Riding in the cold even dry

[Tom Kunich]

At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today. While you can easily dress for those temperatures on the flats, descending in those temperatures most definitely isn't a great deal of fun. Even though this is well above freezing I have had many times riding into what should be perfectly dry areas that appear to be dry and yet have a layer of glare ice. This inclines one to ride on routes that are more directly exposed to the sunlight. None of my favorite climbing routes are this way. So I will do yet another flat route today.

[jbeattie]

On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:32:13 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today. While you can easily dress for those temperatures on the flats, descending in those temperatures most definitely isn't a great deal of fun. Even though this is well above freezing I have had many times riding into what should be perfectly dry areas that appear to be dry and yet have a layer of glare ice. This inclines one to ride on routes that are more directly exposed to the sunlight. None of my favorite climbing routes are this way. So I will do yet another flat route today.

Dude, this is the US of A. Speak Fahrenheit. 16C is 60F, which is balmy. 7C is 44F, which is tights weather. Neither is brutal, even descending. It's East Bay not SF. To refresh: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/60/fe/5c/60fe5c2cbca49d67244deaa838219fe7.jpg

Tip for dressing: take off jacket so you don't sweat to death on the climb. Put jacket back on for descent. Or you could always ride the flats, that's O.K.

I just got a text from my son who is about to leave on a "big" ride with his Specialized cohorts in SLC, which means like a billion feet of climbing. I'll have to lie about my own ride, "son, that's great, but I did 100 miles and 40,000 feet of climbing!" That is the beauty of not being on Strava. And its not a lie. I just round-up to the nearest 100 miles and 40,000 feet, so even a trip to the grocery store is 100 miles and 40,000 feet. My mileage for the year is like 20,000 miles -- even with a broken leg.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Tom Kunich]

You're perfectly welcome to come on a ride with me sans E-bike and then tell me about temperatures.

[Ralph Barone]

jbeattie <jbeat...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:32:13 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today.
>> While you can easily dress for those temperatures on the flats,
>> descending in those temperatures most definitely isn't a great deal of
>> fun. Even though this is well above freezing I have had many times
>> riding into what should be perfectly dry areas that appear to be dry and
>> yet have a layer of glare ice. This inclines one to ride on routes that
>> are more directly exposed to the sunlight. None of my favorite climbing
>> routes are this way. So I will do yet another flat route today.
>
> Dude, this is the US of A. Speak Fahrenheit. 16C is 60F, which is
> balmy. 7C is 44F, which is tights weather. Neither is brutal, even
> descending. It's East Bay not SF. To refresh:
> https://i.pinimg.com/originals/60/fe/5c/60fe5c2cbca49d67244deaa838219fe7.jpg
>

Dude, most of the world speaks Celsius.

[Tom Kunich]

Shhh. He's being a lawyer and rebutting.

[jbeattie]

Rebutting what -- that few USians know what 7C is without the assistance of an on-line calculator? And sure, I'll ride with you in the East Bay on any bike. I'm still sitting around contemplating a ride because it is raining cats and dogs and 47F. Sunny East Bay would be a clear improvement, apart from the fact that I'd have to slog across Oakland to get out to the country.

Notwithstanding the rain, I can roll out of my house, go down the hill and do something boring and short around the Lake O hills -- and skip the trudge through town. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBbHDhnt1-U&ab_channel=JonHayes I've certainly got the clothes and some swanky new Specialized neoprene booties. I don't really have the desire, but I've got to get tough again, because I'm looking at months of rain with days of snow and ice. Its not like California where you can just skip riding the three days it rains. The only plus is that it isn't the Mid West where they have real winters.

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

heh heh.
It was a very warm for November 28F this morning and warmed
up quickly. Which sounds brutal as " minus 3C", despite not
being cool at all, given the calendar.

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

[Mark Cleary]

As long as it is dry and no real wind I have no trouble riding down to about 27F. If the wind is above 10 then 35-40F and try and stay out of it. I have closed circuit I ride of 5 miles that blocks a lot of wind and since it runs in a big figure 8, the wind is only at you some of the time. I wear Bike Gore Soft Shell Jacket, which is essentially Gore Text jacket, base layer under of poly fleece (https://www.farmandfleet.com/products/g-10814-work-n-sport-mens-30-ecws-poly-fleece-crew.html). I put on a balaclava and lined ragg wool mittens. My only issue is the toes and feet will eventually go numb. The idea is to ride until that gets enough that I have to stop. I also wear running tights over my bike shorts. I have some that are thinner and some thicker. Then I have wool socks I pull up over the bottom of the pants. Last two morning here have been around 30-33F and no wind so not bad really and I start before sunrise to ride.

All in all it works and it a good work out in the cold. Much better than a trainer when you do it. In Illinois we never deal with even small hills but look out for the wind. Also not good to ride on the ice. I did that once and that was enough. 3 screws to pin my broken hip after falling over right on the hip. Lucky for me it was not displaced and I manage to return to even running in 15 weeks. But seriously ice is nothing to deal with.
Deacon Mark

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/7/2021 11:10 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:32:13 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today. While you can easily dress for those temperatures on the flats, descending in those temperatures most definitely isn't a great deal of fun. Even though this is well above freezing I have had many times riding into what should be perfectly dry areas that appear to be dry and yet have a layer of glare ice. This inclines one to ride on routes that are more directly exposed to the sunlight. None of my favorite climbing routes are this way. So I will do yet another flat route today.
>
> Dude, this is the US of A. Speak Fahrenheit. 16C is 60F, which is balmy. 7C is 44F, which is tights weather. Neither is brutal, even descending.

I agree with Jay, and think 60F is perfect. Although people differ. My
wife's comfort zone is from 70F to 72F. (That's 21C to 22C). Outside of
that I'll probably hear some minor complaints. But I understand
Raynaud's Syndrome can be hell.

> Tip for dressing: take off jacket so you don't sweat to death on the climb.

And put it in your handlebar bag! ;-)

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/7/2021 12:16 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
> jbeattie <jbeat...@msn.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:32:13 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today.
>>

>> Dude, this is the US of A. Speak Fahrenheit. 16C is 60F, which is
>> balmy. 7C is 44F, which is tights weather. Neither is brutal, even
>> descending. It's East Bay not SF. To refresh:
>> https://i.pinimg.com/originals/60/fe/5c/60fe5c2cbca49d67244deaa838219fe7.jpg
>>
>
> Dude, most of the world speaks Celsius.

I'm a big fan of the SI system, but not for temperatures regarding human
comfort. Fahrenheit works far better.

By coincidence, this was the topic in the "Ask Marilyn" column in
today's newspaper. Marilyn (supposedly owner of the highest IQ ever
recorded) agreed.

As she and others have said, zero Fahrenheit is the lowest temperature
most Americans would ever put up with outdoors, and 100 Fahrenheit is
the highest. It wasn't designed that way, but the scale just happens to
match the human comfort range.

As to Celsius, I remember a few approximate landmarks: Zero is freezing,
10C is about 50F, 16C flips around to 61F, 20 C is 68F (commonly used in
engineering), 28C flips to 82F, and 32 would be freezing on the
Fahrenheit scale but its Celsius version is a really hot 90F instead. In
between, I approximate with one degree C = ~ two degrees F.



--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

It's mere familiarity & custom (see also jeans with pre-slit
knees, pocket protectors, handlebar bags etc).

