Rudge-Whitworth wire wheels

Rudge's research laboriatories finds "soft" wheels best. The article
is referenced below.

The following was a message not accepted through moderation of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
I've re-submitted it there, rbt and now here.

On 7 Nov, 17:42, Marc wrote:

- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
thirty-six wrote:
On 7 Nov, 12:38, Marc wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On 7 Nov, 07:31, James wrote:
On Nov 7, 10:40 am, James wrote:
On Nov 7, 8:25 am, (D.M.
Procida) wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. My wheels work better than
normal construction. I explain to the best of my abilities why. I do
not need to prove my explanation. I, unlike you, spent much time
questioning mechanics and researching historical documents to give
clues as to why there are different experiences for apparently similar
wheels.
Who says your wheels work better? You? Are you the most impartial
judge? To the extent that it exempts you from having to prove your
case other than by assertion?
You seem to think that he owes you a proof.
If I said I'd discovered some way of tying my shoelaces that was
counter-intuitive, ran contrary to the accepted wisdom of
shoelace-tying, and produced better results traditional methods, then
I'd expect anyone else who's interested in shoelace tying to be curious
and skeptical.
I am curious and sceptical, but also have a decent bull**** detector.
When people attempt to overturn established wisdom, they had better
have a decent story. Thirty-six doesn't (or to be pedantic, if he
does, he hasn't written it here).
And I should have added that the topic of bicycle wheel-building has
long been a flypaper for cranks with "theories".
James
Upon some further searching, it appears that Rudge-Whitworth of
Coventry appears to have investigated the best ways to construct wire
wheels for bicycles, motor-cycles and horse carriages and motor -cars
including racing cars.
According to Rudge's advert taken in the Times newspaper on Friday
November 8,1912 page 14 column A the Daimler Company reported a
mileage of 172,731 for 50 tyres on Rudge's wire wheels and 102,524
miles on wood wheels. It refers to 'Autocar' and letters from the
Daimler Company of July 8 and December 2 1911
Yes, yes, and coal was tuppence a ton in 1870. Now that we have finished
with the wavy sepia toned nostalgia bit can we get back to the point (
of this part of the drifted thread) ? Why are your wheels "better" and
how can you show that they are?

Read this:

Society Of Arts.; Wheels And Their Manufacture.
(News)
The Times Apr 19, 1911; pg. 23; Issue 39563; Start column: E 1586
words.
Elec. Coll.: CS387120275.

It explains that the efficient Rudge tension wheels, by far the
largest manufacturer, and record holders, are constructed for ease of
running etc. as I have described in my own wheels. Rudge linearage
is from Covenrtry machinist company with the Starley Aeriel wheel to
Raleigh bicycles (originally with dunlop then weinmann and their own
(sun)rims) and now Sun (ringko?) rims in USA. Rudge probably made the
greatest investigation into the use of pnuematic tyres running on wire
spoked metal rims. It is likely a little research into Coventry
archives on the Rudge-Whitworth research laboratories will provide
extensive documentation upon the testing of the wheels they built for
bicycle and motor vehicle for efficiency of draw, shock absorption and
tire life. It as likely, probably wont satisfy your demands. I'm
afraid I cant hold the spoon for you.

I read the article, a newspaper report of paper presented by Mr Henry L
Heathcote. It was intersting in mentioning hubs of different sizes
internally and externally , different Nos of spokes inside and outside
and moving the holes in the rim to the edge rather than to the middle.I
also found intersting the idea of drilling the holes in the hub at an
angle to reduce the stress on the spoke , rather than bending it through
90 degrees. Nowhere in the article does it mention you or how
wonderful your wheels are going to be. If you thought that you could try
and pretend that you had some sort of authority by posting a reference
to a 98 yr old newspaper article (which just happened to share a page
with an advert that promoted Rudge-Whitworth wheels) that that you
hoped no-one would have access to, it might be a good idea if you
reconsidered your tactics, don't try to kid a kidder!

Awkward cuss.

paragraph 2
"The introduction of the suspension wheel for bicycles marked a great
advance in the shock-absorbing powers of wheels."

para 3:
"In it [tangent spoke suspension wheel] the necessary torque rigidity
could be attained without imparting excessive radial rigidity, and
thus it could be made capable of absorbing shock, as

a comparison of a suspension wheel with a section of tire would bring
out clearly."

para 4:
"the greater the tension the less the rim flattened, and the less the
tension the "softer" was the wheel." "the artproduced its bestwhen
sufficient tension to produce torque rigidity was

combined with conditions that developed the wheel a MAXIMUM cushioning
effect, these conditions being moderate spoke tension combined with
with a flexible and resilient rim and

thin spokes."

The paragraph continues extolling the virtues of Rudge wheels as does
paragraphs 5 onwards to the end of the document, paragraph 9.
Also the Institute of Automobile engineers report on the same page.
Try reading the Society of arts report as I advised.

On 8 Nov, 01:19, thirty-six wrote:
Rudge's research laboriatories finds "soft" wheels best. *The article
is referenced below.

The following was a message not accepted through moderation of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
I've re-submitted it there, rbt and now here.


and as if by magic it appears six hours after first posting in urcm
with half dozen(not checked) of my posts appearing before it which
were posted after.

"thirty-six" wrote in message
...
Rudge's research laboriatories finds "soft" wheels best. The article
is referenced below.

