Running cassette and chain until both totally shot

"Kinky Cowboy" wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:12:47 -0800 (PST), MajorBob
wrote:

This is part of sort of an experiment on just how cheap you can keep a
bike going. I'm a cycle commuter (4,000 miles/year in wet sandy
Florida on a recumbent - 300 links!) and hope to write a book soon
about a "whole life view" (exercise, time, money spent, health,
happiness, taxes, subsidies, etc.) of transportation "Moving at the
speed of life".

If you want to maximise the life of your transmission, sell the
recumbnet [sic] and buy an ordinary; you won't look any more stupid,
and you'll have no chain at all. You'll still get overtaken on the
hills by people on safety cycles.[...]

And you may severely injure yourself or die when you do a header while
trying to brake on the downhill. There is a good reason why the ordinary
is not longer produced or ridden (except as a curiosity item).

Falling at low speed on the ordinary or even the standard upright can
produce serious injury, while similar falls from the recumbent barely
hurt for a second or two.

Experience indicates that chain wear rate is proportional to chain
length, so the recumbent rider spends three (3) times as much to
purchase a replacement chain, but that chain lasts three (3) times
longer than the chain on an upright.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
"Kinky Cowboy" wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:12:47 -0800 (PST), MajorBob
wrote:

This is part of sort of an experiment on just how cheap you can keep a
bike going. I'm a cycle commuter (4,000 miles/year in wet sandy
Florida on a recumbent - 300 links!) and hope to write a book soon
about a "whole life view" (exercise, time, money spent, health,
happiness, taxes, subsidies, etc.) of transportation "Moving at the
speed of life".

If you want to maximise the life of your transmission, sell the
recumbnet [sic] and buy an ordinary; you won't look any more stupid,
and you'll have no chain at all. You'll still get overtaken on the
hills by people on safety cycles.[...]

And you may severely injure yourself or die when you do a header while
trying to brake on the downhill. There is a good reason why the ordinary
is not longer produced or ridden (except as a curiosity item).

Falling at low speed on the ordinary or even the standard upright can
produce serious injury, while similar falls from the recumbent barely hurt
for a second or two.

Experience indicates that chain wear rate is proportional to chain length,
so the recumbent rider spends three (3) times as much to purchase a
replacement chain, but that chain lasts three (3) times longer than the
chain on an upright.

There are practically no expenses at all to keep a bicycle going forever if
you don't mind it being a clunker. Of course, if you want it to always look
and act like new, then you might possibly entail some expenses from time to
time. But compared to any motor vehicle, a bicycle is dirt cheap to own and
to operate. I even think Wal-Mart bicycles are more than good enough for 90%
of mankind.

An ordinary is an extremely dangerous bicycle for anyone to ride. Leave them
to circus clowns. The most expensive thing you can do these days is to have
to go to an emergency room at a hospital after falling off an ordinary. Now
we are talking about some real money!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
"Kinky Cowboy" wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:12:47 -0800 (PST), MajorBob
wrote:

This is part of sort of an experiment on just how cheap you can keep a
bike going. I'm a cycle commuter (4,000 miles/year in wet sandy
Florida on a recumbent - 300 links!) and hope to write a book soon
about a "whole life view" (exercise, time, money spent, health,
happiness, taxes, subsidies, etc.) of transportation "Moving at the
speed of life".
If you want to maximise the life of your transmission, sell the
recumbnet [sic] and buy an ordinary; you won't look any more stupid,
and you'll have no chain at all. You'll still get overtaken on the
hills by people on safety cycles.[...]
And you may severely injure yourself or die when you do a header while
trying to brake on the downhill. There is a good reason why the ordinary
is not longer produced or ridden (except as a curiosity item).

Falling at low speed on the ordinary or even the standard upright can
produce serious injury, while similar falls from the recumbent barely hurt
for a second or two.

Experience indicates that chain wear rate is proportional to chain length,
so the recumbent rider spends three (3) times as much to purchase a
replacement chain, but that chain lasts three (3) times longer than the
chain on an upright.

There are practically no expenses at all to keep a bicycle going forever if
you don't mind it being a clunker. Of course, if you want it to always look
and act like new, then you might possibly entail some expenses from time to
time. But compared to any motor vehicle, a bicycle is dirt cheap to own and
to operate. I even think Wal-Mart bicycles are more than good enough for 90%
of mankind.

Well, if you decide to tour the US self-supported on dirt roads and
worse, even an expensive trike with good quality components will require
a lot of maintenance:
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?o=3Tzut&doc_id=998&v=q0.

An ordinary is an extremely dangerous bicycle for anyone to ride. Leave them
to circus clowns.

Or Martin Krieg: http://www.bikeroute.com/MartinKrieg.php.

The most expensive thing you can do these days is to have
to go to an emergency room at a hospital after falling off an ordinary. Now
we are talking about some real money!

I discovered back in the early 1980's that even a low speed fall from an
upright could produce rather unpleasant injuries. A much higher speed
crash in an impromptu lowracer race only produced minor scrapes and
bruises, since I started out so close to the ground.

Ordinaries should come with ejection seats and parachutes.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll

Kinky Cowboy wrote: If you want to maximise the life of your transmission,
sell the
recumbnet [sic] and buy an ordinary; you won't look any more stupid,
and you'll have no chain at all. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Tom Sherman wrote: And you may severely injure yourself or die when you do
a header while
trying to brake on the downhill. There is a good reason why the ordinary
is not longer produced or ridden (except as a curiosity item).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wasn't Kinky's comment meant to be tongue in cheek?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Tom Sherman: Experience indicates that chain wear rate is proportional to
chain
length,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Should be: "chain wear is *inversely* proportional to chain length."

"Leo Lichtman" wrote in message
...

Kinky Cowboy wrote: If you want to maximise the life of your
transmission, sell the
recumbnet [sic] and buy an ordinary; you won't look any more stupid,
and you'll have no chain at all. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Tom Sherman wrote: And you may severely injure yourself or die when
you do a header while
trying to brake on the downhill. There is a good reason why the
ordinary is not longer produced or ridden (except as a curiosity
item).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wasn't Kinky's comment meant to be tongue in cheek?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Tom Sherman: Experience indicates that chain wear rate is
proportional to chain
length,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Should be: "chain wear is *inversely* proportional to chain length."
Or chain life is proportional to chain length

Phil H