Sorry to disagree with Ms dos Savant and you but
freezing/boiling points of water, average human body, any
other universal points are the same thing, merely expressed
on various scales. You might just as well argue Kelvin as
Fahrenheit.

"Oh, sweetie it's a perfect 293K this morning, let's go for
a ride!".

[Tom Kunich]

The beauty of the centigrade system is that everyone knows that it is cold when water freezes and hot when it boils So you can tell that it is a day in the desert at 50C.

[AMuzi]

For cycling, it's not cold when water freezes. One may
easily dress for that temperature and ride comfortably.

It's cold when exposed flesh freezes during a ride. There's
a point at which any one of us has just met his/her limit.
Mine may be lower than yours.

[jbeattie]

To me, it is not important that it is cold enough to freeze water -- but it is important to me if there is frozen water, and how the water froze. I'm fine on fresh snow, which really provides pretty good traction. Ice is a whole other thing. I have ridden on a lot of ice because I didn't want to feel like a dope taking the car to work and then finding that the ice has all melted a mile down the road after I lost some elevation. So I go squirming down the road out of my neighborhood, waiting for the ice to go away and it doesn't, and then I end up on a busy road, fishtailing my way to work wondering what the f*** I was thinking. I 'm not going to do that this year. I'll just drive and feel like a dope. I don't think I've ridden below 15F and certainly never sub-zero. Maybe if it were super dry and sunny but really cold, I'd give it a whirl, but those conditions do not exist here. We don't have frozen lakes for ice-biking, and any time snow hangs around for a long time, it turns into pocked, unrideable cement. I'm in the car with snow tires.

BTW, people in Portland don't know how to drive in the snow, which is kind of mind-boggling to me because everybody seems to be driving up Mt. Hood during ski season, so somebody has to be used to driving in snow. Anyway, you can get these miniscule snow-falls, and the warning goes out -- and everybody leaves for home and creates a giant traffic jam, like a you-can-walk-home-faster-than-driving traffic jam. That's when I just ride by, making nice little lines in the fresh-fallen snow. Later suckers. I bet those days are over with COVID work from home, but maybe not.

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

Don't feel alone. People in Wisconsin can't drive in snow
either. It just takes one stop-on-merge idiot or some
schmuck trying to find tire traction limits in traffic to
make a pileup.

And I am with you about ice or slushy wet snow. When beer
trucks are sliding sideways across the curbs it's time to
get off the bike. It's just a dozen days per year usually.

Still, moderately cold[1] is generally very bikeable when
properly dressed[2]

[1] fill in your own number here
[2]Normal road bike shoes with clipless are miserable in
cold. Never found a better solution than toeclips + warm sox
in leather shoes with overshoes to keep out the wind and wet.

[Roger Merriman]

It’s less the body temperature more is there going to be pockets of
ice/frost on my commute?

It’s generally not a issue on the gravel/MTB as well off road mostly and so
ice is much less of a issue.

But ice even in warm london can be a real hazard.

Roger Merriman.

[Tim R]

On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:56:50 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:

> [2]Normal road bike shoes with clipless are miserable in
> cold. Never found a better solution than toeclips + warm sox
> in leather shoes with overshoes to keep out the wind and wet.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

You found toe clips big enough? That's my solution too but my current set are too cramped.

[Rolf Mantel]

Am 07.11.2021 um 22:56 schrieb Frank Krygowski:
> On 11/7/2021 11:10 AM, jbeattie wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:32:13 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today.
>>> While you can easily dress for those temperatures on the flats,
>>> descending in those temperatures most definitely isn't a great deal
>>> of fun. Even though this is well above freezing I have had many times
>>> riding into what should be perfectly dry areas that appear to be dry
>>> and yet have a layer of glare ice. This inclines one to ride on
>>> routes that are more directly exposed to the sunlight. None of my
>>> favorite climbing routes are this way. So I will do yet another flat
>>> route today.
>>
>> Dude, this is the US of A.  Speak Fahrenheit.   16C is 60F, which is
>> balmy.  7C is 44F, which is tights weather.   Neither is brutal, even
>> descending.
>
> I agree with Jay, and think 60F is perfect. Although people differ. My
> wife's comfort zone is from 70F to 72F. (That's 21C to 22C). Outside of
> that I'll probably hear some minor complaints. But I understand
> Raynaud's Syndrome can be hell.

I guess the "real" Winsoncin/Minnesotan comparisons are:

40 below is 40 below, 11F is -11C.

[AMuzi]

On 11/8/2021 7:17 AM, Tim R wrote:
> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:56:50 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
>> [2]Normal road bike shoes with clipless are miserable in
>> cold. Never found a better solution than toeclips + warm sox
>> in leather shoes with overshoes to keep out the wind and wet.

>

> You found toe clips big enough? That's my solution too but my current set are too cramped.
>

Large steel toeclips for my size 42 feet with overshoes but
for larger sizes the Zéfal XL is both longer and taller. BTW
modern toestraps are significantly longer than classic which
is also nice for larger sizes.

[Tom Kunich]

When you dress warmly, ride hard to keep your body temperature up and then after the ride have to stand under the shower for 15 minutes to bring your body temperature up to normal, it is cold. And after any ride at 0C that is what happens.

[Ralph Barone]

If you want a scale that’s actually awkward to use, somebody once proposed
measuring temperature on a logarithmic scale in decibels, with zero at
0.001K. 0 dBmK is pretty much absolute zero, room temperature is 54.7
dBmK, water boils at 55.7 dBmK, and the surface of the sun is 67.6 dBmK.

[Tom Kunich]

And some people suggest that disk brakes make you faster. Both make the same amount of sense.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/7/2021 5:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 11/7/2021 4:07 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> As she and others have said, zero Fahrenheit is the lowest
>> temperature most Americans would ever put up with outdoors,
>> and 100 Fahrenheit is the highest. It wasn't designed that
>> way, but the scale just happens to match the human comfort
>> range.
>>
>

> It's mere familiarity & custom (see also jeans with pre-slit knees,
> pocket protectors, handlebar bags etc).
>
> Sorry to disagree with Ms dos Savant and you but freezing/boiling points
> of water, average human body, any other universal points are the same
> thing, merely expressed on various scales. You might just as well argue
> Kelvin as Fahrenheit.

I think a good analogy might be languages. If a person moves to an
unfamiliar country, that person will eventually learn the language well
enough to get by, no matter what the language is.

But few people deny that some languages are much easier to learn than
others.

I suspect that Fahrenheit is much easier to "learn," when used to
describe human comfort.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

>> If you want a scale that’s actually awkward to use, somebody once proposed

>> measuring temperature on a logarithmic scale in decibels, with zero at
>> 0.001K. 0 dBmK is pretty much absolute zero, room temperature is 54.7
>> dBmK, water boils at 55.7 dBmK, and the surface of the sun is 67.6 dBmK.
> And some people suggest that disk brakes make you faster. Both make the same amount of sense.
>

For autos, discs are faster because one may brake later and
more positively/effectively than with drums. I assume the
same may be true for bicycles in some situations but
probably with less significance.

[AMuzi]

I'll watch for our Euro contributors' comments on that.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/7/2021 7:23 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>
> BTW, people in Portland don't know how to drive in the snow, which is kind of mind-boggling to me...

When I moved from the midwest to a southern U.S. state, I was astonished
that they closed schools, offices etc. for a half inch snowfall. I had
plenty of experience plowing through inches of snow to get to work,
classes, etc. up north.

