|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Pedal threads? I can interchange any pedal from anything onto
anything. Well,except kid's bikes. Saddle rails? Any saddle fits any seatpost (gah, except some old Brooks things. And Dursley-Pedersen hammocks. And recumbents.). Cables? The basic Bowden cable can double up for shifting and braking duty on just about everything. Yeah, the nipples are different but other than that you can freely whack any cable into any bike and it'll do the job. My repair kit includes a spare gear cable, because you can use it as an emergency brake cable at a pinch. Apart from hydro brakes, that is. And stupid Positron gears. And rod brakes. Chain pitch! I'm damned if I can think of a bicycle that doesn't use 1/2" chain pitch. Someone tell me I'm wrong... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Marvin wrote:
Chain pitch! I'm damned if I can think of a bicycle that doesn't use 1/2" chain pitch. Someone tell me I'm wrong... Hmm...1" pitch chain was popular with trackies, and Shimano tried 10mm chain more recently. Bzzzt, thankyou for playing ;-) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 03:25:20 -0600, Jim Smith
wrote: "Nick Payne" nickDOTpayne@internodeDOTonDOTnet writes: The ball-bearing. The bearing-ball. Dear Nick and Jim, They're certainly round, and grade 25 suggests darned little variation. Offhand, how many different sizes of ball-bearings would you expect to find if you disassembled a Campagnolo, a Shimano, and a Fury Roadmaster--front hub, headset, bottom bracket, pedals, rear hub? Carl Fogel |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On 23 Dec 2004 14:13:09 GMT, (Qui si parla
Campagnolo ) wrote: What part of a bicycle do you think varies the least? And why? BRBR In terms of basic design, the frame. The same double triangle shape that it has been since the 'bicycle' was introduced. Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302 (303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene" Dear Peter, Certainly all God-fearing riders use the double triangle. (Or the recumbent. Or the mixte. Or my mother's 1960's step-through 10-speed Schwinn. Or my friend in Seattle's Moulton. Or the tandems.) (Or the dozens of goofball frames with weird tubes and bracing wires in "The Frame" chapter in Archibald Sharp's "Bicycles and Tricycles".) Carl Fogel |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:58:29 GMT, Paul Kopit
wrote: On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:29:29 -0700, wrote: What part of a bicycle do you think varies the least? And why? The chain turning gears. The spacing of the dropout on a front wheel. Dear Paul, In terms physical variation, the plain gears are pretty uniform, although the fixed-gear crowd insists that there is horribly significant variation (except for Sheldon Brown, who says that with high-quality parts he has no gear-induced chain-tension problems). Of course, the contoured teeth for better derailleur shifting vary wildly. I really like your point about the width of the front wheel dropout--no Scrooge-like objections come to mind, so I'll have to rely on the nit-picking legions of rec.bicycles.tech to think of exceptions. Carl Fogel |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:11:29 -0700, Mark Hickey
wrote: wrote: What part of a bicycle do you think varies the least? And why? That's an easy one. It's the motor. Hasn't changed for many thousands of years. Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame Dear Mark, I like your choice, since it never occurred to me. On the other hand, we have riders ranging from at least 5'3" to 6'10" here on rec.bicycles.tech. Arbitrarily tossing out the dwarves and leading the giants aside, we could claim in a hateful, height-bigoted way that a reasonable range of riders is 5'4" to 6'4" (this eliminates Jobst and my mother). That's a range of 64 to 76 inches, an upward variation of about 19% (12/64), presumably reflected by the same variation from hip socket to cleat. Yet even the unusually broad range of crank lengths from 165 to 180 mm is only about 9% (15/165). If a 165 mm crank is just right for a 5'4" rider, scaling him up in height to 6'4" suggests that a 195 mm crank would be appropriate. Makes me wonder about some of the claims about fit and sensitivity. I suspect that the further people are from around 5'8" to 5'10", the less their knee angles resemble the ideal (whatever it is) while they pedal. Carl Fogel |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Surprised no one mentioned spoke nipples. There are only 2 sizes as far as thread diameter goes and only a few lengths. For the most part, they are identical. -- Weisse Luft |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Children should wear bicycle helmets. | John Doe | UK | 516 | December 16th 04 12:04 AM |
Invisible Paint: Ingenious Bicycle Anti-Theft Product | Verdra H. Ciretop | Mountain Biking | 1 | November 24th 04 09:13 PM |
published helmet research - not troll | Frank Krygowski | Social Issues | 1716 | October 24th 04 06:39 AM |
A song for Carla | John Harlow | Mountain Biking | 3 | May 10th 04 02:29 PM |
Those bicycle builders big mistake! | Garrison Hilliard | Techniques | 23 | December 23rd 03 06:03 AM |