> Most people would agree that at the point you have a new frame, you have new bicycle. <S> In that sense your question might be rephrased: "how can I purchase new bicycle and minimize cost by using some of parts from the old one". <S> To do so, you need to make a list of parts that you think are good on the old one, including type of parts and assessment of their value. <S> Then you go to shop some other old bicycle that has bad or lacking parts that you have. <S> In theory this sounds good, but in practice it takes a lot of time and looking of old bicycles to find suitable purchase candidate. <S> That is because you need new bicycle that will be compatible with parts you have. <S> For instance if you have good 6 speed shifter, you should be looking for bicycle with 6 speed rear hub. <S> It is not a rocket science, but there is some room to make mistakes, and in the end spend more money that you have intended to. <S> But it is definitely a learning experience!
|
Moving components to a new frame may require some specialized tools and is likely not cost effective except for high end parts (usually otherwise, reselling the bike is a better idea, but in this case it sounds unethical). If rear hub is loose, it maybe a damaged hub, which will break itself over time (but no one can say how much time it will take).
|
Chain length when swapping between cassette sizes (11-28 and 11-23) Currently I am running a semi compact 52/36 up front and a 11-28 at the back. I'm planning on getting a 11-23 cassette for criterium races, and have the 11-28 for hillier rides. Will there be any issues with chain length when swapping back and forth between the two? If I leave the chain length as is (optimized for a 11-28), will I run into any problems when putting the 11-23 in? <Q> It should be fine. <S> The chain will be a little bit longer than necessary when using the 11-23, which may give some droop if you're running bad gear combinations (e.g. small chainring+small cog), but nothing serious. <S> Never run with a too short chain. <S> A bit long is OK. <A> In this particular case it will not cause a problem . <S> As long as chain length is right for 11-28. <S> Chain is too short , if chain is too short to raise to bigger gear. <S> For example if 52x23 is ok, but it might still be too short for 52x28, not vice versa. <S> Chain is too long , if chain is rubbing against derailleur cage. <S> It would cause noise, wear the parts and affect precision of gear shift. <A> This is because your 11-28 cassette already includes an 11-23 cassette inside it. <S> The longer chain is working just fine with the 11-23 which are there now. <S> If you have no droop with 11-28, there will not be droop with 11-23 with the same chain length. <S> The other direction doesn't necessarily work, of course. <S> Since your derailleur has a spring-loaded tension wheel, extra chain length doesn't matter much. <S> Shifting can be excellent at a range of tensions. <S> So while the 11-23 gives you the opportunity to shorten the chain, you don't have to take up the offer. <S> If you make the chain as short as possible, then you can't do an emergency repair out on the road which involves splicing out and throwing away a damaged pair of links. <S> (Or rather, you can , but probably shouldn't).
|
A chain length that is fine on 11-23 might not be long enough to go around the larger cogs of an 11-28, causing a disaster. Logically, the longer chain cannot cause a problem. It will work exactly the same if 11-23 is the entire range!
|
Selecting a GPS device I am out to purchase a (dedicated) GPS device for the outlined below use cases. Trouble is, I have never owned a GPS-enabled device. Furthermore, general articles on "how to purchase sports GPS" seem to vague. What features am I supposed to value most? What "type" of device do I need? Use cases: Ski trekking at about 2000m elevation, up to a week without electricity. I use a map, but if a (heavy) fog falls, I could be depending on the device for up to 2-3 days straight. Bicycle trekking on rough mountain paths, up to two weeks without electricity. Again, I would carry a map, but when in doubt would need the GPS so as not go off path and waste half a day wandering around. <Q> What features am I supposed to value most? <S> Really you should decide this yourself. <S> The second point is quite important to me. <S> This isn't a device you will use when sitting at leisure at a desk or table sipping a Martini. <S> You probably want to keep your eyes ahead and occasionally glance at the device to pick up key info. <S> A display that crams lots of detail into it will usually be much harder to read at a glance. <S> For more leisurely perusal you might as well just buy a $50 smartphone and an offline <S> mapping app (ViewRanger is pretty good IMO). <A> If your doing this sort of activity I would NOT look at cycling related, or "sports" GPS devices. <S> Your shopping for something that could potentially save your life. <S> You won't need many of the functions of a cycling computer on a ski trek. <S> You may also check out "The Great Outdoors" stack and search through there. <S> I would look at one that is waterproof for sure. <S> Easy to use with gloves on would be a definite plus, as is the size and weight, but the latter shouldn't be a big issue. <S> I would also read a lot of reviews online once you narrow it down to a brand or style you like. <S> You may also think about looking at one that is usb rechargeable and a good quality power bank or two depending on battery type and life. <A> I would like to recommend a "hiking" GPS. <S> A good example is the Garmin Oregon/Montana/Dakota units. <S> Pick one that fits your price range. <S> They are water resistant and shock resistant. <S> They are built very ruggedly and can be operated with gloves. <S> You can use regular AA batteries which means as long as you pack enough batteries, you never have to worry about running out. <S> If you're going with the Oregon/Montana model, you might want to get the "t" version (such as Oregon 600t) as it include topographical maps, which could come in very useful for your purposes. <S> I personally use the Garmin Oregon 450 (no longer sold) on my bike. <S> It seems to acquire a signal rather quickly so you can turn it off if you don't need it all the time, but you can also leave it on as the batteries last quite a long time (16 hours on a set of AA+). <S> You can pair it with an ANT+ heart rate and/or cadence sensor (no speed sensor supported) with your bike. <S> It has a good sturdy bike mount so you can easily mount it on your handle bars. <S> There's a clip on the back and they included a carabiner so you can easily latch it to yourself <S> so it doesn't get lost. <S> You can use rechargable NiMH batteries, so if you bring some kind of solar charger with you, then you could theoretically have unlimited battery life. <S> I think these units would probably suit your needs. <S> They seem to match all the requirements given by yourself the other people who answered.
