randonneur

On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 2:08:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/1/2018 1:41 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 31 May 2018 15:13:51 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote:
Tim McNamara wrote:

As a tall, heavy guy I thnk that'd be about right. I have problems
with any rear wheel with less than 36 spokes if it has 7 or more cogs
(7 x 135 mm wide is not a problem, very low dish wheel, but 7 or more
with a 130 mm OLN is just bad design IMHO even though it is the
standard. With 11 speeds, the OLN should be 140 or 145 mm unless the
rider is under 120 lbs).

What is OLN? "Over lock nut"?

Yes- the distance between the inner faces of the rear dropouts. 110 mm
is or was standard for track bikes, 120 for 5 speed and some 6 speed,
etc. up to 130 mm for 8/9/10/11 speed (road standards, 135 mm MTB
standards). As the cassette gets wider, the wheel dish becomes more
severe and the rear wheel gets weaker.

At 6'3" and currently an embarrassing 230 lbs after several years of
health problems, I put probably 120 lbs on the rear wheel wthout any
extra loads on the bike. I find that 130 mm wheels with 8+ speeds are
unstable over time- the non-drive side spokes lose tension, the wheel
goes out of true and requires correction regularly. I have a 7 speed
26" wheel on one bike that is mow 22 years old and has never had to be
retrued. With a 7 speed freewheel and the larger OLN, the wheel has
very little dish and is very strong and stable. I should probably go to
a MTB or tandem rear hub (135 mm to 145 mm, respectively) on my road
bikes and reduce my wheel problems considerably.

Certainly on a touring bike I would go with the wider spacing for the
rear wheel.


Touring bikes are mostly 135mm and have been for 10~15
years. With the advent of through axles there myriad
'standards' now.

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

Yep. My 1991 Trek 520 touring bike had 135mm rear dropout. So at least 27 years touring bikes have used 135mm. Used Deore DX hubs. Mountain bike hubs. Dropped perfectly into my newer Redline Conquest Tour frame.

On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 1:26:22 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 2:08:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/1/2018 1:41 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 31 May 2018 15:13:51 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote:
Tim McNamara wrote:

As a tall, heavy guy I thnk that'd be about right. I have problems
with any rear wheel with less than 36 spokes if it has 7 or more cogs
(7 x 135 mm wide is not a problem, very low dish wheel, but 7 or more
with a 130 mm OLN is just bad design IMHO even though it is the
standard. With 11 speeds, the OLN should be 140 or 145 mm unless the
rider is under 120 lbs).

What is OLN? "Over lock nut"?

Yes- the distance between the inner faces of the rear dropouts. 110 mm
is or was standard for track bikes, 120 for 5 speed and some 6 speed,
etc. up to 130 mm for 8/9/10/11 speed (road standards, 135 mm MTB
standards). As the cassette gets wider, the wheel dish becomes more
severe and the rear wheel gets weaker.

At 6'3" and currently an embarrassing 230 lbs after several years of
health problems, I put probably 120 lbs on the rear wheel wthout any
extra loads on the bike. I find that 130 mm wheels with 8+ speeds are
unstable over time- the non-drive side spokes lose tension, the wheel
goes out of true and requires correction regularly. I have a 7 speed
26" wheel on one bike that is mow 22 years old and has never had to be
retrued. With a 7 speed freewheel and the larger OLN, the wheel has
very little dish and is very strong and stable. I should probably go to
a MTB or tandem rear hub (135 mm to 145 mm, respectively) on my road
bikes and reduce my wheel problems considerably.

Certainly on a touring bike I would go with the wider spacing for the
rear wheel.


Touring bikes are mostly 135mm and have been for 10~15
years. With the advent of through axles there myriad
'standards' now.

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

Yep. My 1991 Trek 520 touring bike had 135mm rear dropout. So at least 27 years touring bikes have used 135mm. Used Deore DX hubs. Mountain bike hubs. Dropped perfectly into my newer Redline Conquest Tour frame.

Live and learn -- what is odd is that Trek spec'd the Portland commuter with odd-ball 130mm discs during the same time period. One wonders why the product designers were not talking to each other.

Speaking of discs, if I got a new touring bike, I'd certainly get one with discs, although discs limit your wheel replacement options if your wheels explode in outer Mongolia -- but not outer Magnolia. http://www.mapmyride.com/us/seattle-...de-route-58399

-- Jay Beattie.

On 5/31/2018 5:06 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:

snip

32 is too small IMO. If they put them on as the
default choice on a bike marketed as
a randonneur one would expect them not to
do that.

True. It would be odd for them to be the tire it shipped with. I recall
that during the touring bike heyday of the 1980's 700 x 35 was the
default choice for bikes like the Specialized Expedition, not sure about
the competing Miyata 1000, it may have come with 700 x 32. Those were
the two best touring bicycles back then. There was a a slew of others
from various companies like Nishiki and Shogun.

On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 17:27:56 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 5/31/2018 5:06 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:

snip

32 is too small IMO. If they put them on as the
default choice on a bike marketed as
a randonneur one would expect them not to
do that.

True. It would be odd for them to be the tire it shipped with. I recall
that during the touring bike heyday of the 1980's 700 x 35 was the
default choice for bikes like the Specialized Expedition, not sure about
the competing Miyata 1000, it may have come with 700 x 32. Those were
the two best touring bicycles back then. There was a a slew of others
from various companies like Nishiki and Shogun.

