All road bike

[James]

I am very happy with the performance of my new bike.

I bought a Finna Taroko frame set from Spain, Fulcrum Rapid Red 5 wheels
from Germany, Campagnolo Centaur 11v gears and TRP Spyre C brake
calipers, etc., from somewhere else in Europe. Currently I've fitted
Michelin Wild Run'r 1.40" slick tyres.

I can't find our digital luggage scales at the moment, but using our old
bathroom scales, the bike weighs about the same as my road bike.

After a half dozen or so rides on predominantly bitumen roads, my times
are basically the same as when I've ridden my road bike. These are
typically rides of at least 3 hours duration and near 100km, with some
being quite hilly and others reasonably flat.

The biggest difference is that the much wider tyres give a nicer ride
over the potholed roads and unmade sections where there are roadworks.

With clearance to fit up to 50mm tyres, I'll give it a try on some
gravel roads later this year. I haven't needed the small chain ring for
more than a few kilometers so far, and that's only because I don't go
past the third largest sprocket when I'm in the big chain ring.

Oh, I fitted Shitmano GRX 2x ultra compact cranks, with 46/30
chainrings. The cassette is 32-11. Some of the gravel roads through the
national parks are steep.

--
JS

[Tom Kunich]

You will find your speed and endurance pretty much set by your physical condition. Since you're not a pro rider that means that aero other than wheels will not make the least difference. So it shouldn't surprise you that you can do the same times on your gravel bike as on your road bike, though the wider tires might make you a bit more tired if they are knobbies without a smooth center section.

I like Shimano 10 speed stuff for a gravel bike since they made parts that would shift up to 42 teeth, I believe, while the largest Campy cog that would shift was 28.

The only reason I like 11 speeds is because they have exactly the same spacing between all of the brand's cogs so that you can use any wheelset you have.

I used to ride high pressure 23's on gravel roads but the 28's are so much better it is hard to compare.

[Frank Krygowski]

The change in tire fashion has been interesting to watch. Friends who
once rode 19s are now praising tires twice that wide. Except for one or
two loaded tours and some sport riding, I've never gone much outside the
28 to 32 range; but I'm tempted to try some of the wide lightweight
tires that are getting so much attention.

I had Conti Top Touring 37s on my Cannondale touring bike for a short
while, but to my disappointment the space between the chainstays was
just a bit too narrow. Everything needed to be perfect to avoid
scraping. Clearance elsewhere was fine.

I've thought about trying to indent the inside of the chainstays at
least a millimeter or two at that point. I've done that before with a
Reynolds 531 frame. But I'm not sure how it will go with the 6061-T6
aluminum, which I'm sure has a heavier wall.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 1/30/2023 7:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/30/2023 6:26 PM, James wrote:
>> I am very happy with the performance of my new bike.
>>
>> I bought a Finna Taroko frame set from Spain, Fulcrum
>> Rapid Red 5 wheels from Germany, Campagnolo Centaur 11v
>> gears and TRP Spyre C brake calipers, etc., from somewhere

>> else in Europe. Currently I've fitted Michelin Wild

>> Run'r 1.40" slick tyres.
>>
>> I can't find our digital luggage scales at the moment, but
>> using our old bathroom scales, the bike weighs about the
>> same as my road bike.
>>
>> After a half dozen or so rides on predominantly bitumen
>> roads, my times are basically the same as when I've ridden

>> my road bike. These are typically rides of at least 3

>> hours duration and near 100km, with some being quite hilly
>> and others reasonably flat.
>>
>> The biggest difference is that the much wider tyres give a
>> nicer ride over the potholed roads and unmade sections
>> where there are roadworks.
>>
>> With clearance to fit up to 50mm tyres, I'll give it a try

>> on some gravel roads later this year. I haven't needed

>> the small chain ring for more than a few kilometers so
>> far, and that's only because I don't go past the third
>> largest sprocket when I'm in the big chain ring.
>>
>> Oh, I fitted Shitmano GRX 2x ultra compact cranks, with

>> 46/30 chainrings. The cassette is 32-11. Some of the

>> gravel roads through the national parks are steep.
>
> The change in tire fashion has been interesting to watch.
> Friends who once rode 19s are now praising tires twice that
> wide. Except for one or two loaded tours and some sport
> riding, I've never gone much outside the 28 to 32 range; but
> I'm tempted to try some of the wide lightweight tires that
> are getting so much attention.
>
> I had Conti Top Touring 37s on my Cannondale touring bike
> for a short while, but to my disappointment the space
> between the chainstays was just a bit too narrow. Everything
> needed to be perfect to avoid scraping. Clearance elsewhere
> was fine.
>
> I've thought about trying to indent the inside of the
> chainstays at least a millimeter or two at that point. I've
> done that before with a Reynolds 531 frame. But I'm not sure
> how it will go with the 6061-T6 aluminum, which I'm sure has
> a heavier wall.
>

In theory you shouldn't do that.

The material is more ductile in the annealed state but after
welding the entire frame is tempered (or more correctly, as
the aluminum guys say, 'rapid aging') making it more brittle
and prone to cracking when worked.

The limits of that I do not know.

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

[Frank Krygowski]

I think the limits are exactly the point. Yes, it's more brittle after the
T6 quench; but sources like this
https://asm.matweb.com/search/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=ma6061t6
say it's still got an elongation of 17%. The metal will move in response to
enough applied force. How much will it move, and how much force is required?
"That I do not know." (Ductility doesn't increase markedly until ~350F, so there's
little point in trying to heat it, even aside from the permanent effect on the strength.)

Ideally, I'd like to have a sort of anvil or support to surround and reinforce
the outside of the chainstay, and a clamp that will pinch the chainstay from the
inside, toward that anvil to flatten it just a bit. Repeat for the other chainstay.
I definitely don't intend to try to pry against both from the inside.

I'm still thinking about this.

- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

I would emphasize Andrew's comments. In the Air Force T6 was not
considered suitable to be bent or formed regardless of the alloy.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Roger Merriman]

James <james.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am very happy with the performance of my new bike.
>
> I bought a Finna Taroko frame set from Spain, Fulcrum Rapid Red 5 wheels
> from Germany, Campagnolo Centaur 11v gears and TRP Spyre C brake
> calipers, etc., from somewhere else in Europe. Currently I've fitted
> Michelin Wild Run'r 1.40" slick tyres.
>
> I can't find our digital luggage scales at the moment, but using our old
> bathroom scales, the bike weighs about the same as my road bike.
>
> After a half dozen or so rides on predominantly bitumen roads, my times
> are basically the same as when I've ridden my road bike. These are
> typically rides of at least 3 hours duration and near 100km, with some
> being quite hilly and others reasonably flat.

That was my experience as well, and looking at Strava seems to broadly
support this.

>
> The biggest difference is that the much wider tyres give a nicer ride
> over the potholed roads and unmade sections where there are roadworks.
>

Absolutely the ability to just ride over rough roads and to a degree
potholes with out issue is great! And greater grip levels even on smooth
flat roads.

> With clearance to fit up to 50mm tyres, I'll give it a try on some
> gravel roads later this year. I haven't needed the small chain ring for
> more than a few kilometers so far, and that's only because I don't go
> past the third largest sprocket when I'm in the big chain ring.
>
> Oh, I fitted Shitmano GRX 2x ultra compact cranks, with 46/30
> chainrings. The cassette is 32-11. Some of the gravel roads through the
> national parks are steep.
>

My older Gravel bike which is what all road is, it’s not a new term either
both are a least 10 years old.

Has Tiagra fitted which gives broadly similar gearing, though the rear mech
doesn’t have clutch so will get chain slap if one really bombs it on rocky
stuff.