|
I would value longest battery life simplicity of display least size/weight usability with gloves on In my humble opinion two key factors for your application would be battery life [the biggest factor], or the ability to change or charge the battery, and Durability, considering you will be using it for Ski treks in addition to bike treks, your going to want something the elements won't bother, cold, wet, sand, mud etc.
|
When down-shifting my rear derailleur (Campagnolo 10spd) is skipping multiple gears. The problem feels like it is in the shifter as it just "lets go" when I press it. I'm told it could be the G spring. Is it something in the derailleur or the shifter? If its the shifter is replacing the G spring an easy task (doesn't look like it is in the exploded diagram!). <Q> The correct answer to your query depends on the model and age of the system. <S> If it's an older system from the Record or Chorus ranges, when they were still 10s <S> (pre 2009), then yes, the G-springs are a possibility. <S> The G-Spings (AKA the P springs <S> - it depends what letter you think they resemble) are two springs which engage a ratchet. <S> The ratchet is what sets the index interval and if one or both springs fail, or if the mount ring that holds them in place fails, you can get the problem that you describe although normally in these types of lever, if tou have a system that "falls through" all of the gears, the shift in the other direction won't "hold" a gear reliably either. <S> Levers of this type can be repaired as others have noted. <S> If you don't want to tackle it yourself, we offer the service here at <S> Velotech Cycling Ltd - please drop me an email at the address below, for more info. <S> Post 2007 and Pre 2009 Xenon through to Centaur all used "Escape". <S> These levers have no G springs, but an escapement mechanism. <S> Campagnolo part number EC-VL100. Veloce and Centuar 2009 - 2011 used an UltraShift mechanism. <S> These are serviceable but this kind of issue is very rare - I'd suggest a call in to a Campagnolo Pro-Shop (see the Campagnolo website for a listing) or drop us an email at Velotech - we are the main UK Service Centre - email us at velotechcycling"at"aim"dot"com. <S> Veloce and Centaur <S> 2012-present - again, a system that works basically like Escape, called PowerShift - the only relaible fix is a new lever body complete, part number EC-CE300. <A> This answer is about first and second generation Ergopower, the Escape mechanism is different and should never downshift several gears at time. <S> The G-spring is a small piece of wire shaped like capital G, located inside the shifter. <S> When it is worn out, the clicks feel less crisp and it is easy to accidentally shift multiple gears at a time. <S> The Campagnolo mechanism is extremely simple compared to Shimano, but the price of simplicity is the spring that wears out. <S> EDIT: Not UltraShift. <S> See the other answer. <A> Thanks everyone for the information. <S> Being a newer model <S> Centaur, the only solution was to replace the lever body, so it went from a $10 part with $70 labour (too hard for me to tackle) to $110 part with $20 labour. <S> At lest its now done and riding smoothly again. <S> Thanks again. <A> I had the same problem on a Mirage 10 shifter. <S> After taking it apart <S> I figured out a way to repair it. <S> I drilled a hole through the shifter body perpendicular to the ratchet. <S> Then I put a strong spring in the hole and pushed it down with a set screw. <S> I tightened the screw until there was just enough pressure to allow up shifting. <S> Now on the down shift it indexes perfectly.