I happen to have the 1984 Miyata printed catalog. The 1000 came with:
Miyata Super Touring Nylon Belted Tire. 700x32C S.S.W. 90 lbs 380g.
Araya Model 16-A3 rims. 40 holes on the rear wheel, 36 on the front.

My Miyate 610 was probably 2nd best for 1984. It's fairly similar but
with slightly cheaper components and tapered seat stays. Wheels were
both 36 hole and used 27x1-1/4 tires.
http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/slides/Miyata-610.html




--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

sms wrote:

True. It would be odd for them to be the tire
it shipped with. I recall that during the
touring bike heyday of the 1980's

OK, what was it about the 80s and
randonneuring? Good bikes and roads but still
not insane traffic like today?

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I happen to have the 1984 Miyata printed
catalog. The 1000 came with: Miyata Super
Touring Nylon Belted Tire. 700x32C S.S.W.
90 lbs 380g. Araya Model 16-A3 rims. 40 holes
on the rear wheel, 36 on the front.

I have a book from 1994 [1], with previous
editions -78, -83 and -86, and in the
randonneur chapter (pages 289-413) the author
mentions two bikes, one is the Miyata 1000
(photo with a back rack and front side racks,
fenders, and three water bottles), the other
is the "Follis Lyon" (photo with rear/front
side racks, only no traditional rack, fenders,
and only one bottle holder).

[1]

@book{cykelbok,
author = {Staffan Skott},
ISBN = {91-550-3942-1},
publisher = {Tiden},
title = {Cykelbok},
year = 1994
}

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

I've just finished a book on randonneuring,
namely

@book{long-distance-cyclists-handbook,
author = {Simon Doughty},
ISBN = {0 7136 5819 3},
publisher = {A \& C Black},
title = {The Long Distance Cyclists' handbook},
year = 2001
}

The book is very meticulous, typically British
with lots of illustrations, tables, etc.

The only surprising thing is that it is also
about cycling in general - those sections are
great as well tho so I'm not complaining.
Perhaps the author had a hard time selling the
book with the title "My Book About Cycling"?

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 11:06:52 AM UTC-5, Emanuel Berg wrote:
sms wrote:

True. It would be odd for them to be the tire
it shipped with. I recall that during the
touring bike heyday of the 1980's

OK, what was it about the 80s and
randonneuring? Good bikes and roads but still
not insane traffic like today?

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

Stop using the word randonneuring incorrectly. You are talking about touring. Not randonneuring.

The early 1980s were a very few years after 1976. 1976 was when Adventure Cycling (they were called something else at first) organized the first cross country USA bike ride. It was not the first time anyone had ever ridden across the USA. But it was the first nationally publicized cross country ride with a "big" organization sponsoring, organizing, it. They organized groups of riders and had ride leaders for each group. So bike companies were merely trying to capitalize on this new market for touring bikes. Riding a touring bike across the country was a new thing. And you needed a new bike to do this. A touring bike. Thus companies made the bikes people wanted to buy. Its called capitalism. Companies sell what people want to buy.

On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 8:59:47 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jun 2018 17:27:56 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 5/31/2018 5:06 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:

snip

32 is too small IMO. If they put them on as the
default choice on a bike marketed as
a randonneur one would expect them not to
do that.

True. It would be odd for them to be the tire it shipped with. I recall
that during the touring bike heyday of the 1980's 700 x 35 was the
default choice for bikes like the Specialized Expedition, not sure about
the competing Miyata 1000, it may have come with 700 x 32. Those were
the two best touring bicycles back then. There was a a slew of others
from various companies like Nishiki and Shogun.

I happen to have the 1984 Miyata printed catalog. The 1000 came with:
Miyata Super Touring Nylon Belted Tire. 700x32C S.S.W. 90 lbs 380g.
Araya Model 16-A3 rims. 40 holes on the rear wheel, 36 on the front.

My Miyate 610 was probably 2nd best for 1984. It's fairly similar but
with slightly cheaper components and tapered seat stays. Wheels were
both 36 hole and used 27x1-1/4 tires.
http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/slides/Miyata-610.html

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Odd the same company would use 700C and 27" wheels on two of their touring bikes. Why not just pick one or the other? Unless they figured only the professional tourers would buy the 700C because they knew about bikes and what the rest of the world used for tires. 700C in Europe. And the 27" was marketed to the beginner who would only tour around his house in the USA. 27" tires for USA.

wrote:

The early 1980s were a very few years after
1976. 1976 was when Adventure Cycling (they
were called something else at first)
organized the first cross country USA bike
ride. It was not the first time anyone had
ever ridden across the USA. But it was the
first nationally publicized cross country
ride with a "big" organization sponsoring,
organizing, it. They organized groups of
riders and had ride leaders for each group.
So bike companies were merely trying to
capitalize on this new market for touring
bikes. Riding a touring bike across the
country was a new thing. And you needed a new
bike to do this.

OK, so all it takes is one organization to do
something by all means cool and then the whole
industry will start producing equipment for
others to do (versions of) the same thing?

Thus companies made the bikes people wanted
to buy. Its called capitalism. Companies sell
what people want to buy.

Is this what you do on Usenet as well?
Write posts that people want to read?

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573