Roger Merriman

[Roger Merriman]

Surely there are 35mm tyres that would be suitable? I run 35mm at 45psi as
I’m heavy but lower than I used when tubed and being able to drop the
pressures plus potentially no tube as well.

Has made the tires much more plush, which I was surprised by how much!

Roger Merriman

[Catrike Rider]

Performance of tires on my Catrike are different than on two wheelers
because the Catrike doesn't lean when cornering. I use 40 MM tires at
85/90 psi. Lowering the pressure increases the rolling resistance.
I've noticed that as the tires wear and the tire patch grows wider,
will also lower the rolling resistance. I ride almost exclusively on
asphalt.

[Tom Kunich]

I will be doing a short ride of maybe 20 miles today almost entirely on gravel. It has been long enough since the rain that any mud will have hardened to the point where it isn't icky with 28mm tires.

[Andre Jute]

I don't have a tricycle (and if I made or bought one, I would choose leaning wheels), so I'm in the first instance applying automobile knowledge to your point: it is commonly and erroneously thought that slicks have greater rolling resistance because there is more tyre in contact with tarmacadam, but this is in most cases untrue. The exact degree in which slicks have less rolling resistance depends on how the sipes are cut and the amount of movement in the resulting blocks of "rubber", and also on the exact mechanical friction properties of the compound at various temperatures, so the speed and thus the power input are also factors.* In my book DESIGNING AND BUILDING SPECIAL CARS I show some graphs to help readers get a grip on the frustrating non-linearities of tyre "science" -- they're all S-shaped. Jobst Brandt proved long ago (Andrew, do you remember the year in which the Avocet slicks were launched?) that bicycle tyres have less rolling resistance than those with tread.
>
* I remember a day at MIRA in which I was doing the ultra-speed tests where I noticed that as I explained to an engineer that the feel of the car was different for less than the 10mph speed differential blocks he was measuring and the changes weren't proportional or even in the same direction. I noticed he was clenching his hands into fists. When he went away, I said to head of the test group, "I'm not risking my life by going over the limit of your tyres for goddamn junior engineers, are we crystal on that?" And he said, "Don't worry about him. He'll learn yet that the bulge in a driver's pants is at the back, and then you'll like him better." I laughed; it was a good way to describe the seat of the pants feeling of the limits at a time when the most sophisticated instruments of today either didn't exist or were crude ancestors. (Today the cheapest iPhone has more automobile testing software than existed then.) I ran into this guy again some years later when he was leading the OEM group where I was testing prototype auto-boxes for sports cars at Nardo. He said, "Best thing that ever happened to me, you putting me down and James [the head of the group that day at MIRA) explaining to me that frustration is the lot of the tyre engineer. I got out and into a rational line of engineering." But their illinearities are precisely what make tyres such a fascinating subject for right-brained people, such as most high-level racing engineers; this guy, who came to hate tyres, was originally a pure mathematician: he also hated Godel, the Austrian who proved mathematics don't have all the answers. There's a sense in which tyres are the last frontier.
>
BTW, I think that even Roger, who says he is heavy, can go down still from 45psi, depending of course on the construction of the tyres. The sweet spot is likely to be about a 15 per cent drop measured between the road and the lowest point of the rim, as defined by Frank Berto in an article or articles quite a few years ago.
>
I run 622x60mm Schwalbe Big Apples with the Liteskin sidewalls at something over 2 bar/under 30psi, and don't even bother to check the pressure between routing monthly reinflations. It is true that two of the less than a handful of flats I've had in 13 years on the Big Apples came about by fishbones, one by riding at 50kph plus through a pothole, the other by misjudging a 9in kerb, but that's a very small price to pay for a veeeeery plush ride all these years. Something else to consider is that softer tyres make you more secure in fast downhill corners by adding a measure of protective understeer, perhaps more important to bicycles than tricycles.
>
Andre Jute
Bicycle science is an endlessly fascinating subject.
>

[AMuzi]

Some riders just change diameter from 622mm to to 584mm rims
and tires

[Tom Kunich]

Silca makes a tire pressure calculator into which you put the tire specifics and then your weight

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:23:20 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
<fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Jobst Brandt proved long ago (Andrew, do you remember the year in which the Avocet slicks were launched?) that bicycle tyres have less rolling resistance than those with tread.

Rolling resistance of tires:
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/rolling-resistance.html>

Tires with smooth tread:
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/slicks.html>

Details and discussion from various articles by Jobst:
<https://yarchive.net/bike/slicks.html>

I couldn't find the exact date, but various article mention "early
80's":
"Jobst Brandt: Loss of an Icon"
<http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.com/2015/05/jobst-brandt.html>

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

[Roger Merriman]

As with most gravel tires more sturdy than road tires who’s side walls are
very thin but some way from say MTB robustness. At higher pressures and
tubes still able to bottom out the rim occasionally, as well off road.

>>
> I run 622x60mm Schwalbe Big Apples with the Liteskin sidewalls at
> something over 2 bar/under 30psi, and don't even bother to check the
> pressure between routing monthly reinflations. It is true that two of the
> less than a handful of flats I've had in 13 years on the Big Apples came
> about by fishbones, one by riding at 50kph plus through a pothole, the
> other by misjudging a 9in kerb, but that's a very small price to pay for
> a veeeeery plush ride all these years. Something else to consider is that
> softer tyres make you more secure in fast downhill corners by adding a
> measure of protective understeer, perhaps more important to bicycles than tricycles.

Fairly sure litskin has been discontinued only the Performance or active
lines, I run 26/2in on the commuter though it’s the one bike I do run
higher pressures on, with 40psi as well I carry stuff.

If it’s just urban probably could reduce your pressures further, my MTB
tires are broadly same weight and size run at 30psi/2bar though big apples
don’t have strong sidewalls a shard of glass was able to rip mine,
something the MTB tyre is designed to survive.

>>
> Andre Jute
> Bicycle science is an endlessly fascinating subject.
>>
>

Roger Merriman

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

In the early days of CX in the US (mid/late 80's) there were a few frame builders in the local copying euro designs, and one who would modify road frames - he brazed on cantilever brake bosses, then replace the rear brake bridge and pinch in the chainstays by the bottom bracket if necessary. I found a used Schwinn Tempo that didn't need a brake bridge replacement but he did have to pinch in the stays. I "raced" that one for a few years until I nailed a root on a highspeed downhill and buckled the downtube. I eventually replaced it with a Bontrager CX (pre-Trek, Steelman fork). That was such a nice ride I still have it, converted to gravel use for my wife.

[AMuzi]

On 1/31/2023 1:36 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:23:20 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Jobst Brandt proved long ago (Andrew, do you remember the year in which the Avocet slicks were launched?) that bicycle tyres have less rolling resistance than those with tread.
>
> Rolling resistance of tires:
> <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/rolling-resistance.html>
>
> Tires with smooth tread:
> <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/slicks.html>
>
> Details and discussion from various articles by Jobst:
> <https://yarchive.net/bike/slicks.html>
>
> I couldn't find the exact date, but various article mention "early
> 80's":
> "Jobst Brandt: Loss of an Icon"
> <http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.com/2015/05/jobst-brandt.html>
>

My (diminished) memory says about 1980 but Velobase
(generally OK but known for crowdsource errors) says 1985:

https://velobase.com/ViewBrand.aspx?BrandID=b04018a4-18cc-485d-aff5-ed0935fed628

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 11:36:59 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:23:20 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
><fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Jobst Brandt proved long ago (Andrew, do you remember the year in which the Avocet slicks were launched?) that bicycle tyres have less rolling resistance than those with tread.
>
>Rolling resistance of tires:
><https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/rolling-resistance.html>
>
>Tires with smooth tread:
><https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/slicks.html>
>
>Details and discussion from various articles by Jobst:
><https://yarchive.net/bike/slicks.html>
>
>I couldn't find the exact date, but various article mention "early
>80's":
>"Jobst Brandt: Loss of an Icon"
><http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.com/2015/05/jobst-brandt.html>

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Is this your first carbon frame?