OTOH, many midwesterners do get tremendously confused in a really big
snow. Some seem to think all rules of the road become suspended.

I recall driving on a four lane suburban arterial in a blizzard, slowing
down with my blinker on, hoping to make a left turn just after an
oncoming car passed. The woman driving the car slowed and slowed and
slowed, then came to a stop in the road to frantically motion for me to
turn in front of her. I mean... what the hell?

Of course, I've had the same thing happen to me while riding my bike.
Some people are easily confused.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

I didn't know about the elevens, thanks.

About the 40s: I probably described the sign we saw hanging in the state
museum in Bismarck, North Dakota: "Forty below keeps the riff-raff out."

They didn't have to specify Fahrenheit or Celsius.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

+1
We do observe 'Winter Rules' when using autos in snow (such
as don't do a complete stop on an uphill intersection) but
idiocy knows no particular locale or season, as you note.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUZvKrO6kgM

bonus for 'style points'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRMEl1-a2sI

[Tom Kunich]

I've had extensive experience with disks and rim brakes. If there is any difference other than the disks being an absolute pain in the butt you could fool me. If you can lock the tires and slide them with a rim brake how is a disk any improvement? Because it takes them less time to clear the water off of the braking surface in heavy rain? That is completely crap. If you're riding rim brakes you are always aware that you have to clear the braking surface and start applying the brake a little early. This does NOT slow you up.

[Rolf Mantel]

Fargo has "honorary Minnesotan" status (Bismarck only if you come
begging) ;-)

[Lou Holtman]

Huh??? How is that? I can calibrate my thermometer with C scale just using boiling water and melting ice. Rest is just what you used to.

Lou

[Roger Merriman]

If you live in a mostly dry place particularly if you ride on road, then
yes not a lot in it, and I do question the benefits for road racers really
with wheel changes and so on.

But once in wet climates and particularly off road, my gravel bike with
disks, same tires etc as the CX (canti) before it is miles faster on
various descents as it’s braking distance is much less and so I can be
confident barreling though twisty single track knowing that I can stop,
that I don’t need to nurse the bike.

And since I started my MTBing with rigid bikes and canti I remember the
nursing and how your arms pumped from braking so much, that’s one of the
benefits of Gravel bikes vs old MTB is braking ie it works!

The shifting isn’t dramatically better nor the tires and so on, but the
brakes are.

Roger Merriman.

[Tom Kunich]

I expect he has never bothered to look up the work of Fahrenheit and discover just how crude it was and how he used three calibration points for no perceptible reason I could suggest. His scale was adjusted several times And I suppose that it was to make the degrees between melting and boiling a number that was easily divided into many fractions though the value of that was never made particularly clear.

[Tom Kunich]

I wouldn't argue about MTB's. They are so heavy that the addition of a disk isn't much of an addition and you can lock up the tires on an MTB without much danger. But the weight, cost and complexity of them on a road bike is just plain silly. As I said, I have ridden rim brakes in the worst conditions and I have never thought them dangerous. After all, a rim brake is nothing but a large disk brake.

[jbeattie]

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 11:17:21 AM UTC-8, Roger Merriman wrote:

A couple of the selling points on racing bikes is that you can use larger tires and there is no problem stopping with CF rims. Whether that justifies discs is another matter. I got them because I live in a wet environment. They stop better and don't wear through rims. Mine don't drag, but they can scream if I don't clean the rotors. Then again, I had cantis that screamed, too, so rim brakes are not necessarily scream-less. Apart from higher pad costs, they are basically set-and-forget. On my racing bike, I have direct mount brakes which will accommodate 28mm tires, I think -- I only use 25mm tires, and use bigger tires are on my disc bikes. The wheels on my racing bike are getting long in the tooth, and it does pain me to hear the pads against the aluminum brake tracks, which will wear out. I kind of wish I had discs for that reason, but dry braking on that bike is as good as discs or not appreciably worse.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Roger Merriman]

MTB aren’t that more heavy to be honest, for the end user who probably
doesn’t service there bike anyway. Brakes that need pads now and then, and
occasionally being cleaned though that’s more off than on road really.

Rim brakes are fine, and not dangerous but they clearly and measurably
don’t have the grunt that (Hydraulic) disks do, particularly on wet days.

It’s not just they become less effective it’s the lag to start working,
it’s clearly less of a issue for club run type of usage but even then it
was always noticeable.

But well I’ve descended down lots of hills off and on road, wet and dry
short and long, steep and dirty and shallow and smooth, on various rim and
disk brakes. Nothing was dangerously bad, but at times I did have to nurse
the bike.

UK does tend to have a fair bit of wet steep country roads which does
favour disks to be fair.

Roger Merriman

[Roger Merriman]

I was think more your road racers ie TDF lot than racing bikes/road bikes,
after all to the best of my knowledge/memory disks have been consumer
driven than manufacturers.

Roger Merriman.

[John B.]

Well, I've lived in unfamiliar countries and learned language well
enough to get by and I can't remember anyone even mentioning a
temperature in degrees. What you do hear is "Whooo Wee! Sure is Hot
(or cold) Today! In fact a news report only a day or so ago said
something like "The North East can expect colder temperatures from the
7th until the 12th of the month. No mention of degrees at all.

So, in a sense, Fahrenheit, or the other one, doesn't have any meaning
at all (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

>> >> If you want a scale that’s actually awkward to use, somebody once proposed

>> >> measuring temperature on a logarithmic scale in decibels, with zero at
>> >> 0.001K. 0 dBmK is pretty much absolute zero, room temperature is 54.7
>> >> dBmK, water boils at 55.7 dBmK, and the surface of the sun is 67.6 dBmK.
>> > And some people suggest that disk brakes make you faster. Both make the same amount of sense.
>> >
>> For autos, discs are faster because one may brake later and
>> more positively/effectively than with drums. I assume the
>> same may be true for bicycles in some situations but
>> probably with less significance.
>
>I've had extensive experience with disks and rim brakes. If there is any difference other than the disks being an absolute pain in the butt you could fool me. If you can lock the tires and slide them with a rim brake how is a disk any improvement? Because it takes them less time to clear the water off of the braking surface in heavy rain? That is completely crap. If you're riding rim brakes you are always aware that you have to clear the braking surface and start applying the brake a little early. This does NOT slow you up.

I've always wondered about that "clearing the water off" thing. I
remember seeing logging trucks up around Grass Valley with water
cooled drum brakes. A 55 gallon drum of water spraying through what
looked like a garden hose into each trailer brake drum. Seems like
clearing the water didn't bother them.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 9:28:39 AM UTC-8, lou.h...@gmail.com wrote:

I believe that if you were not used to either system, and needed to discuss weather conditions or other human comfort, it
would be easier to get used to Fahrenheit than Celsius. That's because the Fahrenheit scale from zero to 100 accidentally
corresponds with common climate extremes.

