Kit 2 convert front of upright bike to 2 wheels?

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 3:49 AM, James wrote:
On 21/04/15 14:45, Joe Riel wrote:


I believe Jim Papadoupolous has more or less solved the problem in
the last few years; I've got the paper around here somewhere.


IIRC his is about bicycles that are "self stable" when in motion and
without a rider. Is that useful?

Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 4/21/2015 10:21 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.


I long ago decided that when I can't understand something, it's probably
art. (I think this applies to many of Gene's posts.)

But it also applies to a lot of things that people purchase, if you
sufficiently broaden the definition of "art" to include purchased
self-expression. And we allow it for those who buy a Picasso, so why not?

I think some of Compass's customers have fairly straightforward
technical explanations for their purchase choices - perhaps something
like "disks aren't as repairable if something goes wrong in the
boondocks" or "I want to fit any tooth count I choose." But I suspect
most of them are also buying into a certain retro aesthetic: "It reminds
me of the good old days when men were men and roads weren't paved." Or
whatever.

I don't think it's any less sensible than, say, the guy with the
basketball-shaped belly who spends an extra $1000 to drop four pounds
off the weight of his "racing" bike. Or the guy who buys a 20" wheel
with 72 radial spokes for his low rider bike. We all have our tastes,
our justifications and our rationalizations.

As some sage once said: Everybody thinks they're right.

And as Andrew's frequently reminded us, we're all allowed to buy what we
prefer.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/21/2015 10:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 10:21 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank
Krygowski wrote:


Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current)
limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he
says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/



I've wandered around that site a few times but never
looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into
the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that
are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank.
http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs.
http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get
it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire
randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the
caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.


I long ago decided that when I can't understand something,
it's probably art. (I think this applies to many of Gene's
posts.)

But it also applies to a lot of things that people purchase,
if you sufficiently broaden the definition of "art" to
include purchased self-expression. And we allow it for
those who buy a Picasso, so why not?

I think some of Compass's customers have fairly
straightforward technical explanations for their purchase
choices - perhaps something like "disks aren't as repairable
if something goes wrong in the boondocks" or "I want to fit
any tooth count I choose." But I suspect most of them are
also buying into a certain retro aesthetic: "It reminds me
of the good old days when men were men and roads weren't
paved." Or whatever.

I don't think it's any less sensible than, say, the guy with
the basketball-shaped belly who spends an extra $1000 to
drop four pounds off the weight of his "racing" bike. Or
the guy who buys a 20" wheel with 72 radial spokes for his
low rider bike. We all have our tastes, our justifications
and our rationalizations.

As some sage once said: Everybody thinks they're right.

And as Andrew's frequently reminded us, we're all allowed to
buy what we prefer.


Which is an important aspect of human culture. If everyone
were happy with the same thing there would be no innovation.
Admittedly, frenetic innovation has given us some
spectacular oddities but even making things which fail to be
popular or even functional is an important part of innovation.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

jbeattie writes:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 3:49 AM, James wrote:
On 21/04/15 14:45, Joe Riel wrote:


I believe Jim Papadoupolous has more or less solved the problem in
the last few years; I've got the paper around here somewhere.


IIRC his is about bicycles that are "self stable" when in motion and
without a rider. Is that useful?

Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the
Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a
3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other
crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I
don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring,
I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or
the problems with cantis.

I bought two of these:
http://www.compasscycle.com/lighting_led_tail_bulb.html

It's an LED retrofit bulb for old dynamo taillights. Works great. $20 is
only somewhat ridiculous. I'll admit it's of interest only to atavists.

--

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 10:21:56 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 3:49 AM, James wrote:
On 21/04/15 14:45, Joe Riel wrote:


I believe Jim Papadoupolous has more or less solved the problem in
the last few years; I've got the paper around here somewhere.


IIRC his is about bicycles that are "self stable" when in motion and
without a rider. Is that useful?

Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.

-- Jay Beattie.

EGADS! Look at how close those brakes are to the tires! Pick up anything in the tread of the front tire and you're liable to endo.

Cheers

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 8:54:12 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 10:21 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.


I long ago decided that when I can't understand something, it's probably
art. (I think this applies to many of Gene's posts.)

But it also applies to a lot of things that people purchase, if you
sufficiently broaden the definition of "art" to include purchased
self-expression. And we allow it for those who buy a Picasso, so why not?

I think some of Compass's customers have fairly straightforward
technical explanations for their purchase choices - perhaps something
like "disks aren't as repairable if something goes wrong in the
boondocks" or "I want to fit any tooth count I choose." But I suspect
most of them are also buying into a certain retro aesthetic: "It reminds
me of the good old days when men were men and roads weren't paved." Or
whatever.

I don't think it's any less sensible than, say, the guy with the
basketball-shaped belly who spends an extra $1000 to drop four pounds
off the weight of his "racing" bike. Or the guy who buys a 20" wheel
with 72 radial spokes for his low rider bike. We all have our tastes,
our justifications and our rationalizations.

As some sage once said: Everybody thinks they're right.

And as Andrew's frequently reminded us, we're all allowed to buy what we
prefer.

I don't disagree with any of that -- I just don't get it. If I were going the repro route, I would have picked a better original design for the crank -- or, if I were going to spend that kind of money, I'd find NOS TA.

Mafac Racers were $11/set. https://www.flickr.com/photos/zbills...57606789001880

I think $325 for a repro (perhaps with more tire clearance) is a bit much.

