Dumb Questions for Old Timers

Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

What the heck happened to all the spokes? How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. Do the new ones work the same?

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. Are
they any good? (I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

__o o__ o__ o__
_ \,_ _./ _ _./ _ _./ _
(_)/ (_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_)

Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again.

I did something similar about 15 years ago, though I hadn't been out of
riding for as long.

I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

One thing to consider is that your Viscount may have collector value
that's higher than its value to you. I would suggest trolling around the
web to see what they're selling for. The more original it is, the more
it's likely to be worth, so if you're considering selling it, don't do
much to it or at least keep all of the original parts.

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

Indexed shifting and integrated brake/shift levers are a big improvement
over downtube shifters. Similarly, 9 and 10 speed cassettes make wide
ratios available without big gaps between them.

What the heck happened to all the spokes? How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

They're typically thicker and have higher tension. I'm not a big fan of
"boutique" wheels, due mainly to their excessive cost and the difficulty
of getting replacement parts. I prefer wheels that I can easily service
myself and I still build my own, at least for my road bikes.

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. Do the new ones work the same?

At the most basic level, yes. Your finger pressure pushes the rear
derailleur inward and up the cogs and the front derailleur outward and
up the chainrings. Springs handle the return function. The differences
are as I mentioned above, the shifting is indexed and you have more gears.

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Yes, tubulars are still available, though the price of many of them will
likely give you a serious case of sticker shock. I still ride them, but
I'm in a tiny minority these days. Come to think of it, tubular users
were a tiny minority of cyclists in the 70's and 80's, too. The
difference today is that a lot of racers ride clinchers, which was rare
"back in the day".

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. Are
they any good? (I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

IMO, the advantages of carbon for the average cyclist are seriously
overblown. It's the fad material of choice these days, but it's not
without its merits, particularly for hard-core racer types. It's not a
panacea, as some would have you believe. It's expensive and has a
failure mode that's much less forgiving than metals.

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

Well, there's no point in buying a bike that's unnecessarily heavy and
today's bikes are considerably lighter than your Viscount, without the
downsides of fragility and flexibility that were common with really
light bike of yore. In that regard, it's a win-win situation.

Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

Have fun!

"Nobody Special" wrote in message
...



Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

What the heck happened to all the spokes? How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. Do the new ones work the same?

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. Are
they any good? (I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

__o o__ o__ o__
_ \,_ _./ _ _./ _ _./ _
(_)/ (_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_)





Nobody Special,
You're likely to create long threads on a number of your topics! I rode
sewups in the 70s with friction shifters, so may be able to relate to your
background. Here are my opinions, others are likely to differ:
If the aluminum fork is one of the cast ones, there have been numerous
reports of failures, which are likely to be dangerous to your health. I'd
replace the fork, or go the new bike route.
The best of the new technology is the integrated shifter/brake levers. You
might want to test-ride a bike with these to see if you like them better
than your existing fingertip shifters. The integrated shifters also index,
so no "feeling" your way into the correct lever position for the gear you're
in. You also get way more gears than you had before, perhaps even way more
than you need.
Nothing wrong at all with the number of spokes you already have (32 or 36,
probably). Other than not being as fashionable as today's low spoke count
wheels. Oh, the low spoke count wheels may make you more susceptible to
squirrels, etc. being caught in your wheel and causing you harm. And some of
the low spoke count wheels will fail catastrophically if a couple of spokes
break - all the other spokes just fall out and the wheel collapses.
Sewups are still made, although current terminology is tubulars. Clincher
tire technology has come a long way since you last rode - even if you keep
your current bike, you may well want to change to 700C clinchers (their
braking surfaces are at about the same diameter as your sewup rims, so your
current brake calipers will still work). Lots easier to repair than sewups.
I have aluminum and steel (not stainless, don't know about those) bikes, no
carbon. Don't like the idea that it's difficult to determine if there are
internal failures in carbon.
You can certainly buy well built bikes that aren't super light. Andre Jute
(a frequent contributor to these group) just did, and I'm in the process of
getting a custom steel frame that won't be super light, nor super low cost.
Welcome back to the bike!
Kerry

Per Nobody Special:
My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

I quit somewhere around my early thirties when my bud's practice
of carrying a loaded .44 magnum in his motorcycle's gas tank
storage pouch started to sound reasonable.

Some there around 50 or so, I resumed - but on fat tire bikes
that let me avoid contention with motor vehicles.

Define "repairable" in terms of dollars?

My kneejerk is that I'd be wanting a beater bike even if I bought
a new one. To that end, fixing up the old bike would seem tb
the first step.

Also, you might find out that cycling doesn't work out for
you.... and you might as well find that out for the lowest number
of dollars. Finally, my experience has been that a new bike is
much more enjoyable when moved up to from an older bike.

As far as the age factor goes, you are going to be less tolerant
of an aero position and your butt's going tb less robust.