[James]

On 1/2/23 10:23, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>
> Is this your first carbon frame?

Yes.

Previously I've had carbon forks with an aluminium steerer, and various
carbon fiber parts like Campagnolo Chorus Ultra Torque cranks, brake
levers and a seat post.

--
JS

[James]

On 31/1/23 12:08, Frank Krygowski wrote:

>
> The change in tire fashion has been interesting to watch. Friends who
> once rode 19s are now praising tires twice that wide. Except for one or
> two loaded tours and some sport riding, I've never gone much outside the
> 28 to 32 range; but I'm tempted to try some of the wide lightweight
> tires that are getting so much attention.

Had I remained a city dweller, I would not have bought this bike and
would still be happily riding my road bike with "normal" racing tyres.

I think some people actively seek gravel roads to escape from
automobiles. I would prefer to ride on bitumen all the time, but there
are not many bitumen roads to chose from where I now live. By
incorporating some gravel roads I can ride a wider variety of routes,
which is nice.

I had my road bike frame built to accommodate at least 30mm tyres. It
can probably fit 32mm tyres. But I made a mistake when I ordered forks
from the internet, as the ones I chose wont allow wider than 23mm.
Stupid oversight.

I could certainly manage a few of the local gravel roads on 32mm tyres,
if I bought a new fork for my road bike, but there are many more kms of
gravel roads where 32mm tyres are really not big enough.

Even the 42mm tyres that came with my steel gravel/touring bike were
barely big enough for some. When I tackle those roads again I'll be
fitting some 50mm rubber!

Most people, I suspect, would be more at home on a modern mountain bike
for those roads, with suspension and 2.4 inch knobby tyres. But the
routes are over 100km and about half gravel roads over mountainous
terrain. Riding a mountain bike on the bitumen parts is a real drag -
which is again why I like what is really a more capable road bike. It
becomes an "all road bike".

However, I am a sample of one. Who knows what justifications the rest
have, and what the sales people convince them of. Jan Heine wants to
sell tyres!

--
JS

[Frank Krygowski]

On 1/31/2023 5:17 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> In the early days of CX in the US (mid/late 80's) there were a few frame builders in the local copying euro designs, and one who would modify road frames - he brazed on cantilever brake bosses, then replace the rear brake bridge and pinch in the chainstays by the bottom bracket if necessary. I found a used Schwinn Tempo that didn't need a brake bridge replacement but he did have to pinch in the stays.

Do you know what sort of tooling he used to indent the stays? I've done
it on one Reynolds 531 frame, but it was a slightly clumsy operation.
I'd like to find a better way for the Cannondale.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 1/31/2023 9:37 PM, James wrote:
> On 31/1/23 12:08, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
>>
>> The change in tire fashion has been interesting to watch. Friends who
>> once rode 19s are now praising tires twice that wide. Except for one
>> or two loaded tours and some sport riding, I've never gone much
>> outside the 28 to 32 range; but I'm tempted to try some of the wide
>> lightweight tires that are getting so much attention.
>
> Had I remained a city dweller, I would not have bought this bike and
> would still be happily riding my road bike with "normal" racing tyres.
>
> I think some people actively seek gravel roads to escape from
> automobiles.  I would prefer to ride on bitumen all the time, but there
> are not many bitumen roads to chose from where I now live.  By
> incorporating some gravel roads I can ride a wider variety of routes,
> which is nice.
>
> I had my road bike frame built to accommodate at least 30mm tyres.  It
> can probably fit 32mm tyres.  But I made a mistake when I ordered forks
> from the internet, as the ones I chose wont allow wider than 23mm.
> Stupid oversight.

Sheldon's site has a page about upgrading older bikes. It contains many
remarks on racer fashions that are inappropriate for most riders,
including within the paragraph on tight tire clearance - something I've
complained about here.

> I could certainly manage a few of the local gravel roads on 32mm tyres,
> if I bought a new fork for my road bike, but there are many more kms of
> gravel roads where 32mm tyres are really not big enough.
>
> Even the 42mm tyres that came with my steel gravel/touring bike were
> barely big enough for some.  When I tackle those roads again I'll be
> fitting some 50mm rubber!

As I've suggested to a couple club members with new-ish "gravel bikes,"
there are many miles of nice looking gravel roads in the Amish areas to
our north. I can envision a nice weekend renting a B&B in the area and
exploring them. Heck, I should suggest it to a B&B owner as a marketing
strategy.

>
> Most people, I suspect, would be more at home on a modern mountain bike
> for those roads, with suspension and 2.4 inch knobby tyres.  But the
> routes are over 100km and about half gravel roads over mountainous
> terrain.  Riding a mountain bike on the bitumen parts is a real drag -
> which is again why I like what is really a more capable road bike.  It
> becomes an "all road bike".
>
> However, I am a sample of one.  Who knows what justifications the rest
> have, and what the sales people convince them of.  Jan Heine wants to
> sell tyres!

He certainly does! And he seems to be succeeding.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 1/31/2023 10:23 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> Sheldon's site has a page about upgrading older bikes. It contains many
> remarks on racer fashions that are inappropriate for most riders,
> including within the paragraph on tight tire clearance - something I've
> complained about here.

Here's that page: https://www.sheldonbrown.com/upgrade.html

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Roger Merriman]

Always been a bit suspect with testing on a drum particularly gravel and
MTB tyres.

Not saying it’s not a interesting site is it’s but I’m not convinced the
science is correct.

Roger Merriman

[Roger Merriman]

I’d have his fat road tyres but not the Gravel ones I’d not trust them to
rip personally.

Roger Merriman

[Lou Holtman]

I wonder if it is worth going through all that trouble risking to ruin your frame. I would just lower the tire pressure a bit if you want a more comfortable ride. 5 bar in a 28 mm tire is as comfortable as 3 bar in a 35 mm tire and probably has the same RR. You just have to be more careful about pinch flats.

Lou

[Catrike Rider]

..and, of course, the tire is always straight up and down on that
drum.

Many years ago I did my own tests on several Scwalbe tires. None of my
tests disputed the results from that site, but definately disputed
Scwalbe's claims about rolling resistance.

[Roger Merriman]

For myself it’s more the off-road where well it’s not a smooth surface,
about best will be a fire road, I run Hans Dampf soft, they are notoriously
quick for what they are ie big burly trail/enduro tyre.

I don’t doubt that on tarmac they drag and they do, which is what rolling
resistance claims but that’s not the point of them nor expect use!

And rather made me question any others particularly off road tyres or even
rolling on less than smooth roads

Roger Merriman

[AMuzi]

The outside is laid in a half cylinder form and the inside
is pressed as needed. This is difficult to set up in a built
frame, much simpler when making chainstays.

The current thought is curvy chainstays:
http://sevencycles.com/images/options/dropped-chainstays-long.jpg

[Frank Krygowski]

The "all that trouble" point is a good one, and it's what's kept me from
trying this to date. Again, this stems from my trial with 37mm tires. I
was disappointed that there was lots of clearance everywhere except that
one spot.