There's a reason volume control knobs on amplifiers are not graduated from -17.8 to 37.8
That wouldn't really work as well even if you were used to it.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 1:41:57 PM UTC-8, Roger Merriman wrote:

> jbeattie <jbeat...@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > A couple of the selling points on racing bikes is that you can use larger
> > tires and there is no problem stopping with CF rims. Whether that
> > justifies discs is another matter. I got them because I live in a wet
> > environment. They stop better and don't wear through rims. Mine don't
> > drag, but they can scream if I don't clean the rotors. Then again, I had
> > cantis that screamed, too, so rim brakes are not necessarily scream-less.
> > Apart from higher pad costs, they are basically set-and-forget. On my
> > racing bike, I have direct mount brakes which will accommodate 28mm
> > tires, I think -- I only use 25mm tires, and use bigger tires are on my
> > disc bikes. The wheels on my racing bike are getting long in the tooth,
> > and it does pain me to hear the pads against the aluminum brake tracks,
> > which will wear out. I kind of wish I had discs for that reason, but dry
> > braking on that bike is as good as discs or not appreciably worse.
> >
> > -- Jay Beattie.

> I was think more your road racers ie TDF lot than racing bikes/road bikes,
> after all to the best of my knowledge/memory disks have been consumer
> driven than manufacturers.

I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs has been driven by consumers. As I've said, before
road discs were a thing, I don't remember hearing any road rider complain about their caliper brakes being inadequate.

Yet within just a couple years, the industry suddenly all but abandoned rim brakes. And I was
surprised when one good friend said "I plan to buy just one more bike, so I can get disc brakes." She
too had never complained - but once they were marketed, she felt the need to buy them.

Other road-only friends of mine now also have discs, when before they seemed perfectly happy with calipers.

- Frank Krygowski

[Lou Holtman]

I'm not convinced. It is just arbitrary. From Wikipedia:
'The Fahrenheit scale is now usually defined by two fixed points with a 180 °F separation: the temperature at which pure water freezes is defined as 32 °F and the boiling point of water is defined to be 212 °F, both at sea level and under standard atmospheric pressure.' What is different compared to the C scale that divides the two fixed points in 100 degrees? It is all the same, personal preference, what you are used to. It would be nice if we used only one scale instead of converting; C = 5/9*(F-32) or the other way round. That is crazy. Lets flip a coin. I would accept the outcome. BTW I have to set the volume of my soundbar of my TV to 7 or my amp to the second dot to the right. Etc. etc. Do you have amp with a dB scale?

Lou

[Lou Holtman]

Frank, discs make perfectly sense if you use CF rims. Like Jay says on Al rims and dry conditions there is no difference. It wet conditions and Al rims the differences in braking performance is questionable, only rimbrakes wear out rims but that can take a long time for most cyclists.

Lou

[AMuzi]

Out here in the real world, most new bicycle buyers are not
(yet?) 'dedicated cyclists' and are already predisposed to
'disc brakes are better' from autos and motorcycles. This is
not news.

[Tom Kunich]

I am used to the Fahrenheit scale and use it but to even hint that it is in any way better than the far more sensible Centigrade scale is pretty silly. But here we have Frank. supposedly an engineer who should be able to see the far more sensible metric system as being not used here strictly because the US got used to the English systems of measurement while we were in the Industrial Revolution and "England Rules the World", makes one wonder why Frank doesn't also think that the Pounds, Shilling and Pence of the older England weren't also superior.

[Tom Kunich]

On this we disagree - aluminum rims brake perfectly well in the wet unless it is pouring rain and then you have to feather the brakes on for one full revolution to clean the water off of the rims. Rim brakes are lighter, less complicated and more aero. And cheaper. Just consider - people are buying disk brakes to go faster. Does that make the slightest sense?

[Frank Krygowski]

Of course they are "predisposed," which is another way of saying that
they are vulnerable to advertising and salesmanship.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

We are in agreement there. But I believe that disk brakes on road bikes will soon be a thing of the past along with Aero carbon wheels. After I stop actioned that Alviso Crit crash and say that carbon wheel bent 30 degrees out of line causing the sprint crash, I expect people to begin buying wheels with extra stiffening of some sort. That will kick the weight of the wheels up to the level of aluminum which has superior braking performance. And rim brakes offer superior performance to disk brakes in virtually every way.

I think that the people who like disk brakes on road bikes are simply those who like the latest fad. They will invent reasons that it is better despite every indication that they aren't. I had to change the brake shoes on one disk bike twice within 500 miles. The same with carbon rim brakes and once a year on aluminum rims.

I have a set of these and they work very well. After almost 2,000 miles on them there isn't a mark on the brake tracks.+

[AMuzi]

On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs

>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said,Ā before

>>> road discs were a thing, I don't remember hearing any
>>> road rider complain about their caliper brakes being
>>> inadequate.
>>>
>>> Yet within just a couple years, the industry suddenly all
>>> but abandoned rim brakes. And I was
>>> surprised when one good friend said "I plan to buy just
>>> one more bike, so I can get disc brakes." She
>>> too had never complained - but once they were marketed,
>>> she felt the need to buy them.
>>>
>>> Other road-only friends of mine now also have discs, when
>>> before they seemed perfectly happy with calipers.
>>>
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>
>> Out here in the real world, most new bicycle buyers are
>> not (yet?) 'dedicated cyclists' and are already
>> predisposed to 'disc brakes are better' from autos and
>> motorcycles. This is not news.
>
> Of course they are "predisposed," which is another way of
> saying that they are vulnerable to advertising and
> salesmanship.
>

I'll venture that not one person in ten thousand who
purchased a new bike with disc brakes in the last year has
ever seen or heard any advertisement for bicycle disc brakes.

Note that our industry is virtually unknown in advertising
to the general consumer and that the greater bulk of bikes
sold with disc brakes in the last 12 months are under $400
or so.

Nothing wrong with hi-zoot carbon gravel bikes, hydraulic
braking systems and electronic shift. They're fine things.
But again out here in the world most bicycle owners have
never seen one of those.

[Tom Kunich]

What do you suppose they will think of the constant maintenance costs? Or do you believe that they will all be newer riders and not know the difference?

[AMuzi]

On 11/9/2021 11:18 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 8:30:10 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs

>>>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said,Ä€ before

It's true that linear (V) brakes consume brake pads faster
than caliper or cantilever designs. And in gritty urban use
they eat rims fast, too.

Discs do indeed take 'rapid pad wear' up a notch.

But since replacement pads are installed in seconds with
fingers only and rotor replacement is faster/less expensive
than a new rim, maintenance doesn't seem to daunt disc brake
riders.

I'm sympathetic to your braking problems but, again
reporting from the actual world as I find it, discs are less
trouble for most riders than other designs. Do guys spin
handlebars around, ripping out cables or hydraulic line?
Yes. Do offroad berserkers fold/dent front discs? Yes. Do
guys run past the pad material and score rotors accompanied
by loud noises? Yes, all the while. What they don't
generally experience is brake pad cuts on tires or
chronically dragging pads, both common to rim brakes.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/9/2021 11:30 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs

>>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said,  before

>>>> road discs were a thing, I don't remember hearing any
>>>> road rider complain about their caliper brakes being
>>>> inadequate.
>>>>
>>>> Yet within just a couple years, the industry suddenly all
>>>> but abandoned rim brakes. And I was
>>>> surprised when one good friend said "I plan to buy just
>>>> one more bike, so I can get disc brakes." She
>>>> too had never complained - but once they were marketed,
>>>> she felt the need to buy them.
>>>>
>>>> Other road-only friends of mine now also have discs, when
>>>> before they seemed perfectly happy with calipers.
>>>>
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>
>>>
>>> Out here in the real world, most new bicycle buyers are
>>> not (yet?) 'dedicated cyclists' and are already
>>> predisposed to 'disc brakes are better' from autos and
>>> motorcycles. This is not news.
>>
>> Of course they are "predisposed," which is another way of
>> saying that they are vulnerable to advertising and
>> salesmanship.
>>
>
> I'll venture that not one person in ten thousand who purchased a new
> bike with disc brakes in the last year has ever seen or heard any
> advertisement for bicycle disc brakes.

