|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
On 1/19/2018 3:45 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote: On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/ Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two different bicycles. I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. +1 I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but because it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I suffer on steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said, anything that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough. In my area, if you want to ride up into the Santa Cruz mountains and you're older than a millenial, it's really nice to have a triple on a road bike. In the early 1980's, triples weren't that common then around 1983 most of the road bikes sold around hear suddenly were coming with triples, like my Specialized Sirrus, which had a dual and a triple option, with the triple at an extra $100. Touring bikes of course had triples for a long time. Last year I did a benefit ride, which I normally avoid but my little group of troublemakers had a team, and those without a triple were suffering. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
On 1/19/2018 5:45 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote: On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/ Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two different bicycles. I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. +1 I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but because it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I suffer on steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said, anything that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough. ... There is no way to get the range that was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs. I guess if the mountain bike is transported to the trail-head on a vehicle, and never ridden on-road, that you can get by without the high gears. Even regular 3x MTBs like mine tucker out at 28-30mph because the biggest ring is only 42T. On the last 4-5 miles home I sometimes wish it had 52T like my road bike. IOW 4x would be even better. Or coarse steps, that would be the optimum. That said, the front shifter on my mountain bike stopped going into high last Saturday, and I had to buy a replacement set of Deore shifters, $40 from REI. I opened up the old one but it was beyond my ability to fix it, so yesterday I changed the front shifter. Definitely can see the advantage of not having the extra complexity. But on the trail I was on, which was not steep except for a few short stretches, I wanted those high gears. Could have used the redneck shifter: A somewhat straight piece of a small branch with a 90 degree li'l branch (or a nail) sticking out the side. When a buddy's chain pretzeled and ripped off the front derailer that's how he shifted. It worked so well that he forgot to order a new derailer for a few months. Easy; not even expensive: http://www.abundantadventures.com/quads.html -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote: On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/ Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two different bicycles. I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. +1 I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but because it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I suffer on steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said, anything that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough. ... There is no way to get the range that was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs. I guess if the mountain bike is transported to the trail-head on a vehicle, and never ridden on-road, that you can get by without the high gears. Even regular 3x MTBs like mine tucker out at 28-30mph because the biggest ring is only 42T. On the last 4-5 miles home I sometimes wish it had 52T like my road bike. IOW 4x would be even better. Or coarse steps, that would be the optimum. snip A friend of mine had a 3x9 drivetrain on his recumbent trike and decided to put a larger rear wheel on it, but didn't want to lose his lowest gear. The easiest solution for him was to build up the new rear wheel with a SRAM 3 speed hub that also took a 9 speed cassette. Add that to the 3 front chain rings and he had an 81 speed drivetrain. The gear range wasn't optimal and there was a lot of overlap, but it covered all the bases. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
On 1/19/2018 7:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2018 5:45 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote: On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/ Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two different bicycles. I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. +1 I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but because it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I suffer on steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said, anything that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough. Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* ... There is no way to get the range that was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs. I guess if the mountain bike is transported to the trail-head on a vehicle, and never ridden on-road, that you can get by without the high gears. Even regular 3x MTBs like mine tucker out at 28-30mph because the biggest ring is only 42T. On the last 4-5 miles home I sometimes wish it had 52T like my road bike. IOW 4x would be even better. Or coarse steps, that would be the optimum. That said, the front shifter on my mountain bike stopped going into high last Saturday, and I had to buy a replacement set of Deore shifters, $40 from REI. I opened up the old one but it was beyond my ability to fix it, so yesterday I changed the front shifter. Definitely can see the advantage of not having the extra complexity. But on the trail I was on, which was not steep except for a few short stretches, I wanted those high gears. Could have used the redneck shifter: A somewhat straight piece of a small branch with a 90 degree li'l branch (or a nail) sticking out the side. When a buddy's chain pretzeled and ripped off the front derailer that's how he shifted. It worked so well that he forgot to order a new derailer for a few months. Easy; not even expensive: http://www.abundantadventures.com/quads.html Joerg should note the Gorilla Headlock on that page. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
An innovative Cy cling company may design unique in no way a 'standard'
done at risk of ruin But the $$$ is not that large in small scale production. generally not so if yawl hungry. Good for evolution Good question where'the evo n why is it effective. Or is all the devo evo toyish ? Kinda looks toyish out here but there's the gravel bike geometry for the gravel crowd/market Clay anyone ? Grass ? Beach snow sawdust spiked tar gravel downhill uphill traverse talc various grades sand silicon Valley ... CHIP SEAL Like universals tire wall morphed into Spec bikes each Combo ? One from A one from B ahhhhh like sports/ touring ? All surfaces taken. There's a good evo devo channel. Pursued by JB no less right ? Or all frames must fit rider Tires will be seasonaly matched. Twilight riders will equip with lights, white or yallow clothing.. Foop |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
On 1/19/2018 4:48 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
Joerg wrote: On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote: On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote: https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/ Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two different bicycles. I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. +1 I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but because it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I suffer on steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said, anything that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough. ... There is no way to get the range that was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs. I guess if the mountain bike is transported to the trail-head on a vehicle, and never ridden on-road, that you can get by without the high gears. Even regular 3x MTBs like mine tucker out at 28-30mph because the biggest ring is only 42T. On the last 4-5 miles home I sometimes wish it had 52T like my road bike. IOW 4x would be even better. Or coarse steps, that would be the optimum. snip A friend of mine had a 3x9 drivetrain on his recumbent trike and decided to put a larger rear wheel on it, but didn't want to lose his lowest gear. The easiest solution for him was to build up the new rear wheel with a SRAM 3 speed hub that also took a 9 speed cassette. Add that to the 3 front chain rings and he had an 81 speed drivetrain. The gear range wasn't optimal and there was a lot of overlap, but it covered all the bases. Add a Schlumpf drive and go up to 162. http://www.haberstock-mobility.com/index.php/products.html |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
sms wrote:
I SPIT on the whole 1x movement. There is no way to get the range that was possible with 2x or 3x, even with a 10-42, and the rear derailleur has to take up a huge amount of chain between the high and low cogs. Well, not everyone uses their bikes to climb mountains and valleys. Here is pretty flat so I can definitely see the benefit with 1x and just a couple of sprockets back. Less complexity as you say and also less focus on having the right gear all the time, instead focus on riding the bike. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 5:24:15 PM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/ Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two different bicycles. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 The last 5-10 years they lost me with their ATB's. Can't think ever buying a new ATB. I'll stick to my 26 inch wheeled Rohloff equipped ATB and ride my Cross bike more and more for off road riding. Lou |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
not enough standards
lou.holtman wrote:
The last 5-10 years they lost me with their ATB's. Can't think ever buying a new ATB. ATB -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Standards; always room for one more! | AMuzi | Techniques | 26 | January 1st 18 05:30 PM |
Japanese standards | AMuzi | Techniques | 1 | November 25th 14 08:56 PM |
Australian Helmet standards | Walrus | Australia | 33 | September 20th 05 09:25 AM |
h*lm*t standards where's the web site? | Bryan | UK | 5 | August 18th 05 09:52 AM |
Driving standards | Tom | UK | 20 | February 11th 04 12:36 AM |