If I didn't have a location for some interesting gravel touring fairly
near me, I probably wouldn't consider it. And it may be that I'll skip
the project yet again.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 2/1/2023 8:49 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 8:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 1/31/2023 5:17 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> In the early days of CX in the US (mid/late 80's) there
>>> were a few frame builders in the local copying euro
>>> designs, and one who would modify road frames - he brazed
>>> on cantilever brake bosses, then replace the rear brake
>>> bridge and pinch in the chainstays by the bottom bracket
>>> if necessary. I found a used Schwinn Tempo that didn't
>>> need a brake bridge replacement but he did have to pinch
>>> in the stays.
>>
>> Do you know what sort of tooling he used to indent the
>> stays? I've done it on one Reynolds 531 frame, but it was a
>> slightly clumsy operation. I'd like to find a better way for
>> the Cannondale.
>>
>
> The outside is laid in a half cylinder form and the inside is pressed as
> needed. This is difficult to set up in a built frame, much simpler when
> making chainstays.

It's the "pressed as needed" that I was curious about. And yes, I know
it's difficult in a built up frame, having done it once!

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

I did one last autumn that way. Laid the frame in a steel
block with a half cylinder cutout, heavy cardboard liner
since the curves did not exactly match.

Stuck a long steel bar under the edge of a heavy vise,
across a steel round set in the too-small inside chainstay
dent, and pressed lightly on the other end. Repeat other side.

Most of the 'race' frames I set up for cross with cantilever
posts over the years were older longer models (think 1970
PX10 and similar). Adding cantilevers to a late 1980s race
bike (which can't clear a 30mm cross tub) is stupid.

[Tom Kunich]

I did a 19 mile ride yesterday, 10 miles of it was on gravel. I most definitely was not in chap or all of it would have been on gravel except for the route too and from the coffee shop. Of course I was riding my normal street bike so the wet and heavy gravel was more than sufficient to give you exercise.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

A well designed carbon frame balances the best of all ride qualities in ways that are exceptionally difficult to achieve using conventional materials. Carbon-haters will try to tell you different, now you know better :)

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

No, but the work _seemed_ to have been done well. I do know he wouldn't do it to aluminum.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

That's why the local guy would redo the brake bridge and pinch the stays

[AMuzi]

Right I understood that. What about the fork?

[James]

On 1/2/23 22:09, Roger Merriman wrote:

> For myself it’s more the off-road where well it’s not a smooth surface,
> about best will be a fire road, I run Hans Dampf soft, they are notoriously
> quick for what they are ie big burly trail/enduro tyre.
>
> I don’t doubt that on tarmac they drag and they do, which is what rolling
> resistance claims but that’s not the point of them nor expect use!
>
> And rather made me question any others particularly off road tyres or even
> rolling on less than smooth roads
>

The tyres that came with my gravel/touring bike were WTB Resolute 42mm.
They're available with 60 or 120 TPI. I don't know which ones came with
the bike. They're a drag on bitumen but feel ok on gravel.

https://www.wtb.com/products/resolute

The tyres I use on that bike now are Maxxis Rambler 40mm, TR EXO 120TPI.
They don't suck anywhere near as much on bitumen, and are similar on
gravel.

https://www.maxxis.com/int/tire/rambler/

--
JS

[James]

My beef with carbon is not with the material, but the use of it. I
think many manufacturers try to use too little to reduce weight for
bragging rights. I'd rather carry an additional few hundred grams if it
means the frame will last another decade or two.

I hope the frame and fork I bought is well designed for longevity.

--
JS

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

The Schwinn Tempo had enough clearance for a 32. in the fork. Not so sure the tempo ever qualified as a 'race bike' lol, but at the level of the sport I was participating the bike wasn't really the issue. There was a local MTB "elite master" racer that showed up to his very first cross race on a proflex and won.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

You may run into that issue on lower quality frames. I hadn't heard of Finna before you made this post but they seem to be reputable builder from what I've read. My quick anecdote on carbon forks is that my trusted Easton EC90 fork from ~2002 recently failed, but it wasn't the carbon. It was the aluminum dropout. It snapped where it inserts into the fork blade. The carbon looked intact. It had probably 50K miles on it, including a few crashes, and one accident where I t-boned a car that pulled out of a side street.

My issue with carbon use is only for off-road, and only because off-road the frame can be subject to high-speed impacts which can cause a crack that propagates. It's p[ossible on a road bike as well of course, but a lot less likely. I've seen a number of carbon MTB frames that needed to retire after the rider bashed against a rock that left visible damage. The chainstays of all my MTBs show pretty dramatic impacts (scrapes and dents), with my TI hardtail having a pretty sizable dent. I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.

I'm guessing you won't run into these issues with a gravel bike unless you take it into some seriously technical trails, just remember it isn't designed for that. What I tell people about carbon is that carbon is used in many many high stress applications - aircraft, auto racing - If it's good enough to build F1 frame and suspension components from carbon fiber, it's good enough to build a bike frame.

[Roger Merriman]

I’ve tended to go for relatively fast rolling type tires, particularly as
my Gravel bike is though upgraded has fairly limited clearance for a Gravel
bike at least.

My go to has been the Schwalbe G-one all round as well it’s in the sweet
spot of fast enough, yet enough grip though I have used a few other brands
over the years.

https://www.schwalbe.com/en/gravel-reader/schwalbe-g-one-allround

I presently have G one (F)and a pirelli cinturato gravel H (R) the Pirelli
is quick but it lacks the ability to bite into the ground so I’ll retire it
in 6 months or so when I get the tubless goo refreshed ie just before
autumn!

The Pirelli worked better with tubes in that it was fairly resistant to
shards and so on, but having moved to tubeless the Schwalbe is barely any
slower and a hangs on fair bit more more in terms of grip.

[Lou Holtman]

How much does the frame and the fork weigh?

Lou

[Lou Holtman]

On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 11:55:47 AM UTC+1, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:14:15 PM UTC-5, James wrote:
> > On 2/2/23 05:27, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 9:37:42 PM UTC-5, James wrote:
> > >> On 1/2/23 10:23, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Is this your first carbon frame?
> > >> Yes.
> > >>
> > >> Previously I've had carbon forks with an aluminium steerer, and
> > >> various carbon fiber parts like Campagnolo Chorus Ultra Torque
> > >> cranks, brake levers and a seat post.
> > >>
> > >> -- JS
> > >
> > > A well designed carbon frame balances the best of all ride qualities
> > > in ways that are exceptionally difficult to achieve using
> > > conventional materials. Carbon-haters will try to tell you different,
> > > now you know better :)
> > My beef with carbon is not with the material, but the use of it. I
> > think many manufacturers try to use too little to reduce weight for
> > bragging rights. I'd rather carry an additional few hundred grams if it
> > means the frame will last another decade or two.
> >
> > I hope the frame and fork I bought is well designed for longevity.
> >
> You may run into that issue on lower quality frames. I hadn't heard of Finna before you made this post but they seem to be reputable builder from what I've read. My quick anecdote on carbon forks is that my trusted Easton EC90 fork from ~2002 recently failed, but it wasn't the carbon. It was the aluminum dropout. It snapped where it inserts into the fork blade. The carbon looked intact. It had probably 50K miles on it, including a few crashes, and one accident where I t-boned a car that pulled out of a side street.
>

I rather have a full carbon fork, including the the drop outs , than one with glued in aluminum crap.

> My issue with carbon use is only for off-road, and only because off-road the frame can be subject to high-speed impacts which can cause a crack that propagates. It's p[ossible on a road bike as well of course, but a lot less likely. I've seen a number of carbon MTB frames that needed to retire after the rider bashed against a rock that left visible damage. The chainstays of all my MTBs show pretty dramatic impacts (scrapes and dents), with my TI hardtail having a pretty sizable dent. I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.

