Noise from new Sunrace cassette

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 22:17:07 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

Me = bicycles, her = sewing machines. Nuff said.

Me, two bikes, two sewing machines. Two *functioning* sewing
machines. We use my late mother-in-law's cabinet model as a sideboard
in the kitchen/dining room. And the portable Kenmore found in the
barn is stashed in my closet.

And two functioning bikes -- there's a Raleigh Carleton frame in the
barn attic. Must get around to seeing whether our great-nephew wants
it.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

On 28/11/18 12:28 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/27/2018 7:26 PM, Joerg wrote:

You can get up to impressive speeds with 52/11 downhill, pedaling full
blast. On Sunday I couldn't resist but throttled back when the front
end started a hard shimmy.

Got numbers?

As has been pointed out before, 52-11 is about 127 gear inches, or 10
meters development. That's about 25% higher than almost any cyclists
really need, or can really use.

It would give 30 mph at just 80 rpm if you could spin it. But on level
ground, the air resistance is so great you almost certainly can't
produce enough power to maintain that speed for more than 15 seconds at
a time. And on any downhill where it might otherwise be useful, you'll
gain more speed by getting in a tight aero tuck and coasting.

In other words, reducing your drag coefficient is more beneficial than
pedaling.



In a race I remember wishing for an 11 when the bunch was rolling turns
on a long slight down hill with a stiff tail wind at over 70km/h.

That's about 20m/s and ~2 revs per second or 120rpm with a 53/12 (9.28m).

These days I have a 53/11 biggest gear, and I have used it for some fast
(for me) sprints.

But generally on steep descents, I prefer to pedal up to about 80km/h,
then form an aero tuck and dive down the hill even faster.

--
JS

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:04:28 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/27/2018 7:56 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:31:22 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/27/2018 6:54 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:07:10 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-11-26 19:43, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 14:24:45 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

[...]

Speaking of hacking cassettes. I have one bicycle wheel that has a
9-speed hacked cassette with a corncob cluster 11 to 19 teeth being
shifted with friction downtube shifters which is good because one of
the cogs I could not find on my spare 9 speed cassettes was take from
and 8 speed cassette. I have no problems shifting to or from any of
those cogs. It's a fun bike to ride on gently rolling hills.

On my long distance road bike I have the Campagnolo Veloce 30 - 42 -
52 triple crank and find that 30 teeth ring useful at times in strong
headwinds, steep hills or if I'm really tired.

However, I think some people like Joerg simply enjoy making something
work with something it wasn't designed to work with.


Oh yeah. Sometimes you get a little bonus in the wake. For example, this
new cassette came with 11T and 13T as smallest cogs. Because of its
construction these had to stay in unless I'd do a more serious hack on
the big grinder. Turns out that 52/11 acts like an overdrive in a car
and if the wind picks up a wee bit I can shift to 13T. Currently I am
missing 15T so I accelerate for the last bit on the 18T, then shift to
the 13T for a "mild overdrive". It suits me well because I am not used
to spinning.


Interesting. A 52/11 with a 23mm tire at a moderate 90 RPM crank speed
is about 54 KPH or 33 MPH. I read that TdF level riders will ride a 36
K time trial in the 29 - 31 MPH range.


Then there are people who prefer not to ride longer distance at 90rpm. I
often ride at 20mph and the resulting lower rpm feels just right.

While "spinning" initially seems difficult it really isn't and it is
the most efficient method of powering a bicycle.
(horse) Power = RPM x Force

Perhaps I shouldn't be pedantic, but it's really RPM x Torque.
Alternately, it's velocity x Force. (Yes, with appropriate conversion
factors.)

Well yes, or many other formula :-) I was trying to simplify things by
talking about RPM, i.e. velocity, and force on the pedals, i.e.
torque.

Somewhat similar to Watt's original calculation with the horse and the
mill wheel. :-)


No matter what gear, we cannot raise 33,000lb one foot in
one minute.

You are right. But the calculation is Ft. Lbs. and minutes and a
trained athlete can generate as much as 3.5 H.P. ( Usain Bolt ) for
very short periods of time.


cheers,

John B.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/27/2018 6:54 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:07:10 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-11-26 19:43, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 14:24:45 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

[...]