That may be correct, but they are still vulnerable. It may come down to
a salesman saying "... but _this_ one has disc brakes!" at which point
the customer thinks "Ooh, everyone knows disc brakes are better." It may
be the customer noting the cheaper bikes have some sort of rim brake but
the more expensive bikes have discs. And in some instances, it may be
that a shop's available bikes almost all have discs.

But I was talking about fellow club members. Those have gotten the
anti-rim-brake message through the same pipeline as the N+1 cog message,
the narrow tire message (now supplanted by the wide tire message), the
titanium ride message (now supplanted by the CF ride message), etc.

Here's how: A percentage of avid riders do read the promotional ads and
articles. They begin talking about (and talking up) the fashions they've
read about. Someone decides to buy a bike with that fashion. Others say
how natty it really is, and just the proper style. Another buys one, and
we're off to the races. Not one in a hundred cares about the size of the
purported benefit, let alone any detriments. Not one notices that their
riding experience is just the same.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 11/9/2021 11:39 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 11:30 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs

>>>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said, before

For an expensive bicycle with disc brakes sold in a bicycle
shop, yes. For most bicycles, there is no 'salesman' or
'sales process'; it's either 'click here' or, in higher
volumes, 'roll it to the checkout' in the front of the big
box store.

BTW most riders have no idea how many sprockets are on the
wheel of their bicycle. Try asking that question. You may be
surprised.

[Tom Kunich]

I haven't had any problems with rim brakes and I showed no excess wear on even carbon rims run in the rain. Of course I do clean the pads and brake tracks after getting caught out in the rain. Campagnolo carbon rim brake pads allows you almost as good braking as standard pads on aluminum rims. And they seem to wear very slowly and not like the Chinese brake pads which wear like a rubber band.

[Tom Kunich]

Well, contrary to all of the messages about "compliance" this is all almost entirely in the tires and a little in the seat post. The material is essentially unimportant. My Time was completely unrideable with 23 mm tires on it but switching to 28's made it the best riding bike I've had to date that I could compare with other bikes. I remember the Basso Loto being a good riding bike but I also remembering it bouncing HARD at the bottom of fast descents. My Eddy Merckx Strata OS rode well but it mustn't have been that outstanding since I sold it off very rapidly. But that was when I bought the 2018 Emonda nearly new. That bike had almost no redeeming features other than riding normally. My Colnago CLX3.0 with Di2 is a good bike but the only exceptionalism in is in that it rode a great deal better than the Treks. And since it is a 58 cm it had a low and very fast position. But near the end of a hard ride I couldn't lift my head up enough to keep a descent look at the road.

The titanium bikes are no better than the steel bikes but you don't have to worry about scratched paint. And getting back to a more upright posture makes me a whole lot less tired at the end of a ride.

[Tom Kunich]

On flat ground I use maybe 3 gears. As I get tired my cadence goes from 76 or so down to 46. On the way back from my Sunday ride, I was rolling over rollers faster at the lower cadence than at the higher. That was a flat ride but all of those rollers added up to almost 1,000 feet.

[Roger Merriman]

My experience is that was a pent up desire or acknowledgment that rim
brakes performance could be lacking. After all lots of folks do have MTB or
hybrid bikes as well as road bikes, and will have been aware of them.

I certainly can remember folks noting the (performance) difference going
back best part of 20 years.

The desire for better braking for road bikes has been out there for years
decades even.

Roger Merriman.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 5:07:53 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 11/7/2021 12:16 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
> > jbeattie <jbeat...@msn.com> wrote:
> >> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:32:13 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> At the moment is it 7 degrees C and will get up to 16 degrees today.
> >>
> >> Dude, this is the US of A. Speak Fahrenheit. 16C is 60F, which is
> >> balmy. 7C is 44F, which is tights weather. Neither is brutal, even
> >> descending. It's East Bay not SF. To refresh:
> >> https://i.pinimg.com/originals/60/fe/5c/60fe5c2cbca49d67244deaa838219fe7.jpg
> >>
> >
> > Dude, most of the world speaks Celsius.
> I'm a big fan of the SI system, but not for temperatures regarding human
> comfort. Fahrenheit works far better.
>
> By coincidence, this was the topic in the "Ask Marilyn" column in
> today's newspaper. Marilyn (supposedly owner of the highest IQ ever
> recorded) agreed.
>
> As she and others have said, zero Fahrenheit is the lowest temperature
> most Americans would ever put up with outdoors, and 100 Fahrenheit is
> the highest. It wasn't designed that way, but the scale just happens to
> match the human comfort range.
>
> As to Celsius, I remember a few approximate landmarks: Zero is freezing,
> 10C is about 50F, 16C flips around to 61F, 20 C is 68F (commonly used in
> engineering), 28C flips to 82F, and 32 would be freezing on the
> Fahrenheit scale but its Celsius version is a really hot 90F instead. In
> between, I approximate with one degree C = ~ two degrees F.
>

And -40C = -40F

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/9/2021 12:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> It's true that linear (V) brakes consume brake pads faster than caliper
> or cantilever designs.

I'm curious why that would be.

I've got V brakes only on the folding Bikes Friday, and they get much
less mileage, so I don't have enough experience to tell. But ISTM brake
wear shouldn't depend on the mechanical details of how the brake force
is applied.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 10:49:50 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> On 11/8/2021 9:21 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 7:18:31 AM UTC-8, Ralph Barone wrote:
> >> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

> >>> It's mere familiarity & custom (see also jeans with pre-slit
> >>> knees, pocket protectors, handlebar bags etc).
> >>>
> >>> Sorry to disagree with Ms dos Savant and you but
> >>> freezing/boiling points of water, average human body, any
> >>> other universal points are the same thing, merely expressed
> >>> on various scales. You might just as well argue Kelvin as
> >>> Fahrenheit.
> >>>
> >>> "Oh, sweetie it's a perfect 293K this morning, let's go for
> >>> a ride!".
> >>>

> >> If you want a scale that’s actually awkward to use, somebody once proposed

> >> measuring temperature on a logarithmic scale in decibels, with zero at
> >> 0.001K. 0 dBmK is pretty much absolute zero, room temperature is 54.7
> >> dBmK, water boils at 55.7 dBmK, and the surface of the sun is 67.6 dBmK.
> > And some people suggest that disk brakes make you faster. Both make the same amount of sense.
> >
> For autos, discs are faster because one may brake later and
> more positively/effectively than with drums. I assume the
> same may be true for bicycles in some situations but
> probably with less significance.

> --

Paolo Savoldelli - two-time winner of the Giro - was nicknamed "the Falcon" for his descending capabilities. When the disc brakes started showing up in the peloton he was quoted as saying something along the lines of how he wished he had disc brakes when he was racing, commenting on the ability to brake later with better control, I checked around the net for that article but can't find it.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

+1

[Frank Krygowski]

OK, for those people it's probably mostly "this is what's in stock." But
if there were (say) a V brake model next to a disc brake model, I think
the "discs are better" meme would kick in.