The following was a message not accepted through moderation of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
I've re-submitted it there, rbt and now here.


snipped. --- no slashed


If you have a problem with urcm then I sugest that you take it up with urcm
and not try to continue your tedious, boring, diatribe on esoteric wheel
desgn on urc.

From
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 17:19:04 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
wrote:

The following was a message not accepted through moderation of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
I've re-submitted it there, rbt and now here.

Thank you for maximising the chances for people to point and laugh at
your fatuous ideas. Mission accomplished, now please **** off.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt

On 8 Nov, 11:46, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 17:19:04 -0800 (PST), thirty-six

wrote:
The following was a message not accepted through moderation of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
I've re-submitted it there, rbt and now here.

Thank you for maximising the chances for people to point and laugh at
your fatuous ideas. *Mission accomplished, now please **** off.

Guy
--http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key athttp://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt

?

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 17:19:04 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
wrote:

The following was a message not accepted through moderation of
uk.rec.cycling.moderated
I've re-submitted it there, rbt and now here.

Thank you for maximising the chances for people to point and laugh at
your fatuous ideas. Mission accomplished, now please **** off.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt

hi Guy

I am actually not at all amazed by your response to this post -- oh not that
you express a sentiment similar to mine to the poster -- but your way of
doing it.

I have watched your posts on urcm and and other areas and I hardly
recognise your style there . Purer than pure!

Ah but here on urc you revert to form. A stirrer , a wrestler and a
deliberate baiter and creator of long irrelevant posts.

I have carefully watched your posts on several groups and see again, and
again your profession of total innocence

In this case I see absolutely no need for you to say "f*ck off" -- it is
intended to create a situation. I suggest that you use the same terminology
on "urcm" and not on here!


You are a inveterate "stirrer" and I am totally in agreement with the
assessment that Ian Smith made of you a couple of weeks ago.

You Post,

You shower the area with effluent,

and then you profess dismay when the same area is covered with that effluent
and try to appear innocent and hurt by the endless responses which cover
the whole group with the same dirt!

Oh I do believe that Judith, Nuxx and Matt B were/are a PIA but the main
reason they were such a distressing presence was your unending, incessant
feed ing of their responses.

I have seen your claims elsewhere that you were defending yourself against
attacks by these people.

That is very far from the truth.

If anyone holds responsibility for the degradation of "urc" it is you ---
and it is you ---- and it is you!
And now you have the temerity to continue with your efforts on urc while
you post on urcm posing an innocent

Right!

So it is very very rare that I express myself in basic language. I think it
is the refuge of posters who are unable to form a proper and legible
response to an argument or a discussion.

So here I go

hey "Just this Guy" why don't you just -- "go way" --oops --- sorry I
meant "f*ck off". and if I ever meant anything I have said on here let me
reinforce it why don't you "Go Away". You are a hugely disturbing influence
which negates the little good sense that you make wrt cycling.

You are and have been for months a destructive element to urc and I suspect
that many people have had enough of your endless vitriolic rhetoric on urc

I certainly have.

I resurrected several borderline case from my "sin bin" during this last
couple of weeks and I thought long and hard about you!

hey --- congratulations you will be back there in just 48 hours!

A final comment.

I have written and rewritten this post several times.

It is vey clearly a personal "attack" on another unique individual of whom I
have no knowledge other than that which I read on these very unimportant
"newsgroups! Most of the time, when I get to this point, I just go away for
a while and think it might get better when I return. but people like "Just
this Guy" will only add to the process of destruction

So at then end of the day I can just go away and ignore all this fairly
irrelevant "chatter" that goes on here and urcm ( I look there but will not
post there for a while at least -- while the Cabal/Junta attacks a declining
"Usenet" -- probably hastenting its imminent demise).

in the end i supose it is all more than a little unimportant

However -- just to make my point!

hey Guy --- "f*ck off".



--
From
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:36:02 -0000, "Trevor A Panther"
wrote:

hey Guy --- "f*ck off".

*shrug* fair enough. I'm just expressing frustration at the forum
shopping of thirty-six, aka Nick L Plate, aka Trevor. This is not the
first time he's come along and played the wronged innocent.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt

On Nov 8, 3:48*pm, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:
played the wronged innocent.


Tackling problems head-on seems to be a lost cause on
the internet, in general. In dealing with your problems,
have you used all fifteen stages of the Glupy-Chelobek
Problem Resolution Method?
http://www.mepis.org/node/6888
If it seems stuck, a wire coat-hanger, straightened and
carefully inserted to fairly scratch the uterine lining, the
end result being a severe infection leading to miscarriage,
can bring about fabulous results, if applied early enough.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:36:02 -0000, "Trevor A Panther"
wrote:

hey Guy --- "f*ck off".

*shrug* fair enough. I'm just expressing frustration at the forum
shopping of thirty-six, aka Nick L Plate, aka Trevor. This is not the
first time he's come along and played the wronged innocent.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt

"Mein Gott sie sind so unglaublich"


"This is not the first time he's come along and played the wronged
innocent."


But it is the very same thing that you do -- all the time! -- "methinks
he protesteth too much"



So why dont you express that frustration on urcm -- or daren't you do
that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Again Just go away from here
-- and be a pratt elsewhere

Do your own trolling on urcm


From
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:24:21 -0000, "Trevor A Panther"
wrote:

So why dont you express that frustration on urcm -- or daren't you do
that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the self-same reason that he came here to post his
nonsense when it was rejected from urcm.

But there is a difference: he came to urc to plead for support, I was
here all along. I've been subscribed to urc for a long time.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt