Dazed and Confused

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:00:00 +0100, Simon Brooke wrote:

You're confusing number of gears with range.

I do wish people would stop telling me I'm confused about gears.

I'm not in the least. I don't even need a gear calculator, I could easily make
my own, or even do the calculations in my head if necessary.

It's still quite clear that an 11-32 with a 42 will not give me the same range
as an 11-32 with a 48-26 chainring set. In fact, it won't even be close.

a 2.9 range in the first case, and a 5.3 range in the secind case.


Well, that's true. But how you spend money is something to consider. If
you go for the top bike from a cheap brand, what you typically get is
good components on a poor frame. It'll be low maintenance for a good
while because those good components will last a long time, but you'll
never really be able to upgrade it and it will still have that poor
frame for the life of the bike.

By contrast if you get a bottom-end bike from a good maker you will
often find you get poor quality components on a high quality frame
(Cannondale is a particular case in point). The poor quality components
will wear out much more quickly, but if you replace them as they wear
with better quality ones then over time you'll end up with a really
good quality bike.

So given that I'm consdering increasing the budget to £450, to cover the
Ridgeback Supernova, are you saying that's a 'cheap' frame?

Or are the components not up to much?

Is Ridgeback a 'cheap' brand?

All this talk about spending hundreds of pounds and still having to make a
choice between either a cheap frame or inferior components just brings on the
"stressed and depressed" feelings again.

And to think that someone actually had the cheek to say that this nightmare of
trying to choose a bike was in some way 'fun'!

I had a hundred quid bike that lasted for ten years without any repairs.

Surely, a £450 bike should be able to manage 5 years without the bits wearing
out? (except tyres of course).

Paul D wrote:

: Surely, a £450 bike should be able to manage 5 years without the bits wearing
: out? (except tyres of course).

As ever, it depends. If you only ride it in summer, then yes. If you ride it
in winter and all year then you'll get through at least a couple of chains, maybe a
cassette, a few jockey wheels, some tyres, some inner tubes. Maybe a saddle
and some bottle cages.

Nothing lasts for ever.

Good, full length mudguards do really help though.


--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
Don't get me wrong, perl is an OK operating system, but it lacks a
lightweight scripting language -- Walter Dnes

Paul D wrote:

It's still quite clear that an 11-32 with a 42 will not give me the sam=
e range
as an 11-32 with a 48-26 chainring set. In fact, it won't even be close=
=2E
a 2.9 range in the first case, and a 5.3 range in the secind case.

But as has been pointed out it's the Actual Useful Gears you have=20
available on the bike that Really Matters. A 26 - 32 gives you the=20
sort of gearing that is only generally much useful up very steep hills=20
and/or with heavy luggage. If you don't use it there isn't much point=20
in having it.

Is Ridgeback a 'cheap' brand?

Depends how you define "cheap". In automotive terms I'd put them as=20
about Ford. They are well respected and make a range from fairly low=20
cost but good value free of gimmicks up to reasonably well respected=20
performance mid-range.

And to think that someone actually had the cheek to say that this night=
mare of
trying to choose a bike was in some way 'fun'!

If you dwell on the negatives of shopping it's a depressing experience.=20
If you dwell on coming out of it with Something Very Shiny then it's=20
potentially fun. If you see a test ride as a pain you've got to go=20
through then it's a pain, if you see it as a chance to try out lots of=20
Really Good Toys then it's fun. Go into something convinced it's a=20
chore and it will be. It seems you are, where the rest of us revel in=20
the thought of a new bike, because we know it's a precursor to years of=20
pleasure and useful service.

I had a hundred quid bike that lasted for ten years without any repairs=
=2E

Though if you'd done more repairs and maintenance over that time it=20
should still be going strong, and you wouldn't be in your current=20
situation. Not only it wouldn't be dying, it would be more or less as=20
good as the day you bought it.

Surely, a =A3450 bike should be able to manage 5 years without the bits=
wearing
out? (except tyres of course).

Don't forget the brake blocks... Beyond that, it depends how well it's=20
cared for. If you ride through a winter with lots of road gritting and=20
never clean the chain then the chain will be rather inflexible, and=20
using a rusty chain on a gear block will wear it far faster than a chain =

in good repair, and so on. Leave broken spokes unfixed and sooner or=20
later the rim won't be able to take any more and will die, keep any=20
breaks fixed ASAP and it'll be fine. There isn't /much/ that needs to=20
be done to keep an okay bike running well, but it's more than sticking=20
it in the shed until next time you ride.

Pete.
--=20
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

(Paul D) writes:

It's still quite clear that an 11-32 with a 42 will not give me the same range
as an 11-32 with a 48-26 chainring set. In fact, it won't even be close.

And now compare the 11-32 with a 48-26 chainring with 9-52 with a 42
chainring.


Roos

Paul D wrote:

And to think that someone actually had the cheek to say that this nightmare of
trying to choose a bike was in some way 'fun'!

Well pardon my cheek. I accept from all you say that you are having a
tough time reconciling some of the conflicting issues you identify. I
don't doubt that for you they are serious issues and I hope some of the
many responses you've had here have helped.

OTOH, I think I'd be right in saying that for many if not most cyclists
the opprtunity to replace a bike or add to the collection would be seen
as a positive one,aka "fun".

--
Brian G

Paul D wrote:
I do wish people would stop telling me I'm confused about gears.

You give a very good impression of someone who is confused about gears.

It's still quite clear that an 11-32 with a 42 will not give me the
same range
as an 11-32 with a 48-26 chainring set. In fact, it won't even be
close.

No, of course it won't, but you seem to be missing the point that it is
easily possible to acquire the range of gearing you want on a bike with
a single chainring, providing you choose the right size of chainring
and fit a wide-ranging cassette.

The Courier Race as described above by Simon actually has a wider
gearing range and a higher top gear than my road bike, which has a
triple chainset.

QED.

I could easily increase the range on my bike by changing the 14-25
cassette for an 11-32, but for my needs the closer spacing between
gears is preferable to that wider range.

Your needs are in the opposite direction, so I would endorse what
everyone else is saying viz the appropriateness of the EBC Courier. It
sounds eminently suitable for your requirements.

And to think that someone actually had the cheek to say that this
nightmare of
trying to choose a bike was in some way 'fun'!

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing", and "Ignorance is bliss" are
the cliches that spring to mind.

I had a hundred quid bike that lasted for ten years without any
repairs.

Surely, a =A3450 bike should be able to manage 5 years without the
bits wearing
out? (except tyres of course).

This problem is not exclusive to the world of cycling - washing
machines, televisions, you name it, they are all produced to a much
higher technical specification these days and for a much lower price,
but if you want to buy something that's built to last you have to spend
a /lot/ of money. (That said, a reasonably decent steel frame should
last you a lifetime and needn't be that expensive.)

And don't forget inflation - =A3450 now is probably worth significantly
less than your =A3100 was back then.

d=2E

"Paul D" wrote in message
...
I posted a thread yesterday, entited; "stressed and depressed", because
that's
just about how I felt trying to come to some sort of a decision about
upgrading
my bike.

Today, despite quite a few people posting advice, and a definite flow of
knowledge in my direction, I am just as stressed, and even more confused.

Nothing I've ever tried to buy before; hi-fi's, computers, cars, flats,
houses,
has left me feeling so helpless in the face of such an array of
conflicting and
disjointed information.

I'm seriously thinking about giving up cycling, and using either the car
or a
pogo stick to get around.

What you are experiencing is known as "didactic decision making" -that is,
your focus is no longer on the original decision (what bike?).

Your focus has transferred to the gathering of information, and is clouding
your judgement.

You have moved from "What bike?" to "Should I really buy a bike at all?".

I suggest some retail therapy - go to your local bike shop, and ask them to
recommend two or three vehicles that will meet your needs (note: NOT the
technical requirements. You should ignore these for now!). Try them out,
select the one that feels best for you, and spend some money!

--
MatSav

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:29:09 GMT, (Paul D) wrote:

All this talk about spending hundreds of pounds and still having to make a
choice between either a cheap frame or inferior components just brings on the
"stressed and depressed" feelings again.

yeahbut ... that's true of just about any major purchase. I felt the
same working up to buying a digital camera, and I'm feeling much the
same about impending laptop buying. As I see it, if one is not
already well versed in the field of bikes or computers or whatever,
there are basically 2 options:
1. Get well versed. Take advice from friends and interweb strangers,
read magazines and articles, mither the people in your local
specialist shops, until you feel like you know what you're doing.
or
2. Go to shop, close eyes, cross fingers and throw your credit card
at the problem.

happy shopping :-)

Simon Brooke wrote:
in message , Paul D
combinations. And then you say the lower gears are too low to be useful
to you. So you're probably _now_ using only five or six different
gears. The Courier Race has, as you say, only eight gears, but they're
rationally spaced with no overlap so they're eight usable different
gears.

Another option would be an 8 speed hub gear. People seem to be less
rude about the Halford's Subway 8 than they are about Halfords in
general, and there's bound to be a Halfords near you, though not
necessarily one with staff that know anything about their bikes.
Hub gears generally need less maintaining and adjusting than derailleur
gears, and their chains generally last longer. On the other hand the
Courier is cheaper, and possibly better in other ways (the Halfords
web page doesn't give a detailed spec).
http://www.halfords.com/opd_product_...type=0&cat=144

in message , Paul D
') wrote:

So given that I'm consdering increasing the budget to £450, to cover
the Ridgeback Supernova, are you saying that's a 'cheap' frame?

Or are the components not up to much?

Is Ridgeback a 'cheap' brand?

That's my prejudice, yes. I could be wrong. I mean, compare it to a
Cannondale Adventure 400 which you should be able to pick up for about
the same price (05 models a bit more expensive, 04 models a bit cheaper
if you can still find them).
URL:http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/ce/model-4AS4.html
You'll find the frame on the Cannondale is much nicer, and the kit
generally not quite as good.

All this talk about spending hundreds of pounds and still having to
make a choice between either a cheap frame or inferior components just
brings on the "stressed and depressed" feelings again.

And to think that someone actually had the cheek to say that this
nightmare of trying to choose a bike was in some way 'fun'!

It _is_ fun, or should be. Wander around bike shops looking at nice toys
until you see the one that you absolutely have to have, and then buy
it.

I had a hundred quid bike that lasted for ten years without any
repairs.

Surely, a £450 bike should be able to manage 5 years without the bits
wearing out? (except tyres of course).

It depends what you're doing with it! If you're thrashing it around a
forest, across rocky screes, through deep mud and over dusty gravel
paths, then substantial transmission wear in a few thousand miles use
is inevitable, no matter how good the parts. If you only use it in an
indoor velodrome, then nothing may wear out for donkeys years.

I've spent part of this evening stripping and cleaning the transmission
on my good road bike; and I've been amazed how little wear it shows, as
compared to a mountain bike transmission of similar age. But roads are
a relatively nice environment, particularly for a bike which doesn't
get used when the roads are salted or when it's ****ing with rain.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
,/| _.--''^``-...___.._.,;
/, \'. _-' ,--,,,--'''
{ \ `_-'' ' /
`;;' ; ; ;
._..--'' ._,,, _..' .;.'
(,_....----''' (,..--''