|
If it's from pre 2007 and is from the lower Campagnolo ranges (Xenon, Mirage, Veloce or Centaur) then it could possibly be a G-spring issue - all of these ranges pre 2007 used a lever mechanism basically the same internally as a Record or Chorus 10s lever - Xenon moved away from that mechanism in 2004/5, Mirage etc in 2007 to a system called Escape. If that is proving troublesome in the way you describe, the only relaible & long term fix is a complete lever body, The spring is fairly easy to replace if you have any experience disassembling mechanical things.
|
Should I worry about rain getting inside my frame? I commute to work every day and lock my bike on the street. I have a nice saddle so I remove my seat post and take it into work with me. This obviously leaves a hole open to the inside of the aluminium frame. Living in London it often rains. Should I worry about raining getting into the frame by this hole and doing damage? And if so what should I cover the hole with? <Q> It depends on the frame material what effect the water inside the frame will have. <S> A lot of frames have a small hole drilled at the bottom of the bottom bracket casing. <S> If there is no hole there you can drill one yourself. <S> I have done this on aluminium frames before and it is very easy. <S> Use a 4mm drill bit and drill through till you cut into the bottom bracket void. <S> There will be a gap internally between the frame casing and the actual bottom bracket. <S> I have found frames fill up with water even with the seat post in place if ridden in the wet, so putting a cork in the seat post hole probably won't make much difference. <A> I drilled out aluminum frame and then inserted removable plug , as water has ruined three bearings and once was from ice caused by zero temp operations. <A> Bottom bracket and the inside of the frame might get oxidised (rusty). <S> Cover the hole with a plastic bag or something else, to prevent rain from going inside your frame.
|
A hole this small in the centre of the bottom bracket casing will not affect the strength of the frame but will allow water to drain.
|
Preventing ergonomic handlebar internal rubber cylinders to stick I have a bike with ergononomic handles (Fuxon brand).Those are kept in position (as in prevented to rotate) with a mechanism which fits inside the handlebar. This mechanism works by compressing two rubber cylinders along their axis, so they expand in the diameter. Whenever I need to remove them for any reason (last time replacing the bar ends) it's a long battle. The rubber cylinders don't move even when the pressure is released. I risked many times ending with the rubber cylinders stuck inside the handlebar. Still, it takes no effort to push them in, but don't want this to happen again. Any suggestion to prevent them to become stuck? Could I use some grease/lubricant, without making the situation worse or making them ineffective? The current "solution" is to relieve pressure by unscrewing the thing, and wait. It took several weeks, until one day the thing came out by pulling. <Q> Grease would make the rubber slip, defeating the purpose of the mechanism. <S> Best solution is to just throw these grips in the garbage, and get some better-designed ones. <S> I've seen several types that use an external clamp (or two clamps) to hold the grip in place - I'm sure that would work better. <S> But if you're really set on keeping these grips, and don't mind getting "creative", you might be able to make an alternate locking mechanism. <S> The expansion plugs that they use with carbon steering tubes would be ideal - except they're too big. <S> So you want something that works on the same principle, but fits inside the handlebar. <S> Go to the fastener section at a hardware store, and see if you can find expansion bolts that are the right size. <A> I can't see how this would ever work (on it's own) for loosening. <S> It appears to be a poor design. <S> When loosening, I don't see anything to hold the nut in place. <S> IE, when you turn the bolt, there is nothing to stop the nut from turning as well and not actually loosening. <S> You may try pulling on the end cap with one hand while loosening the bolt with the other. <S> It <S> may provide enough tension to hold the nut in place while you turn the bolt. <S> If not, I'd look into finding a method for attaching the nut to the washer and/or the rings so that something is holding the nut in place while you loosen the bolt. <S> I would not recommend ANY lubricant to the rubber parts (would likely just make the attachment less effective). <S> However, a very small amount of lubricant for the nut <S> /bolt interface may help some. <A> Maybe don't tighten them up so much next time? <S> Can you use fewer of the rubber doughnuts on the bolt? <S> Or replace the middle doughnuts with a short piece of tube? <S> Are you wedded to these handgrips - you might find a new replacement with a better mounting system. <S> Then use a suitable tiny bolt or a screw from each side to retain the end. <S> Do you have straight bars? <S> Could you use one really long chicago bolt all the way through to hold both ends on?
|
Final resorts: if you're handy might be to remove the axis bolt and doughuts completely, and drill a small radial hole through your bars and through the plastic end. When tightening, the compression from the rubber rings might/should provide enough tension to hold the nut in place while the bolt turns. And it might cause the rubber to deteriorate.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.