BTW, last weekend, I did see a guy on a light bike with full Guinness kit and a giant gut. At first, I was inclined to snicker . . . but then it all made sense. The guy clearly loves his beer. As for the bike, everyone has a light bike these days. I've given up being critical.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 11:12:17 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 10:21:56 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 3:49 AM, James wrote:
On 21/04/15 14:45, Joe Riel wrote:


I believe Jim Papadoupolous has more or less solved the problem in
the last few years; I've got the paper around here somewhere.


IIRC his is about bicycles that are "self stable" when in motion and
without a rider. Is that useful?

Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.

-- Jay Beattie.

EGADS! Look at how close those brakes are to the tires! Pick up anything in the tread of the front tire and you're liable to endo.

Cheers

Now that I look more carefully, I was too quick to judge. These are not ordinary Mafac Racers but rather the boss-mounted version that takes a peculiar, cut-down boss:

"The brakes require mounting posts that are brazed onto the frame. The posts are not included, but available separately. These brakes do not fit on posts for cantilever brakes.

The brakes come with all hardware, straddle cable roller, Kool-Stop salmon-colored brake pads. They are available with standard mounting bolts, as well as with 2 special bolts that have a forward extension to mount a rack."

So, for all that money, you get a non-standard boss-mounted brake with no levers. Sign me up!

-- Jay Beattie.

On 4/21/2015 2:15 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 11:12:17 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 10:21:56 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 3:49 AM, James wrote:
On 21/04/15 14:45, Joe Riel wrote:


I believe Jim Papadoupolous has more or less solved the problem in
the last few years; I've got the paper around here somewhere.


IIRC his is about bicycles that are "self stable" when in motion and
without a rider. Is that useful?

Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www.compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.

-- Jay Beattie.

EGADS! Look at how close those brakes are to the tires! Pick up anything in the tread of the front tire and you're liable to endo.

Cheers

Now that I look more carefully, I was too quick to judge. These are not ordinary Mafac Racers but rather the boss-mounted version that takes a peculiar, cut-down boss:

"The brakes require mounting posts that are brazed onto the frame. The posts are not included, but available separately. These brakes do not fit on posts for cantilever brakes.

The brakes come with all hardware, straddle cable roller, Kool-Stop salmon-colored brake pads. They are available with standard mounting bolts, as well as with 2 special bolts that have a forward extension to mount a rack."

So, for all that money, you get a non-standard boss-mounted brake with no levers. Sign me up!

-- Jay Beattie.


An odd corner of 'standards', that.

Modern cantilever/ linear brakes use the Mafac cantilever
frame boss format, standardized some 80 years ago. The other
format frame boss, for the neo-retro Mafac Raid style you
linked and also for U-Brakes which are current for
freestyle, is also a Mafac design.

There were at least two other frame mounted brake post
designs which failed to catch on, so now it's French or go home!

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 3:15:24 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 11:12:17 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 10:21:56 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/21/2015 3:49 AM, James wrote:
On 21/04/15 14:45, Joe Riel wrote:


I believe Jim Papadoupolous has more or less solved the problem in
the last few years; I've got the paper around here somewhere.


IIRC his is about bicycles that are "self stable" when in motion and
without a rider. Is that useful?

Jim Papadoupolous is pretty clear about the (current) limitations of his
work. He's been working mostly on self-stability, but he says
"self-stability is not the same as nice handling qualities."

There's good discussion at
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/...orks-together/


I've wandered around that site a few times but never looked at the Compass Bicycles page. Gads -- forward into the past! $500 for a 3-arm triple crank with rings that are (AFAIK) unusable on any other crank. http://www..compasscycle.com/cranks_rh_triple.html

$325 for repro Mafacs. http://www.compasscycle.com/brakesCmCpl.html I don't get it. If I were in to super hard-core fat-tire randonneuring, I'd get a bike with discs. Skip the caliper brake clearance issues or the problems with cantis.

-- Jay Beattie.

EGADS! Look at how close those brakes are to the tires! Pick up anything in the tread of the front tire and you're liable to endo.

Cheers

Now that I look more carefully, I was too quick to judge. These are not ordinary Mafac Racers but rather the boss-mounted version that takes a peculiar, cut-down boss:

"The brakes require mounting posts that are brazed onto the frame. The posts are not included, but available separately. These brakes do not fit on posts for cantilever brakes.

The brakes come with all hardware, straddle cable roller, Kool-Stop salmon-colored brake pads. They are available with standard mounting bolts, as well as with 2 special bolts that have a forward extension to mount a rack."

So, for all that money, you get a non-standard boss-mounted brake with no levers. Sign me up!

-- Jay Beattie.

With tthe tires shown in those images there doesn't look to be much more than one millimetre of clearance between the top of the tire and the brake arms.

Cheers

On 4/21/2015 2:11 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:


I bought two of these:
http://www.compasscycle.com/lighting_led_tail_bulb.html

It's an LED retrofit bulb for old dynamo taillights. Works great. $20 is
only somewhat ridiculous. I'll admit it's of interest only to atavists.

I'll raise you on the "ridiculous" part. I made my own.

See, a friend gave me some super LEDs a few years back. Just to play
around, I put one of them into an old taillight base. Saved myself $20
(or less) and only took me about, oh, maybe two hours of work.

Since I'm retired, I get to waste my time as I like. :-)


--
- Frank Krygowski