> BTW most riders have no idea how many sprockets are on the wheel of
> their bicycle. Try asking that question. You may be surprised.

Sure, but that's because counting higher than six is advanced math! All
a consumer really needs to know is what everybody already knows: More
speeds are better.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

Dear Univac, what do you mean by the "size of the purported benefit." And at what point is the "size" of a benefit big enough? Hmmm, now if we divide the disc brakes by the tire profile, times bar width plus saddle width over the sum of the wheelbase, we will be able to determine whether it is worth buying a $60 Spurcycle dingy-bell. Maybe somebody just wants the f****** bell. Should everyone check with you first before buying something to make sure the magnitude of the benefit outweighs the . . . well . . . whatever curmudgeonly counterweight there is. Maybe you should come up with a phone app so people can just calculate whether they should get STI instead of downtube friction shifters.

-- Jay Beattie

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

As I wrote in another thread, That's true. I must have tried at least a dozen different MTB brake designs over the years looking for something that had better modulation and stopping power. Various cantilever designs, v brake variants, there was even my short foray into the magura hydraulic calipers - hey, remember these? :

http://www.bikepro.com/products/brakes/brakeboost/dkgboost.shtml

They did actually help...a little. I had these front and rear on my Ti hardtail until I bought a rockshox SID WC with a disk mount for the front, and converted the rear with one of these:

https://www.amazon.com/A2Z-Unisexs-DM-UNI-Brake-Silver/dp/B001O9PHMW

It works great, so much that the braking is now comparable to my Cdale Habit (FS). More quiet, more reliable, better modulation, better power.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

The meme would kick in because disc brakes _are_ better than V-brakes, though it isn't likely the average rider would ever be able to tell the difference unless they are riding in conditions where water/mud/ice build-up on the rim makes rim brakes unusable. Add that to the drawbacks andrew notes above and the advantages are exceptionally clear.

You're really big on versatility Frank - try this on: All fat bikes have disc brakes. With a fat bike you can mount any type of wheel, from a road 700/28C (provided the correct hub) up to a full fattie 26"x5", with slicks, knobs, studs, and anything in between. One frame does it all, and it wouldn't be possible without disc brakes.

[Lou Holtman]

I said disc brakes are questionable better in the wet than rim brakes on Al rims.
Rim brakes are not more aero (anymore).
Disc brakes don't have to be more expensive. Disc and rim brake calipers are already comparable. Rotors are extra.

Lou

[John B.]

Yes, I would say that probably 90%, or better, of the "department
store" bicycles I see here have cable operated disc brakes. And are
usually 7 speed.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Lou Holtman]

Rim brakes on CF rims suck in the dry and are terrifying in a wet downhill. I had a set of Campy Hyperon Ultra wheels and I used Campagnolo pads for CF rims. They were so so in the dry. Once I was caught in a thunderstorm when I was in the Dolomite mountains. They scared the shit out of me. Never used the front wheel in the mountains again. Always used a front wheel with AL rim after that, until I sold that wheel set for a good price. Disc brakes makes it possible again to use CF rims.

Lou

[Tom Kunich]

As for aero, we will have to disagree there.

[Tom Kunich]

Caught in a heavy rainstorm with carbon wheels and Campy pads and over a long 6-7% descent they were no problem at all. After coming into town there was a 10% descent with a freeway exit traffic light and another intersection below that that has an 11% flattening down to a 5% with very heavy cross traffic and a sure kill if you miss stopping. No trouble at all. But I wasn't trying to go real fast because I knew how dangerous those two intersections were.

[Frank Krygowski]

Congratulations on a rare attempt to talk quantification! Not that it
was any good, but still, it's a step forward for you.

> Maybe you should come up with a phone app so people can just calculate whether they should get STI instead of downtube friction shifters.

Of course, I haven't use downtube shifters for decades now.

But the disc brake decision doesn't matter. Obviously, bicyclists are
well on the way to saying "Any brakes other than disc brakes are unsafe
as well as unstylish!"

Until the pendulum swings back again.

I'm reminded of the guy, in the days of corncob freewheels, who snarked
at my 32 tooth rear cog. "I've never even _seen_ a cog that big!" I was
so unfashionable!

Now that same gear train is unfashionable the other way. I guess I gotta
get me a 40 tooth cog!


--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 07:31:12 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 11:59:00 PM UTC-8, lou.h...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 4:16:09 AM UTC+1, frkr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 9:28:39 AM UTC-8, lou.h...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > > On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 4:42:33 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I think a good analogy might be languages. If a person moves to an
>> > > > unfamiliar country, that person will eventually learn the language well
>> > > > enough to get by, no matter what the language is.
>> > > >
>> > > > But few people deny that some languages are much easier to learn than
>> > > > others.
>> > > >
>> > > > I suspect that Fahrenheit is much easier to "learn," when used to
>> > > > describe human comfort.
>> > > Huh??? How is that? I can calibrate my thermometer with C scale just using boiling water and melting ice. Rest is just what you used to.
>> > I believe that if you were not used to either system, and needed to discuss weather conditions or other human comfort, it
>> > would be easier to get used to Fahrenheit than Celsius. That's because the Fahrenheit scale from zero to 100 accidentally
>> > corresponds with common climate extremes.
>> >
>> > There's a reason volume control knobs on amplifiers are not graduated from -17.8 to 37.8
>> > That wouldn't really work as well even if you were used to it.
>> I'm not convinced. It is just arbitrary. From Wikipedia:
>> 'The Fahrenheit scale is now usually defined by two fixed points with a 180 °F separation: the temperature at which pure water freezes is defined as 32 °F and the boiling point of water is defined to be 212 °F, both at sea level and under standard atmospheric pressure.' What is different compared to the C scale that divides the two fixed points in 100 degrees? It is all the same, personal preference, what you are used to. It would be nice if we used only one scale instead of converting; C = 5/9*(F-32) or the other way round. That is crazy. Lets flip a coin. I would accept the outcome. BTW I have to set the volume of my soundbar of my TV to 7 or my amp to the second dot to the right. Etc. etc. Do you have amp with a dB scale?
>
>I am used to the Fahrenheit scale and use it but to even hint that it is in any way better than the far more sensible Centigrade scale is pretty silly. But here we have Frank. supposedly an engineer who should be able to see the far more sensible metric system as being not used here strictly because the US got used to the English systems of measurement while we were in the Industrial Revolution and "England Rules the World", makes one wonder why Frank doesn't also think that the Pounds, Shilling and Pence of the older England weren't also superior.

I worked with an accountant who served his apprenticeship in the old
pound, shilling, pence English money system and I asked him whether
accounting was a problem using what I thought was a rather cumbersome
system and he replied, "No it wasn't. Why should it have been".
In other words, the system that you are used to is the "normal"
system. Just as some folks with 1/60th of 1/360th and think it is
normal. Or increments of 1.852 Km (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

Let's think about that a second longer. "Disc brakes _are_ better than
V-brakes"... but if the average rider can't tell the difference, they
are not better for the average rider. Isn't that obvious?

FWIW, I've long admitted they are better for muddy mountain biking and
for the 0.0001% of U.S. cyclists who commute like Jay does, rain or
shine year round. And maybe for the far smaller percentage who might buy
the super-versatile fat bike you're imagining. (Is there such a person??)