I embraced suspension seatposts (Cane Creek's ThudBuster in my
case) and I favor a more upright position - even 15 years after
resuming cycling. And my bread-and-butter bike is full
suspension. I ride a hard tail and a rigid - both with
aforementioned sus posts - but I keep coming back to FS for
day-in-and-day-out riding.

Plenty people older than me riding hardtail bikes with no sus
posts though... But if it becomes an issue, be aware of a sus
post as an alternative.

Sprung saddles are ok too, but bundling the sus and seat cuts
down on the variety of saddle shapes available.
--
PeteCresswell

Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.)

You might want to do some research, it's possible you have the infamous
Viscount "death fork".

They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

Spending less will probably make a bigger difference (economically).


My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

No.


What the heck happened to all the spokes? How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

Not really well. It's a style thing.


Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. Do the new ones work the same?

Maybe. Modern shifters are typically indexed. This may or may not be
important, depending on how used to the old ones you are and how many
sprockets you have. There are also integrated brake/shifters
("brifters"), much more expensive, perhaps marginally more useful,
particularly if you race.


Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Probably get new wheels. You can still get sewups, but there's no real
advantage and several disadvantages, supply being just one.


Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. Are
they any good? (I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

CF carries a premium and is quite a bit less tolerant of abuse. Aluminum
frames are usually less flexy (than steel), which you may prefer in your
weight. Steel is fine although not as popular these days.


Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

The old rule still applies: light, reliable, reasonably priced -- pick
any 2.

There is a point of diminishing returns. These days it's reached pretty
early. You can buy a pretty nice bike for $1,000 or so, certainly good
enough to reenter the sport.


Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

I'm older than you and wouldn't react positively to being called an old
fart. If you're really an old fart, perhaps you might be better off with
golf.

On Jan 18, 11:06*am, Peter Cole wrote:
Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. *I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) *

You might want to do some research, it's possible you have the infamous
Viscount "death fork".

They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

Spending less will probably make a bigger difference (economically).

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

No.



What the heck happened to all the spokes? *How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

Not really well. It's a style thing.

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. *Do the new ones work the same?

Maybe. Modern shifters are typically indexed. This may or may not be
important, depending on how used to the old ones you are and how many
sprockets you have. There are also integrated brake/shifters
("brifters"), much more expensive, perhaps marginally more useful,
particularly if you race.

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Probably get new wheels. You can still get sewups, but there's no real
advantage and several disadvantages, supply being just one.

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? *I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. *Are
they any good? *(I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

CF carries a premium and is quite a bit less tolerant of abuse. Aluminum
frames are usually less flexy (than steel), which you may prefer in your
weight. Steel is fine although not as popular these days.

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. *I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

The old rule still applies: light, reliable, reasonably priced -- pick
any 2.

There is a point of diminishing returns. These days it's reached pretty
early. You can buy a pretty nice bike for $1,000 or so, certainly good
enough to reenter the sport.

Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

I'm older than you and wouldn't react positively to being called an old
fart. If you're really an old fart, perhaps you might be better off with
golf.

I'm older than you and wouldn't react positively to being called an old
fart. If you're really an old fart, perhaps you might be better off with
golf.

Peter where's your sense of humor? I've jokingly called my self an
"old fart" for years. The wife reasons then that she must be an "old
fartette" or "fartesse";-)

On Jan 18, 9:52*am, Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. *I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) *They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

I'm amazed the shop did not tell you that some of the aluminum forks
on the Lambert/Viscount were recalled because they broke. As we
discussed recently here (do a Google search), the crown separated from
the steerer. Also, IIRC, they have a press fit, snap ring type bottom
bracket, and I don't think they can be repaired with commonly
available parts -- at least the spindles can't be easily replaced even
if the BB takes standard cartridge bearings.

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

How much do you intend to ride and what kind of riding are you going
to do?

If your bike is trustworthy, e.g., it does not have the bad forks and
the bottom bracket is in good condition, then there is no serious
reason to buy a new bike (assuming the old one still fits you -- what
was comfortable when you were in your 20s may be a nightmare in your
50s). Also, if a lot of small problems start to crop up like shot
headset bearings, hub bearings, fit issues (your stem now seems to
long/short, you need a new saddle, etc.), it might be more economical
to hit Craigslist and shop for a good used bike.

What the heck happened to all the spokes? *How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

It works by usuing a heavier, stiffer rim and thicker spokes. They
are not always lighter, but they are usually more aerodynamic than
conventional wheels.

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. *Do the new ones work the same?

No, they are indexed -- a click gives you a positive gear change.
There is no feeling for gears, but then again, if your clicker dies,
you're SOL. I like click shifting the brake levers (Campy Ergo and
Shimano STI) very much, and I raced/rode for many years on friction
shifters and feel qualified to give an opinion -- but it is only an
opinion. You can live without them.

What you did not ask about are pedals. I much prefer step in pedal
systems to clips and straps, and you can get a Shimano SPD type pedal
cheap from Nashbar with some decent shoes, and you're good to go with
a walkable cleat.