Speaking of hacking cassettes. I have one bicycle wheel that has a
9-speed hacked cassette with a corncob cluster 11 to 19 teeth being
shifted with friction downtube shifters which is good because one of
the cogs I could not find on my spare 9 speed cassettes was take from
and 8 speed cassette. I have no problems shifting to or from any of
those cogs. It's a fun bike to ride on gently rolling hills.

On my long distance road bike I have the Campagnolo Veloce 30 - 42 -
52 triple crank and find that 30 teeth ring useful at times in strong
headwinds, steep hills or if I'm really tired.

However, I think some people like Joerg simply enjoy making something
work with something it wasn't designed to work with.


Oh yeah. Sometimes you get a little bonus in the wake. For example, this
new cassette came with 11T and 13T as smallest cogs. Because of its
construction these had to stay in unless I'd do a more serious hack on
the big grinder. Turns out that 52/11 acts like an overdrive in a car
and if the wind picks up a wee bit I can shift to 13T. Currently I am
missing 15T so I accelerate for the last bit on the 18T, then shift to
the 13T for a "mild overdrive". It suits me well because I am not used
to spinning.


Interesting. A 52/11 with a 23mm tire at a moderate 90 RPM crank speed
is about 54 KPH or 33 MPH. I read that TdF level riders will ride a 36
K time trial in the 29 - 31 MPH range.


Then there are people who prefer not to ride longer distance at 90rpm. I
often ride at 20mph and the resulting lower rpm feels just right.

While "spinning" initially seems difficult it really isn't and it is
the most efficient method of powering a bicycle.
(horse) Power = RPM x Force

Perhaps I shouldn't be pedantic, but it's really RPM x Torque.
Alternately, it's velocity x Force. (Yes, with appropriate conversion
factors.)



Hell, Frank. If you just HAVE to be pedantic, I suppose mechanical
engineering would be the right place for you to start. :-)

AMuzi wrote:
On 11/27/2018 7:56 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:31:22 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/27/2018 6:54 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:07:10 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-11-26 19:43, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 14:24:45 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

[...]

Speaking of hacking cassettes. I have one bicycle wheel that has a
9-speed hacked cassette with a corncob cluster 11 to 19 teeth being
shifted with friction downtube shifters which is good because one of
the cogs I could not find on my spare 9 speed cassettes was take from
and 8 speed cassette. I have no problems shifting to or from any of
those cogs. It's a fun bike to ride on gently rolling hills.

On my long distance road bike I have the Campagnolo Veloce 30 - 42 -
52 triple crank and find that 30 teeth ring useful at times in strong
headwinds, steep hills or if I'm really tired.

However, I think some people like Joerg simply enjoy making something
work with something it wasn't designed to work with.


Oh yeah. Sometimes you get a little bonus in the wake. For example, this
new cassette came with 11T and 13T as smallest cogs. Because of its
construction these had to stay in unless I'd do a more serious hack on
the big grinder. Turns out that 52/11 acts like an overdrive in a car
and if the wind picks up a wee bit I can shift to 13T. Currently I am
missing 15T so I accelerate for the last bit on the 18T, then shift to
the 13T for a "mild overdrive". It suits me well because I am not used
to spinning.


Interesting. A 52/11 with a 23mm tire at a moderate 90 RPM crank speed
is about 54 KPH or 33 MPH. I read that TdF level riders will ride a 36
K time trial in the 29 - 31 MPH range.


Then there are people who prefer not to ride longer distance at 90rpm. I
often ride at 20mph and the resulting lower rpm feels just right.

While "spinning" initially seems difficult it really isn't and it is
the most efficient method of powering a bicycle.
(horse) Power = RPM x Force

Perhaps I shouldn't be pedantic, but it's really RPM x Torque.
Alternately, it's velocity x Force. (Yes, with appropriate conversion
factors.)

Well yes, or many other formula :-) I was trying to simplify things by
talking about RPM, i.e. velocity, and force on the pedals, i.e.
torque.

Somewhat similar to Watt's original calculation with the horse and the
mill wheel. :-)


No matter what gear, we cannot raise 33,000lb one foot in
one minute.


1 hp = 746 W, which is within the range of a track cyclist. There's a video
floating around of a track cyclist making toast using a cycle powered
generator.

Anyway, let's assume 150 mm cranks, a 180 lb cyclist, and a cadence of 100
rpm. If you're standing on the cranks, you're effectively lifting 180 lbs
one foot twice for every rotation of the cranks, so 180 lbs x 1 ft x 2 per
revolution x 100 rev/min = 36,000 ft-lbs/min.

There's an integral of a cosine missing from the equation, so I'm
overestimating things, but 1 hp for 1 minute is within reach for homo
sapiens. Remember that the horsepower was originally what a horse could
deliver continuously over a work day.

On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 6:41:15 PM UTC-5, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 15:36:46 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/27/2018 1:02 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 10:14:23 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
Snipped

Unfortunately not. I'll see how that fares this week. If I really want
that 15T I'll probably take out the 28T instead. The bike only supports
7-speed unless I'd go to a smaller chain. With friction shifters a
smaller chain and more cogs would not be fun.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I have two bicycles with 9 speed clusters, chain and old school friction shifters. I can shift gears on either bicycle with no problems.

YMMV and probably does.

My folding bike has a 9 speed cluster and bar end shifters that can be
set to either index or friction. Sometimes the folding messes with the
indexing for a while, so I just use the friction setting. It's no
problem at all.

But I know it wouldn't work for Joerg.

Both of my "Bangkok" bikes have down tube friction shifters and I find
no problems in shifting. I read once in a magazine that someone asked
Eddy Merckx, who probably rode much of his career with friction
shifters, if he had ever missed a shift and he replied, "I haven't
missed a shift since I was 12 years old".


cheers,

John B.

I heard that it was "since I was 8 years old." Merckx is said too have like friction shifters because he could use any wheel swapped in a race. Don't know if that alleged comment by him is true.

Sometimes when riding my 9 speed cluster Campy Ergo bike after riding my downtube shifter bike quite a bit I try to shift by reaching to the downtube for the shifter. Muscle memory I guess.

Cheers

On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 6:54:45 PM UTC-5, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:07:10 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-11-26 19:43, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 14:24:45 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

[...]

Speaking of hacking cassettes. I have one bicycle wheel that has a
9-speed hacked cassette with a corncob cluster 11 to 19 teeth being
shifted with friction downtube shifters which is good because one of
the cogs I could not find on my spare 9 speed cassettes was take from
and 8 speed cassette. I have no problems shifting to or from any of
those cogs. It's a fun bike to ride on gently rolling hills.

On my long distance road bike I have the Campagnolo Veloce 30 - 42 -
52 triple crank and find that 30 teeth ring useful at times in strong
headwinds, steep hills or if I'm really tired.

However, I think some people like Joerg simply enjoy making something
work with something it wasn't designed to work with.


Oh yeah. Sometimes you get a little bonus in the wake. For example, this
new cassette came with 11T and 13T as smallest cogs. Because of its
construction these had to stay in unless I'd do a more serious hack on
the big grinder. Turns out that 52/11 acts like an overdrive in a car
and if the wind picks up a wee bit I can shift to 13T. Currently I am
missing 15T so I accelerate for the last bit on the 18T, then shift to
the 13T for a "mild overdrive". It suits me well because I am not used
to spinning.


Interesting. A 52/11 with a 23mm tire at a moderate 90 RPM crank speed
is about 54 KPH or 33 MPH. I read that TdF level riders will ride a 36
K time trial in the 29 - 31 MPH range.


Then there are people who prefer not to ride longer distance at 90rpm. I
often ride at 20mph and the resulting lower rpm feels just right.

While "spinning" initially seems difficult it really isn't and it is
the most efficient method of powering a bicycle.
(horse) Power = RPM x Force

(and, yes I know there is a constant used to convert to some specified
output value :-)


cheers,

John B.

Not to mention that spinning in a light gear is a lot easier on the knees than mashing along in a heavy gear.

Cheers

On 28/11/18 3:27 pm, Ralph Barone wrote:


1 hp = 746 W, which is within the range of a track cyclist.

There are plenty of road cyclists who can produce 500W for 5 minutes,
and certainly 746 W for shorter times.

--
JS

On 11/27/2018 10:01 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:04:28 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/27/2018 7:56 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:31:22 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/27/2018 6:54 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:07:10 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-11-26 19:43, John B. slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 14:24:45 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

[...]

Speaking of hacking cassettes. I have one bicycle wheel that has a
9-speed hacked cassette with a corncob cluster 11 to 19 teeth being
shifted with friction downtube shifters which is good because one of
the cogs I could not find on my spare 9 speed cassettes was take from
and 8 speed cassette. I have no problems shifting to or from any of
those cogs. It's a fun bike to ride on gently rolling hills.

On my long distance road bike I have the Campagnolo Veloce 30 - 42 -
52 triple crank and find that 30 teeth ring useful at times in strong
headwinds, steep hills or if I'm really tired.

However, I think some people like Joerg simply enjoy making something
work with something it wasn't designed to work with.


Oh yeah. Sometimes you get a little bonus in the wake. For example, this
new cassette came with 11T and 13T as smallest cogs. Because of its
construction these had to stay in unless I'd do a more serious hack on
the big grinder. Turns out that 52/11 acts like an overdrive in a car
and if the wind picks up a wee bit I can shift to 13T. Currently I am
missing 15T so I accelerate for the last bit on the 18T, then shift to
the 13T for a "mild overdrive". It suits me well because I am not used
to spinning.


Interesting. A 52/11 with a 23mm tire at a moderate 90 RPM crank speed
is about 54 KPH or 33 MPH. I read that TdF level riders will ride a 36
K time trial in the 29 - 31 MPH range.


Then there are people who prefer not to ride longer distance at 90rpm. I
often ride at 20mph and the resulting lower rpm feels just right.

While "spinning" initially seems difficult it really isn't and it is
the most efficient method of powering a bicycle.
(horse) Power = RPM x Force

Perhaps I shouldn't be pedantic, but it's really RPM x Torque.
Alternately, it's velocity x Force. (Yes, with appropriate conversion
factors.)

Well yes, or many other formula :-) I was trying to simplify things by
talking about RPM, i.e. velocity, and force on the pedals, i.e.
torque.

Somewhat similar to Watt's original calculation with the horse and the
mill wheel. :-)


No matter what gear, we cannot raise 33,000lb one foot in
one minute.

You are right. But the calculation is Ft. Lbs. and minutes and a
trained athlete can generate as much as 3.5 H.P. ( Usain Bolt ) for
very short periods of time.


To get such high output from a human one needs to consider
very short duration:

https://www.physicsforums.com/thread...n-power.58140/

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

On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 5:32:52 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/27/2018 7:59 PM, John B. slocomb wrote:

The problem, at least my problem, with spinning is that without a
meter to tell you how fast you are pedaling it is pretty hard to
maintain a constant spin rate. One could, I suppose, calculate the
bike speed in some gear at some pedal rate and then use the
speedometer to try and maintain a constant pedal rate. Or do what I
did and convert a speedometer to a rev meter.

There are cyclometers available with cadence displays. An extra switch &
magnet set are fitted to the cranks. We've got one on our tandem.

In the modern world, cadence data is produced by an accelerometer on your crank and sent to your sunglasses wirelessly via Bluetooth or ANT -- along with data from your heart rate monitor, orbiting satellite, passing cyclists and the Wall Street Journal. https://everysight.com/ Perfect gift for the holiday season!

My son just gave me a Stages head unit, but I have yet to put it on my bike.. I ride with other people who have computers and prefer the social aspect and surprise of learning distance/time/elevation at the end of the ride. It is usually depressing -- "we only went 32.6 miles?"

Speaking of the modern era, I did not see anyone exiting my building last night who was not staring at a phone. I have a new rule of relegation: if you are in an elevator staring at your phone, and the door opens, I am getting out before you -- whether you are man, woman or child. Same goes with getting on.

-- Jay Beattie.