Still think CF is a bad idea for heavy off road. When I look at my aluminum cross bike who endured several crashes, ripped off RD ending stuck in the spokes there is no way a CF frame would survived that.

>
> I'm guessing you won't run into these issues with a gravel bike unless you take it into some seriously technical trails, just remember it isn't designed for that. What I tell people about carbon is that carbon is used in many many high stress applications - aircraft, auto racing - If it's good enough to build F1 frame and suspension components from carbon fiber, it's good enough to build a bike frame.

A 1800 gr CF frame and a 450-500 gr CF fork would is pretty strong. I hope you watched the CF suspension components of a F1 car snap with the lightest touch with the barriers. The monocoque of the F1 car is incredibly strong.

Lou

[Frank Krygowski]

On 2/2/2023 5:55 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.

ISTM the downtube whacks could be lessened, if not prevented, by a front
fender.

And any frame tube could be perfectly protected by a layer of the same
magic styrofoam used in fancy cycling hats! ;-)

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Kunich]

Truthfully, I'm not to worried about a modern carbon fiber bike breaking on me. But it does bother me that even if you absolutely baby the bike that it could fail on the next owner perhaps killing or seriously maiming them.

[Tom Kunich]

Properly built it isn't a "glued in" aluminum steerer but there are horizontal creases in the aluminum steerer so that it is more a mechanical fit than the attempt at a since molded piece which a carbon fiber fork most assuredly is not. The steering tube is made by a different process and glued into the fork.

Now the resins in the fork body and the steerer match so theoretically they are one piece but in reality they aren't.

Aluminum Alloys have a tensile strength of 300 MPascals. Kevlar is used in Time forks. This material has almost the same strength as carbon fiber but the strands are much longer and engage a great deal more of the resin making this material close to failure proof. But it also makes it a great deal stiffer. Carbon Fiber has the same strength as Zylon (5800 MPa) which is also man made and is used for armor etc. Kevlar is cheaper though.

Is it possible to make a light fork that is UNLIKELY to break? Yes, but light and strong doesn't really go together.

Graphene is the strongest material know at twice the strength of carbon fiber, but I don't believe that it can be used 3 dimensionally since it would simply degrade to carbon fiber. There is a lot of work on making Graphene nanotubes since it would be commercially viable but again, I believe that they simply could not prevent it from degrading to carbon fiber.

But to get to the point, Aluminum steerer tubes are as strong as necessary and metal is a great deal less prone to manufacturing errors like voids.

Let's remember that the UCI weigh limit is unlikely to be lowered in the near future and bikes below that limit should not be trusted.

Almost all of the announced weight of carbon fiber bikes are for the smallest size made. As a consequence, my steel Tommasini Fire with a steel fork weighs only 1/2 lb more than my 2018 60 cm Trek Emonda did.

Ask yourself if being able to crest a hill 15 seconds faster than someone on a steel bike is worth the price differential.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:43:05 AM UTC-5, lou.h...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
> I rather have a full carbon fork, including the the drop outs , than one with glued in aluminum crap.

I' m sure there are/were some carbon fiber forks with aluminum dropouts that qualify as "crap". I'm also sure that the EC 90 wasn't one of them.

> > My issue with carbon use is only for off-road, and only because off-road the frame can be subject to high-speed impacts which can cause a crack that propagates. It's p[ossible on a road bike as well of course, but a lot less likely. I've seen a number of carbon MTB frames that needed to retire after the rider bashed against a rock that left visible damage. The chainstays of all my MTBs show pretty dramatic impacts (scrapes and dents), with my TI hardtail having a pretty sizable dent. I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.

> Still think CF is a bad idea for heavy off road. When I look at my aluminum cross bike who endured several crashes, ripped off RD ending stuck in the spokes there is no way a CF frame would survived that.

I agree, and I wouldnt have bought a full carbon MTB frame. The carbon main triangle seems to be surviving just fine 5years later, with the afore mentioned damage to the aluminum rear supporting your point.

> >
> > I'm guessing you won't run into these issues with a gravel bike unless you take it into some seriously technical trails, just remember it isn't designed for that. What I tell people about carbon is that carbon is used in many many high stress applications - aircraft, auto racing - If it's good enough to build F1 frame and suspension components from carbon fiber, it's good enough to build a bike frame.
>
> A 1800 gr CF frame and a 450-500 gr CF fork would is pretty strong. I hope you watched the CF suspension components of a F1 car snap with the lightest touch with the barriers. The monocoque of the F1 car is incredibly strong.

Did you miss a word in there? The middle sentence doesn't seem to comport with the first and last. Bear in mind that "the lightest touch with the barriers" in the F1 racing world is several orders of magnitude more stressful than anything a bike could ever see unless you drove into the bike with a formula 1 car. Besides that, the fact that under normal conditions (e.g. _not_ hitting a barrier) the CF suspension components exhibit spectacular performance is more to the point. If it didn't work, they wouldn't use it.

From https://www.mercedesamgf1.com/en/news/2019/06/the-suspension-of-a-formula-one-car/
"When an F1 car goes over a kerb at high speeds, the suspension needs to be strong and stiff to be able to handle those loads without occurring any damage. Carbon fibre elements such as the push rods and pull rods, for example, are very strong in compression and tension and can take loads of ten Kilonewtons or more."

>
> Lou

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:50:23 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/2/2023 5:55 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.
> ISTM the downtube whacks could be lessened, if not prevented, by a front
> fender.

That's just more stuff to break.

>
> And any frame tube could be perfectly protected by a layer of the same
> magic styrofoam used in fancy cycling hats! ;-)

Both I and my bikes wear our battle scars proudly.


>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

[Roger Merriman]

My local bike shop always say they like working on my bikes particularly
the old one as it has dents and well signs of being used, ie not just life
in the shed!
>
>
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
Roger Merriman

[Frank Krygowski]

On 2/2/2023 3:33 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> My local bike shop always say they like working on my bikes particularly
> the old one as it has dents and well signs of being used, ie not just life
> in the shed!

Some of my musician friends have instruments that look like they were
manufactured yesterday. They're absolutely perfect, in showroom condition.

Other musicians I know have instruments with no significant damage, but
with an assortment of minor nicks and scrapes. They look used.

You can probably guess which musicians play better.

And for an extreme example, there's this:
https://guitar.com/features/interviews/story-of-willie-nelsons-trigger-most-famous-acoustic-guitar/

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Andre Jute]

On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 7:37:06 PM UTC, je...@cruzio.com wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:23:20 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Jobst Brandt proved long ago (Andrew, do you remember the year in which the Avocet slicks were launched?) that bicycle tyres have less rolling resistance than those with tread.
> Rolling resistance of tires:
> <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/rolling-resistance.html>
>
> Tires with smooth tread:
> <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/slicks.html>
>
> Details and discussion from various articles by Jobst:
> <https://yarchive.net/bike/slicks.html>
>
> I couldn't find the exact date, but various article mention "early
> 80's":
> "Jobst Brandt: Loss of an Icon"
> <http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.com/2015/05/jobst-brandt.html>
>

> --
> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
>
Thanks for the links, Jeff. -- AJ

[Andre Jute]

On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 8:52:28 PM UTC, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> Fairly sure [the Big Apple] Liteskin has been discontinued
>
You got that the wrong way round, Roger. The other sidewalls current at the time of the Liteskin were discontinued and the Liteskin, which previously had been a premium sidewall, was made the sidewall for all the next series of Big Apples. I'm on my last pair of the original Liteskin Big Apples, which also had a veeeery long-lasting compound (half worn at 8500kph). -- AJ