Other things that are clearly better: (1) one or two hex bolt seat
posts, (2) cartridge bearing headsets and bottom brackets, (3)
labyrinth sealed hubs (rather than the old dust cap design), (4)
cassettes v. freewheels. We argue about whether STI/Ergo is better
than friction, whether threadless headsets are better and whether the
new two piece cranks are better. I like all those things, so I vote
yes.

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

They make sewups. How much equity do you have in your home. There
are some cheap ones, but they are cheaply made, and the good ones are
very expensive. You would be better off to get clincher wheels.
Flats are much easier to fix, and you can get fatter tires that will
give you a cushier ride.

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? *I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. *Are
they any good? *(I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

CF is worth it if you are racing and want the lightest possible bike.
Some claim that CF gives a smoother ride, but I don't know if that is
true because I have never owned a CF frame. CF is reported to be more
prone to failure due to mechanical damage than steel or aluminum -- as
you can tell from all the threads about frame materials and failure
modes.

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. *I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

There are many high quality steel and aluminum bikes on the market
that are reasonably light weight and certainly lighter than your
Lambert. And you don't have to drop mega bux to buy them. Try
bicyclesdirect.com or the sales at Nashbar or elsewhere. You can get
a pretty darn good aluminum frame bike with 105 level components for a
grand. That's what I would do if I were you -- because we should buy,
buy, buy to save our economy! -- Jay Beattie.

On Jan 18, 11:52 am, Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

Sell the Lambert to some particularly annoying kids and hope the fork
folds. As far as a new bike--I always recommend that folks get a bike
that you can do stuff with--like a touring bike, when getting back to
cycling. Why just go for a pointless ride, when you can ride to places
and purchase objects and have the provisions for bringing them home?

Off the top of my head in the practical do-all bike category would be
a Surly LHT ($1K), Kona Dew Drop ($800), or if you want a little
fancier, a Salsa Casseroll.

http://www.salsacycles.com/casserollComp08.html
http://www.surlybikes.com/lht_comp.html
http://www.konaworld.com/09_dewdrop_en.cfm

Those are just examples to show ya that bikes like that exist--it's
not all just extreme stuff--but the bike shops in the US rarely stock
anything practical on the floor.

If you really wanna spend $2-3K--something like a Gunnar Sport with a
custom build would be a sweet choice. That's a sporty bike that'll
still take a rack and reasonably wide tires. It's made right here in
'merica by cheese heads!

http://www.gunnarbikes.com/sport.php

Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

What the heck happened to all the spokes? How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. Do the new ones work the same?

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. Are
they any good? (I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

That's a reasonably nice frame, even by current standards. Equipment is,
well, to your taste new or old. People (especially here) will argue
that. Forever.

But _do not_ ride that fork.
Replace it. I'm not kidding. They are cast and have random voids which
means, in that material, you won't have enough time to react before your
faceplant when it fails.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Jan 18, 5:33 pm, A Muzi wrote:
Nobody Special wrote:
Dumb questions about bikes:

I stopped riding when I was in my 20s, and now, at 55,
I am ready to start again. I just dusted off my old
Lambert/Viscount with the "aircraft aluminum" forks and
plan on having a local pro bike shop do a complete overhaul,
replacing/cleaning/lubing as needed (it was stored in a
cool dry place, and I see no rust.) They may advise me
to just get a new bike, in which case I will be looking
for something in the $2000-$3000 range unless someone
convinces that spending more will make a big difference.

My questions a

Is there any new technology that justifies me starting with
a new bike even if the old one is repairable?

What the heck happened to all the spokes? How does a wheel
work with so few spokes?

Shifters; I have "fingertips" at the end of my bars, but the
new shifters look different. Do the new ones work the same?

Tires; do they still make sewups, or should I just figure on
getting new wheels?

Frames; Is the carbon fiber really worth it? I googled and saw
that there are bikes with aluminum or stainless available. Are
they any good? (I am 6' 1" and weigh 220 Lbs)

Weight; I never "got" the idea of spending big bucks shaving off
a pound or two off the bike for someone like me who could stand
to lose a few pounds. I am not going to be racing anyone. Is it
feasable to get something stiffer and heavier but still high
quality, or are all the really well-built bikes super light?

Thanks in advance for helping an old fart get back up on two wheels...

That's a reasonably nice frame, even by current standards. Equipment is,
well, to your taste new or old. People (especially here) will argue
that. Forever.

But _do not_ ride that fork.
Replace it. I'm not kidding. They are cast and have random voids which
means, in that material, you won't have enough time to react before your

No kidding! Mine had a Tange replacement fork with very little trail--
nice riding bike, but a bit squirrely in the turns. ;-) I'd say the
OP's weight is pushing it on that frame--it's pretty thin tubing and
quite flexy at the BB.

Also worth replacing the bottom bracket spindle--didn't the original
like to snap at the circlips? Mine had a really nice Campy spindle
when I got it. Could never get the cart bearings to last very long. A
good rain ride and they'd be trashed.