For the vast, vast majority who have never have problems with their rim
brakes, discs are not better. At best, they're equivalent - until the
disc brakes need work and the owner has to wonder what's inside the
little black box; or the pads are worn out and replacements aren't at
hand; or the hydro lever gets bumped with the wheel removed; or it's
time to bleed the things; or etc.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 11/9/2021 6:49 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 11/9/2021 4:25 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 3:58:57 PM UTC-5, Frank
>> Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 11/9/2021 12:52 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/2021 11:39 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 11/9/2021 11:30 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike
>>>>>>>>> discs

>>>>>>>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said,ÂÂ

I don't know if you actually had a point about fat bikes or
if you weren't able to get whatever it is into writing, but
fat bikes are a thing and sell in some significant volume
(locally, a new sub niche of bow hunters).

They all inherently have discs and, as noted by Mr Funk, can
support various wheel formats (because 'fat' is a hub format
as much as 'MTB disc' is a format. ('road' or 'tour' being
way too many formats). Mr Funk is right about enhanced
versatility which you claimed as a virtue earlier.

[John B.]

Actually, given that nearly all of the "department store" bikes I see
lately have cable operated discs I would guess that they are cheaper
then even "Vee" brakes.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[jbeattie]

You seem so wounded by having your 32t cog disrespected -- assuming it was disrespect. The guy may have never seen a cog that big. In the 1970s, a 32 was huge -- and rare. During that era, I was riding a corn-cob, although I had a 42/28 on my ten-speed touring bike -- which I thought was a super-low low.

Now that same gear train is unfashionable the other way. I guess I gotta
> get me a 40 tooth cog!

Not unless you have a 1X or if you want a <18" gear on your triple, which would be bizarre. You would better off walking, and it would be hard to stay upright. A 40/40t on a 1X is a 26" gear, which is a more normal low gear.


-- Jay Beattie.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 09 Nov 2021 11:52:44 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>BTW most riders have no idea how many sprockets are on the
>wheel of their bicycle. Try asking that question. You may be
>surprised.

Very true for "riders". Not so true for bicycle enthusiasts and gear
junkies. Most ordinary riders would not be able to provide the number
of sprockets, and certainly not the number of teeth. Try your luck
answering these questions:
1. What are the real dimension of a common 2x4 construction stud?
2. How many steps do you climb when entering your house?
3. Do you turn your car door key clockwise, or counter clockwise?
4. Is your hot water valve on the left or right? Do you turn it
clockwise or counter clockwise for more water?
5. How many gallons/liters does your vehicle tank hold?
6. Do you recall your bank number or account number from your checks?
7. Do mens shirts have the buttons on the left or right? (If you had
to look, you didn't know or weren't sure).
8. When interleave or knit your fingers, is your right or left thumb
on top? [1]

That should be sufficient. What all these questions have in common is
that they involve things that we all take for granted and have little
reason to inspect in detail. Most the things mentioned are those that
we see, touch, or use daily, yet cannot accurately describe. That's
because we have developed a familiarity and confidence about their
presence and operation so that we don't need to know exactly how they
are built or how they are used. I can easily ride my bicycles without
knowing the number of sprockets.

Incidentally, the same confidence also extends to politics, where
voters generally cannot name their current elected representatives or
whether they voted for the winner or loser in the last election. They
can usually recall the president and governor, but will have problems
remembering the lesser elected representatives.

Despite knowing how such things work, I also don't recall the number
of sprockets on my bicycle wheels. At best, I can make a guess, but
I'm not certain. The only time I really need to know the count is
after I clean them, or when buying replacement cogs, which is almost
never.

I would guess(tm) that you know the intimate details of every
component on your bicycles. I also know what's inside most of my
computers and my customers computers. The gear heads in RBT can
probably provide the number of links in their chain, tubing sizes, key
dimensions, screw sizes, tire sizes, spoke lengths, etc. Expecting
the same from ordinary "riders" might be a bit too much to ask.


[1] "Hand-clasping: The myth"
<http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mythhandclasp.html>

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Bertrand]

> Not unless you have a 1X or if you want a <18" gear on your triple, which would be bizarre. You would better off walking, and it would be hard to stay upright. A 40/40t on a 1X is a 26" gear, which is a more normal low gear.

A useful rule of thumb is that 1:1 gearing on a standard road bike gives about 7
mph at a nominal cadence of 90/minute.

[Frank Krygowski]

I momentarily lost sight of the precision needed in r.b.tech posts. I
should have said "... who might buy the super-versatile fat bike for the
versatility you're imagining..."

Of course I know that fat bikes are sold. I've seen many, although not
around here. I've ridden one in our local forest preserve. (I'd have
ridden another on another occasion, except the owner found it had a flat
just before he handed it to me.)

But I don't know of fat bikes being retrofitted with skinny wheels. That
second guy rode his for a few months as is, on club rides, praising it
for the extra workout. Is that wheel swapping really done with any
regularity, or is it (almost) entirely hypothetical?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

Frank - you couldn't even GET a 32 tooth cog until relatively recently so why are you talking about that? I had to ride 39/25's for a very long time not because I preferred a cadence of 5 on climbs but because there was no alternative. Triples except for top end equipment were highly unreliable shifting and dropping a chain had worse consequences than lugging a larger gear.

[Frank Krygowski]

It may be that the disc hardware itself is more expensive, but the labor
costs to install a disc brake are much lower. V-brakes do require time
and some skill to install.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

The major reason that they are better for MTB's is because traction is far worse off-road and you can lock up a wheel with far fewer problems. On the road that is not the case. I understand that people that presently are converting to disk brakes are going to find every possible reason to believe them better but they aren't any better than rim brakes and there is a weight and aero disadvantage not that either of those is anything other than a talking point.

[Tom Kunich]

The cassette on my 11 speed bikes are 32 tooth large ring and I could get 34 if I switched to a long arm rear derailleur. So I really don't understand Franks wounded feelings.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/10/2021 1:01 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 4:40:20 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> Until the pendulum swings back again.
>>
>> I'm reminded of the guy, in the days of corncob freewheels, who snarked
>> at my 32 tooth rear cog. "I've never even _seen_ a cog that big!" I was
>> so unfashionable!
>

> You seem so wounded by having your 32t cog disrespected ...

You keep implying I'm easily wounded.

That's just hurtful, Jay. It's a microaggression. Turn in your Liberal card!

> Now that same gear train is unfashionable the other way. I guess I gotta
>> get me a 40 tooth cog!
>
> Not unless you have a 1X or if you want a <18" gear on your triple, which would be bizarre. You would better off walking, and it would be hard to stay upright. A 40/40t on a 1X is a 26" gear, which is a more normal low gear.

But... but... can't I take that small step toward fashion??


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

Frank, please stop talking out of your ass. Hydraulic disks take a much larger time to install and are far easier to get failures with. It is the easiest thing in the world to overtighten a hose and crush the seal ring and have a slow leak that could leave you without brakes down the road. What would give you the idea that routing a hose and fitting it and then bleeding the system correctly is in any way easier than running a cable brake?

[Frank Krygowski]

On 11/10/2021 10:13 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> Frank - you couldn't even GET a 32 tooth cog until relatively recently so why are you talking about that?

Tom, Tom, Tom ...