[Andre Jute]

On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 10:45:16 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:

> On 1/31/2023 1:36 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:23:20 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
> > <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Jobst Brandt proved long ago (Andrew, do you remember the year in which the Avocet slicks were launched?) that bicycle tyres have less rolling resistance than those with tread.
> >
> > Rolling resistance of tires:
> > <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/rolling-resistance.html>
> >
> > Tires with smooth tread:
> > <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/slicks.html>
> >
> > Details and discussion from various articles by Jobst:
> > <https://yarchive.net/bike/slicks.html>
> >
> > I couldn't find the exact date, but various article mention "early
> > 80's":
> > "Jobst Brandt: Loss of an Icon"
> > <http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.com/2015/05/jobst-brandt.html>
> >

> My (diminished) memory says about 1980 but Velobase
> (generally OK but known for crowdsource errors) says 1985:
>
> https://velobase.com/ViewBrand.aspx?BrandID=b04018a4-18cc-485d-aff5-ed0935fed628

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

Thanks, Andrew. I wasn't a cyclist those days, and anyway was never a roadie, so I have no relevant memory. -- AJ

[James]

On 2/2/23 21:55, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> My issue with carbon use is only for off-road, and only because
> off-road the frame can be subject to high-speed impacts which can
> cause a crack that propagates. It's p[ossible on a road bike as well
> of course, but a lot less likely. I've seen a number of carbon MTB
> frames that needed to retire after the rider bashed against a rock
> that left visible damage. The chainstays of all my MTBs show pretty
> dramatic impacts (scrapes and dents), with my TI hardtail having a
> pretty sizable dent. I've been on a few highspeed downhills where
> I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the
> impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen
> on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum
> stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did
> more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a
> ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.
>
> I'm guessing you won't run into these issues with a gravel bike
> unless you take it into some seriously technical trails, just
> remember it isn't designed for that. What I tell people about carbon
> is that carbon is used in many many high stress applications -
> aircraft, auto racing - If it's good enough to build F1 frame and
> suspension components from carbon fiber, it's good enough to build a
> bike frame.

The frame has bottle cage bosses under the down tube. I have considered
making a bash plate that bolts on using those two bolts. It would add a
bit of weight, but might just save the frame. I've put plastic paint
protection film on the underside of the down tube already, but of course
that won't save it from a rock thrown up. I think a length of PVC pipe
could be cut length ways, and could even have the radius of curvature
adjusted with a little heat and persuasion.

My steel road bike had to be repaired after I rode over something that
dented the underside of the down tube. The frame builder managed to
pull most of the dent out. For CF there are repairers that could fix
that kind of damage, but I'd rather avoid having it happen in the first
place.

--
JS

[James]

On 3/2/23 02:27, Lou Holtman wrote:

>
> How much does the frame and the fork weigh?
>

- Frame weight (size 55): 1270 g
- Fork weight: 456 g
- Frame set weight (55 size): 1726 g

Frame and fork weighs about as much as my steel road frame without a
fork ;-)

--
JS

[Frank Krygowski]

On 2/2/2023 9:35 PM, James wrote:
>
> The frame has bottle cage bosses under the down tube.  I have considered
> making a bash plate that bolts on using those two bolts.  It would add a
> bit of weight, but might just save the frame.  I've put plastic paint
> protection film on the underside of the down tube already, but of course
> that won't save it from a rock thrown up.  I think a length of PVC pipe
> could be cut length ways, and could even have the radius of curvature
> adjusted with a little heat and persuasion.

FWIW, I found PVC pipe to be easily reshaped by use of a heat gun, or
maybe a propane torch on low flame. I forget which I used.

I used heat to flatten a part of the condensate drain pipe from our
furnace. I had to roll bikes across it to get them to their basement
parking space, and although the OD was only about 1", it was an irritation.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[sms]

On 2/2/2023 7:43 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

<snip>

> Still think CF is a bad idea for heavy off road. When I look at my aluminum cross bike who endured several crashes, ripped off RD ending stuck in the spokes there is no way a CF frame would survived that.

Even for gravel bikes, if possible, go with CrMo frame and fork. Alas,
CF is now easier to find, and cheaper, than 4130 CrMo. Even when you
find a CrMo frame, they often use a carbon fork instead of a CrMo fork.

The gravel bike I'd get is this one
<https://www.bombtrack.com/complete-bikes/beyond-1> but they are
expensive and hard to find.

[Lou Holtman]

That is not crazy light and for CF on the sturdy side. My Canyon Ultimate CF SLX frame weighs if I remember correctly around 800 gr.

Lou
> JS

[Catrike Rider]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:35:50 +1100, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I recently created a bottle cage holster for my handgun out of PVC. It
was easily reshaped using boiling water as a heat source. It doesn't
take much heat to soften the low temperature PVC

[Catrike Rider]

On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:21:00 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:50:23 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 2/2/2023 5:55 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> > I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint, but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.
>> ISTM the downtube whacks could be lessened, if not prevented, by a front
>> fender.
>
>That's just more stuff to break.

I agree with Junior on that. I have a small rear fender that keeps
stuff off the back of my head and neck, but IMHO, front fenders would
be bothersome.

[Roger Merriman]

Catrike Rider <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:21:00 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:50:23 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 2/2/2023 5:55 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into
>>>> the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and
>>>> left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale
>>>> Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few
>>>> whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint,
>>>> but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.
>>> ISTM the downtube whacks could be lessened, if not prevented, by a front
>>> fender.
>>
>> That's just more stuff to break.
>
> I agree with Junior on that. I have a small rear fender that keeps
> stuff off the back of my head and neck, but IMHO, front fenders would
> be bothersome.
>

Depends on where the spray goes I guess!

Some of the low recumbents can be face bound, which isn’t good!

Certainly mudguards on the old MTB keep clothes clean or at least cleaner!

Isn’t really space on the gravel bike without giving up tire volume which
I’m not prepared to do plus well faff!

I have one of the wee fork guards on the MTB proper which keeps most face
bound stuff off.

>>> And any frame tube could be perfectly protected by a layer of the same
>>> magic styrofoam used in fancy cycling hats! ;-)
>>
>> Both I and my bikes wear our battle scars proudly.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>

Roger Merriman

[Catrike Rider]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:41:31 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman
<ro...@sarlet.com> wrote:

>Catrike Rider <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:21:00 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:50:23 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 2/2/2023 5:55 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>> I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into
>>>>> the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and
>>>>> left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale
>>>>> Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few
>>>>> whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint,
>>>>> but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.
>>>> ISTM the downtube whacks could be lessened, if not prevented, by a front
>>>> fender.
>>>
>>> That's just more stuff to break.
>>
>> I agree with Junior on that. I have a small rear fender that keeps
>> stuff off the back of my head and neck, but IMHO, front fenders would
>> be bothersome.
>>
>Depends on where the spray goes I guess!

Indeed, in my situation, it goes on my wrists and forearms.

>Some of the low recumbents can be face bound, which isn’t good!

I would probably put fenders on a two wheel recumbent.

>Certainly mudguards on the old MTB keep clothes clean or at least cleaner!

I suppose so, but there's not much mud on the bike trails, but my bike
clothes are always going straight into the washer after a ride,
anyway. They're very often soaking wet with sweat. I usually change
before I drive home to save the seats in the truck.

[Roger Merriman]

My bike trails ie park stuff does tend to be more dirty, Hounslow Heath is
dreadful for orange spray from the gravel on wet days!

