|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
|
Ads |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
John B. wrote:
On one hand you are reciting what the specifications are telling you and on the other hand it is a bloke with years and years of experience in the business is telling you. Shozaburo Shimano founded Shimano in February 1921 which amounts to a collective experience of 96y 7m 11d, and not of the business in general, but of manufacturing bicycle parts. And they say 6/7/8 of their own chain. The other people/shops I've refered to who also say this are probably just repeating what Shimano says on the chain box. And I think that's completely natural! I also trust what manufacturers of an international magnitude like Shimano put on their boxes. First thing with new gear I always read on the box. So even tho I never tried it myself (a 6/7/8 chain on a 6 casette) I dare say yes, I find this story a bit strange. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
Many times he asks a question then disagrees with what those experts like Andrew who know the RIGHT answer tell him. So let's hear it, why do Shimano put such obvious disinformation on their product boxes? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
John B. wrote:
That isn't true at all. I have definitely improved the speed of a C program by using an assembler language sub routines and even had two C compilers that would compile the same program into two different sizes that performed the same "test" program at two different speeds. Obviously two different programs will be of different sizes and run at different speeds. With compilers to do optimization, and with much increased hardware to make optimization unnecessary to begin with, there is close to zero gain re-writing C into assembler, and its an undertaking that isn't proportional to that gain. So it is rather done when there is a need to manipulate hardware directly or in ways which the high-level language isn't suited for. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 12:00:13 AM UTC-4, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote: Many times he asks a question then disagrees with what those experts like Andrew who know the RIGHT answer tell him. So let's hear it, why do Shimano put such obvious disinformation on their product boxes? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 Yes, you're definitely trolling. Cheers |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 22:18:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 9/11/2017 5:54 AM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 08:34:20 +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote: John B. wrote: Word Star, the first really good word processor application was written in assembler by a single programmer over a period of about a month Straight long ear! Sometime in 1980 Epson wanted to license the software to run on their PX-8 that used a built in LCD display. The application would have to run from 48Kb of ROM. They rehired the Programmer, John Barnaby, who had earlier left the company, at a salary of $100 an hour (1980 dollars, today $297 ). The project was completed in two weeks, whereupon Barnaby left the company again. Wow. If someone were paying me $300 per hour to do a job only I could do, I'd probably take longer than two weeks to do it. ;-) Well, in detail, the guy wrote the word processor application, apparently working 7 days a week and 10 or more hours a day. When he finished the project I guess he said something like "that's enough for me" and quit. When the Epson project came along, as one article said, they lured him back, and he finished the job in two weeks... if his old work schedule applied that would have been, oh say $42,000 :-) As an aside I worked a one year project where the client specified that unless I was the Project Manager they wouldn't award the contract.... makes it pretty pleasant when it comes to salary negotiation time :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 20:10:24 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Monday, September 11, 2017 at 10:53:52 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 15:47:59 +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote: AMuzi wrote: The guy who only stocks one model chain knows a lot more than the guy who made it? http://bike.shimano.com/content/saus...s/cn-hg40.html Shifts for crap on a six speed system. Six changers want classic chain with rivets sticking out the side, especially the fronts. Today I went to a bike repair shop (not the general-purpose store previously mentioned that "only stocks" the Shimano 1S and 6/7/8 chain models), and I asked for a 1S chain. The guy said he had two, one ordinary and one SS. I asked if the chain really does rust if you use the bike, and he confirmed it didn't, so I got the "SC4/0 Steel Roller Chain" which is 114L 1/2" x 1/8" Made in Taiwan. I asked about casette chains for specific numbers of sprockets and he said, without me mentioning it, one model for 6/7/8, one for 9, one for 10, and one for 11, with no mention of 12. So it would seem he is in agreement with the Shimano CN-HG40 6/7/8 specification previously under fire. Of course, I never tried that on a 6, so this is just what he said. The plot thickens... I don't think so. On one hand you are reciting what the specifications are telling you and on the other hand it is a bloke with years and years of experience in the business is telling you. -- Cheers, John B. Reading Berg's posts makes me think that a lot of times he's trolling. Many times he asks a question then disagrees with what those experts like Andrew who know the RIGHT answer tell him. Cheers But compared with some he is relatively harmless. And serves the purpose of allowing others to exhibit their amazing knowledge of a subject without long drawn out arguments :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:00:09 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote: Sir Ridesalot wrote: Many times he asks a question then disagrees with what those experts like Andrew who know the RIGHT answer tell him. So let's hear it, why do Shimano put such obvious disinformation on their product boxes? Because, as Andrew told you, it will fit. On the other hand, as Andrew told you, if a 6 speed it won't shift well. I might add that I have used a 10 speed chain with a 9 speed cassette and a 9 speed chain with a 10 speed cassette, and they worked to my satisfaction although Shimano certainly do not state it will work on the box. -- Cheers, John B. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 05:52:39 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote: John B. wrote: On one hand you are reciting what the specifications are telling you and on the other hand it is a bloke with years and years of experience in the business is telling you. Shozaburo Shimano founded Shimano in February 1921 which amounts to a collective experience of 96y 7m 11d, and not of the business in general, but of manufacturing bicycle parts. And they say 6/7/8 of their own chain. Your data, while accurate, is frivolous as Shozaburo certainly wasn't making multi speed bike parts in 1921. -- Cheers, John B. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
program to compute gears, with table
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:06:56 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote: John B. wrote: That isn't true at all. I have definitely improved the speed of a C program by using an assembler language sub routines and even had two C compilers that would compile the same program into two different sizes that performed the same "test" program at two different speeds. Obviously two different programs will be of different sizes and run at different speeds. But that wasn't what I said at all. As I said the same code compiled on two different compiler resulted in both a different size compiled application and, as well, a speed difference when running. With compilers to do optimization, and with much increased hardware to make optimization unnecessary to begin with, there is close to zero gain re-writing C into assembler, and its Except when it does make a difference. an undertaking that isn't proportional to that gain. So it is rather done when there is a need to manipulate hardware directly or in ways which the high-level language isn't suited for. I'm not sure that is correct in all cases although of course modern computers run at speeds that make the slower software appear to be satisfactory. But I did a search on the question "is modern software written in assembler" and the first hit replied: "Probably more than most people think, especially in the microcontroller field. I write in assembler when it's appropriate, which for the kind of work I do is most of the time -- Cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Table. | Marc[_2_] | UK | 6 | November 25th 09 10:29 AM |
Is Frame spacing for 7 Gears = to 5 Gears? | [email protected] | Techniques | 4 | April 13th 09 12:28 AM |
Now that's a table! | Bob Downie | UK | 4 | April 16th 07 06:23 PM |
Inversion Table | Bill B | Recumbent Biking | 3 | October 22nd 04 03:59 AM |
Gears gears gear..what to choose? | bstephens | Techniques | 8 | February 18th 04 04:06 PM |