When a local bike shop closed back in the 1980s (IIRC) I was given a
very full SunTour sprocket board. It's still hanging in my workshop.
It's got some 34 tooth cogs hanging on it. They're marked "A 34"


--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

You could GET a 32 tooth cog and even a 34 tooth cog on an old 5-speed freewheel, you just didn't see them that often as OE -- at least not that I recall. https://www.flickr.com/photos/zbillster/2771347997/in/album-72157606789001880/ That's a '76 Bikecology catalog. The steps on the 32 were 14,17,21,26,32. TA triples and later Sugino and others were not terrible shifting, assuming you had your derailleur adjusted -- although dropping a chain was far more common back then than it is now, even on a 2X.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Frank Krygowski]

John B. was talking about "department store bikes." (See above.) IME,
those don't come with hydro discs. They use cables.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

Suntour derailleurs that would even shift a 28 were so likely to drop a chain that no one used them except probably Frank. I cannot even imagine shifting a 34 tooth 5 speed freewheel with any of those junk derailleurs. Certainly I never saw anything other than 6 speed freewheels on my touring bike and we would work so hard on hills that I have a hard time imagining using a Sugino rear derailleur which could break in half even with normal gears.

[Tom Kunich]

John talks about a lot of things he knows nothing about.

[Frank Krygowski]

:-) Wow!

How funny that _you_ would make that accusation!

--
- Frank Krygowski

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

No, because the average rider buying a bike with disc brakes doesn't have the frame of reference. Put them on a side-by-side comparison and they will most certainly be able to tell the difference. Someone buying their _one_ bike for recreational riding likely hasn't been on their 20-year-old Ross lying in the back of the garage for 15 of those years - Frame of reference.

>
> FWIW, I've long admitted they are better for muddy mountain biking and
> for the 0.0001% of U.S. cyclists who commute like Jay does, rain or
> shine year round. And maybe for the far smaller percentage who might buy
> the super-versatile fat bike you're imagining. (Is there such a person??)

Not sure about your area, but fat-biking is huge around here. In fact, I'm one of the few people in my regular riding group that doesn't have one. WE have a local weekly race series exclusively for fatbikes (4 races across january/february), and just recently has the New England fat bike championships at a local CX race. The off-road bike-packing set has fully embraced the fat bike.

>
> For the vast, vast majority who have never have problems with their rim
> brakes, discs are not better. At best, they're equivalent

The perception of the performance is not the same as the actual performance.

> until the
> disc brakes need work and the owner has to wonder what's inside the
> little black box; or the pads are worn out and replacements aren't at
> hand; or the hydro lever gets bumped with the wheel removed; or it's
> time to bleed the things; or etc.

wow...hmmm....where to start...

- An average rider is going to be at least as flummoxed (if not more) by cable adjustment and pad alignment on a caliper, and even moreso with cantis. As Andrew noted previously, pad replacement on a disc can be doen without tools and do not need alignment.
- Disc brake pads are these days more ubiquitous at local shops and on-line than non-disc.
- Not sure what you mean with "hydro lever gets bumped with the wheel removed". So what if it does? I've tossed both of my MTBs around with the front wheel off many mnay times over the years, I've never had the tweak the placement. Even more to the point, I''m running a Lefty 2.0 on my Cdale, and the caliper flops around on the end of the cable unless you remount it afteryoyu take the wheel off.
- Hydraulics are the predominant form on bike-shop bikes, but cable discs are the standard on low end bikes. I'm running Avid BB7 cable discs on my hard tail, the difference in performance is barely discernible under most conditions between those and the Sram G2 on my Cdale Habit. I really only notice it while modulating at high speeds - the G2s are more responsive.

All I can say Frank, is that you should try a ride on a bike with disc and put the stopping characteristics through its' paces. If you aren't impressed at the differences (as I would expect given a rider with your experience), you'll be the only person on the planet that isn't.

[AMuzi]

On 11/10/2021 9:13 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 4:40:20 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 11/9/2021 4:03 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 9:39:54 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/2021 11:30 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs

>>>>>>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said, before

what's relatively recently mean? Here's the 1972 Schwinn
(Panasonic) Voyager with an early Shimano shift-enhanced
tooth design:

https://vintageschwinnbicycle.name/images/Vintage-1972-Schwinn-World-Voyageur-Voyager-Road-Bike-Touring-Bicycle-Original-07-nl.jpg

Nishiki and Sekine had a 32 low then as well.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

I have one friend that swaps them out pretty regularly depending on the conditions. Youtube and the MTB forums are loaded with advice on swapping in "skinnies".

[AMuzi]

WTF? Do you live under a rock?

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Schwinn-Santis-Mountain-Bike-24-speeds-29-inch-wheels-Grey-mens-sizes/730625518

$199 BSOs have crappy cable discs, at $329 they're crappy
hydraulic systems.

[AMuzi]

On 11/10/2021 9:44 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 10, 2021 at 7:29:48 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
>> On Wednesday, November 10, 2021 at 7:13:03 AM UTC-8, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 4:40:20 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/2021 4:03 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 9:39:54 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/9/2021 11:30 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/9/2021 9:38 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/9/2021 8:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/8/2021 9:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't believe the sudden popularity of road bike discs

>>>>>>>>>> has been driven by consumers. As I've said, before

Suntour VGT and Shimano Crane were fine for triples with 34t
low 5-FW 48 years ago. Less expensive models still spanned
the ranges and every suppliers got better at that over time.

You might have a good argument regarding Huret Luxe Super
Tour. A great argument in fact, considering it's not Luxe,
it's not Super and it's incapable of dependable shifts on a
Tour bike.

https://velobase.com/ViewComponent.aspx?ID=A3F4CD75-7DE6-42E5-BEE0-CBE625D24739

[Tom Kunich]

Do you mean the guy who worked for Laurence labs, Nasa, automated PCR to discover HIV and developed DNA sequencers? It is very comical that you are so jealous of someone that accomplished something while you were satisfied to poorly educate college students. I'll bet you think that your worthless opinion in any way bothers me.

[jbeattie]

I guess I wasn't paying attention or didn't hang with the big cog set. I thought 32t and 34t were more rare. My bike-boom era 10speeds (Varsity, Gitane) had 28t cog freewheels. When I graduated to the '69 PX10, it had a 24t cog, maybe -- but it was a few years old and bought used, and I don't know what came OE.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Tom Kunich]

I had to work very hard to get 28 tooth freewheels for my touring bike and I would never have put one of those bad shifting things on my sport bike.

[jbeattie]

The mid-late '70s SunTour Cyclone shifted better than a Campy NR, and the long cage version shifted better than the Campy Rally (I owned both) and it was less than half the price. I used the long-cage Cyclone on a 28t freewheel, and it shifted without problems -- except the usual friction shifting missed shift now and then. AFAIK, Sugino didn't produce a rear derailleur -- although in the mid '80s, it sold a re-branded SunTour Superbe, which was a fine derailleur for the era. Shimano had already launched SIS, so SunTour's days were numbered by then.

I hung on to Campy friction shifting until the late '80s, and then I got a Dura-Ace seven speed SIS DT shifters, and on the Cannondale Black Lightening, they would make a loud "snack" that echoed through the fat tubes every time you shifted a gear. It was a somewhat stiff mechanism, too, so shifting was like flipping a breaker. I kind of liked it -- none of that vague and squishy friction shifting. It was a manly sound, although when I first saw SIS, I wrote it off a child's toy for newbies. I changed my tune after buying it and upgrading to N+2 (seven speed).

-- Jay Beattie.