>
>> Isn’t really space on the gravel bike without giving up tire volume which
>> I’m not prepared to do plus well faff!
>>
>> I have one of the wee fork guards on the MTB proper which keeps most face
>> bound stuff off.
>>
>>>>> And any frame tube could be perfectly protected by a layer of the same
>>>>> magic styrofoam used in fancy cycling hats! ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Both I and my bikes wear our battle scars proudly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>

Roger Merriman

[Catrike Rider]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 17:07:05 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman

<ro...@sarlet.com> wrote:

>Catrike Rider <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 15:41:31 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman
>> <ro...@sarlet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Catrike Rider <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:21:00 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 10:50:23 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/2/2023 5:55 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> I've been on a few highspeed downhills where I've kicked a rock into
>>>>>>> the downtube big enough that I felt the impact in the handlebars and
>>>>>>> left a dent, I'm glad that didn't happen on a carbon frame. My Cdale
>>>>>>> Habit3 has carbon main tubes but aluminum stays. I've felt a few
>>>>>>> whacks on the downtube but nothing that did more than chip the paint,
>>>>>>> but the chain stays look like I've taken a ball peen hammer and rasp file to them.
>>>>>> ISTM the downtube whacks could be lessened, if not prevented, by a front
>>>>>> fender.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's just more stuff to break.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Junior on that. I have a small rear fender that keeps
>>>> stuff off the back of my head and neck, but IMHO, front fenders would
>>>> be bothersome.
>>>>
>>> Depends on where the spray goes I guess!
>>
>> Indeed, in my situation, it goes on my wrists and forearms.
>>

>>> Some of the low recumbents can be face bound, which isn?t good!

>>
>> I would probably put fenders on a two wheel recumbent.
>>
>>> Certainly mudguards on the old MTB keep clothes clean or at least cleaner!
>>
>> I suppose so, but there's not much mud on the bike trails, but my bike
>> clothes are always going straight into the washer after a ride,
>> anyway. They're very often soaking wet with sweat. I usually change
>> before I drive home to save the seats in the truck.
>
>My bike trails ie park stuff does tend to be more dirty, Hounslow Heath is
>dreadful for orange spray from the gravel on wet days!

The trails I ride are asphalt and very rural. Gators, snakes, deer,
and insects.

>>> Isn?t really space on the gravel bike without giving up tire volume which
>>> I?m not prepared to do plus well faff!

[Roger Merriman]

The rural ones even if tarmac are worse at least ones I tend to go. with
much like country lanes, ie leaf and tree litter which is pretty but mucky!

>
>>>> Isn?t really space on the gravel bike without giving up tire volume which
>>>> I?m not prepared to do plus well faff!
>>>>
>>>> I have one of the wee fork guards on the MTB proper which keeps most face
>>>> bound stuff off.
>>>>
>>>>>>> And any frame tube could be perfectly protected by a layer of the same
>>>>>>> magic styrofoam used in fancy cycling hats! ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both I and my bikes wear our battle scars proudly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>

Roger Merriman

[Catrike Rider]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 18:32:22 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman

I've never had a problem with that kind of stuff. I get sand and dirt
on the bottoms of my wrists and forearms, but not bothersome enough
for front fenders. Fenders are flimsy and wobbly and easy to bend. The
rear fenders were a problem until I built sturdy aluminum mounting
brackets.

[James]

Good to know. Ta. I prefer sturdy to fall apart at the sight of a bump
in the road. There are plenty of bumps along our roads.

--
JS

[James]

On 3/2/23 20:46, Catrike Rider wrote:

> I recently created a bottle cage holster for my handgun out of PVC. It
> was easily reshaped using boiling water as a heat source. It doesn't
> take much heat to soften the low temperature PVC

Good to know, though I'm not sure I'll need a handgun. At least I hope
I don't need one. Carrying one on a bicycle in a PVC bottle cage
holster would get you in all sorts of trouble in Australia, I suspect.

I cut a section of 100mm PVC sewer pipe, 300mm long and 65mm wide to go
at the BB end, tapered to 60mm wide half way up the down tube. Drilled
a couple of holes and screwed it in place. The curvature is pretty much
spot on, and it hides very well.

I fitted my gravel tyres yesterday as well, and I went for a ride with
SWMBO this morning. She was on her new full suspension e MTB. We rode
about 60km and nearly half on gravel roads - which for a change were in
pretty good shape.

--
JS

[Catrike Rider]

On Sun, 5 Feb 2023 18:25:31 +1100, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 3/2/23 20:46, Catrike Rider wrote:
>
>> I recently created a bottle cage holster for my handgun out of PVC. It
>> was easily reshaped using boiling water as a heat source. It doesn't
>> take much heat to soften the low temperature PVC
>
>Good to know, though I'm not sure I'll need a handgun. At least I hope
>I don't need one. Carrying one on a bicycle in a PVC bottle cage
>holster would get you in all sorts of trouble in Australia, I suspect.

Perfectly legal here and highly recommended by LEOs.

[Tom Kunich]

I have given up on all of the local hill rides but one very mild one that goes from the bay area over the hill into the Livermore valley. I have a notion that there were mud or landslides to the old passes east of there but I will try the local safe routes. I don't want any more potholes like that one that rolled my bars under. Two VERY mild local climbs have been closed even though you can pass through them. Crow Canyon and Norris Canyon. Crow Canyon is only partially covered by mudslides but as strange as it sounds, the Highway Patrol has actually been handing out tickets to the people driving around the Road Closed signs. Redwood Rd. will probably be closed for a minimum year and probably two. There is a local 3 miles of Chabot Rd. that is breaking apart from car traffic so the city council decided to allow heavy dump trucks to drive on that road for the next 80 years. Yes, 80 years. Let's see what they have to say when the road breaks completely off under one of those heavily loaded dump trucks and it kills the road and the dump truck driver.

[James]

On 1/2/23 14:23, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/31/2023 9:37 PM, James wrote:
>> On 31/1/23 12:08, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The change in tire fashion has been interesting to watch. Friends who
>>> once rode 19s are now praising tires twice that wide. Except for one
>>> or two loaded tours and some sport riding, I've never gone much
>>> outside the 28 to 32 range; but I'm tempted to try some of the wide
>>> lightweight tires that are getting so much attention.
>>
>> Had I remained a city dweller, I would not have bought this bike and
>> would still be happily riding my road bike with "normal" racing tyres.
>>
>> I think some people actively seek gravel roads to escape from
>> automobiles.  I would prefer to ride on bitumen all the time, but
>> there are not many bitumen roads to chose from where I now live.  By
>> incorporating some gravel roads I can ride a wider variety of routes,
>> which is nice.
>>
>> I had my road bike frame built to accommodate at least 30mm tyres.  It
>> can probably fit 32mm tyres.  But I made a mistake when I ordered
>> forks from the internet, as the ones I chose wont allow wider than
>> 23mm. Stupid oversight.
>
> Sheldon's site has a page about upgrading older bikes. It contains many
> remarks on racer fashions that are inappropriate for most riders,
> including within the paragraph on tight tire clearance - something I've
> complained about here.
>

Yesterday I rode 90km on all bitumen roads and took my road bike out for
the first time since Christmas.

Several of the rough sections of road have been repaired over the last
month, so for the particular route my road bike was fine, with its
narrow tyres.

It was lovely.

--
JS

[Tom Kunich]

I simply cannot ride narrow tires anymore. I used to get back from a ride with a butt so sore that it took 2 or 3 days to recover, Now with the 28's not only does the bike go faster (proven by many published tests) but the ride is so much better that I now normally ride an unpadded carbon saddle without worrying that it has to be a special saddle with a special shape.

[James]

My road bike is fitted with a 25mm rear that measures 27mm, and a 23mm
front that is pretty close to 23mm. I pump both to 90psi.

I have a flat stiff saddle with minimal padding.

<https://www.bikechain.com.au/a/performance-saddles/selle-san-marco/regale-xslite-microfeel/100003825?variant_id=10315>

I don't like shorts with thick padded chamois, yet I can ride all day
without getting a sore butt.

--
JS

[Roger Meriman]

As ever everyone’s butt is different I found a saddle that works and so use
it on all of my bikes!

Seems to work from the Gravel to the commuter.

I do wear baggy plus the generally cheap padded shorts (not very padded)
which do me fine even for 70+ gravel rides.

My bikes are all a bit plusher I guess in terms of tyres running from 35mm
to 60mm plus suspension on the MTB though the terrain can be rougher.

Tubeless has helped with the Gravel bike in that I’m running slightly less
pressure plus no tube which you can feel!

Roger Merriman

[Catrike Rider]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 14:34:52 +1100, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Riding diamond frame two wheelers not only gave me a sore butt, but
sore shoulders and sore wrists.

Back in the 80s and 90s when I was seriously bicycling to supplement
my weightlifting program, those discomforts were a limiting factor. At
the time I was deep into the no_pain_no_gain mode and dismissed it as
part of the program.

I don't know if I would have tried one of the two wheel recumbents
back then even if I'd known they existed. My only interest in bicycles
was riding one, not researching them, nor did I have any interest in
sitting down and discussing bicycles with anyone in person (still
don't).

[Tom Kunich]

I had a Time frame and fork and it was completely unrideable with 23 mm tores on it. Changing to 28 mm I was able to install https://www.amazon.com/VGEBY-Ultra-Light-Replacement-Mountain-Equipment/dp/B07QS91PZC/ref=sr_1_45?crid=2M94X4INIDLBU&keywords=Carbon+Fiber+bicycle+saddle&qid=1676046574&sprefix=carbon+fiber+bicycle+saddle%2Caps%2C145&sr=8-45 saddles and ride quite comfortably. But I weigh close to 200 lbs and James may be a smaller person. I do get sore arms but that is a matter of climbing with too long a stem. Over the top and on the way down, the arms return to normal.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 2/9/2023 10:34 PM, James wrote:
>
> My road bike is fitted with a 25mm rear that measures 27mm, and a 23mm
> front that is pretty close to 23mm.  I pump both to 90psi.
>
> I have a flat stiff saddle with minimal padding.
>
> <https://www.bikechain.com.au/a/performance-saddles/selle-san-marco/regale-xslite-microfeel/100003825?variant_id=10315>
>
> I don't like shorts with thick padded chamois, yet I can ride all day
> without getting a sore butt.

saddle soreness is a very individual thing. I know people who are always
on the lookout for more comfortable saddles, and I know people who
absolutely never had a bit of soreness. We're all different down there.

But ISTM that lighter and more athletic people should have less problems
than heavier and/or more leisurely riders. Those riding faster are
putting more downward force into the pedals, so there's less on the
saddle. Also, many of them ride further down out of the wind, which puts
more load on the hands, so off the butt.

As for myself: When I began riding in the early 1970s I spent lots of
time trying to cure saddle soreness. After a few decades riding, it
almost never bothered me, no matter what saddle I used on what bike. I
guess things down there toughened up. The human body is adaptable.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 2/10/2023 10:45 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/9/2023 10:34 PM, James wrote:
>>
>> My road bike is fitted with a 25mm rear that measures

>> 27mm, and a 23mm front that is pretty close to 23mm. I

>> pump both to 90psi.
>>
>> I have a flat stiff saddle with minimal padding.
>>
>> <https://www.bikechain.com.au/a/performance-saddles/selle-san-marco/regale-xslite-microfeel/100003825?variant_id=10315>
>>
>>
>> I don't like shorts with thick padded chamois, yet I can
>> ride all day without getting a sore butt.
>
> saddle soreness is a very individual thing. I know people
> who are always on the lookout for more comfortable saddles,
> and I know people who absolutely never had a bit of
> soreness. We're all different down there.
>
> But ISTM that lighter and more athletic people should have
> less problems than heavier and/or more leisurely riders.
> Those riding faster are putting more downward force into the
> pedals, so there's less on the saddle. Also, many of them
> ride further down out of the wind, which puts more load on
> the hands, so off the butt.
>
> As for myself: When I began riding in the early 1970s I
> spent lots of time trying to cure saddle soreness. After a
> few decades riding, it almost never bothered me, no matter
> what saddle I used on what bike. I guess things down there
> toughened up. The human body is adaptable.
>

It's a complex problem, much more nuanced than skeletal
measurements. Saddle choice is affected by that but also
musculature, riding style, position (of handlebar as much as
saddle) and yes, as has been noted here, tire volume to some
extent.

[James]

On 10/2/23 22:37, Catrike Rider wrote:

>
> Riding diamond frame two wheelers not only gave me a sore butt, but
> sore shoulders and sore wrists.

I'm a firm believer that many saddles are too soft for most people, or
at least many people choose a saddle that is too soft. Not only too
soft in the padding department, but the shell under the padding.

A saddle that is too soft bows under the rider's weight, so in cross
section it might appear like a banana.

A consequence is that the pelvis is allowed to rotate forward which
results in more weight being transferred through the upper body through
the arms and hands. This causes sore shoulders and wrists, and possibly
numb hands.

Another consequence is that the nose of the saddle pushes up under the
tackle, and can cause numbness and discomfort in the front.

There's often butt soreness for riders just starting out, but in general
that is muscles and tendons in the glutes adjusting to the new exercise.

--
JS

[James]

See my reply to Catrike Rider just a minute ago.

FWIW, my wife started riding about 100km a week a few years ago. 4-5
rides of 20-30km per week. She is not what I'd describe as athletic or
particularly light weight, though obviously more capable than most of
her peers. Her average speeds are mostly under 20km/h, at what I'd
describe as a leisurely pace.

She adopted one of my road bike saddles, narrow and very firm, and has
no saddle soreness or sore hands or shoulders, etc.

--
JS

[Catrike Rider]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2023 17:43:56 +1100, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I admit that back when I was riding hard on a diamond frame bike I
didn't explore different saddle options, nor did I pay attention to
the size of the bicycle. I probably should have had a bigger bike.

[Roger Meriman]

I have had saddles that where too hard and well thin both in terms of
padding and width or design I guess!

I have found that I like The charge spoon or similar which seems to work
well from Gravel riding and commuting ie fairly upright.

Roger Merrriman

[Frank Krygowski]

I agree. And I think most people who try riding never get their muscles
and tendons conditioned because "Ooh, I'm sore!" I'll bet they assume
all cyclists are always in pain, and wonder why anyone rides.

Back in the 1970s, Dan Henry (then a cycle tourist who was somewhat well
known in the cycling world) designed and used a sling saddle that seemed
somewhat plausible. It was a set of drop bars, inverted, with webbing
slung from one "drop" to the other. I guess it must have felt like the
non-rigid swing seats I see in some playgrounds.

But like countless "innovative" bike saddles, it was never a commercial
success. I don't know if it was even marketed to the public.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Rider]

Even today with the comfortable Catrike, my rides make me sore, but
it's good soreness... very different from the pain I experienced from
the saddle and scrunched up position on two wheelers.

[Lou Holtman]

That is one theory, but that doesn’t work for me. I can’t get along with flat saddles. Soft and flexible are not the same. I like a hard but flexible shell with a little curvature. YMMV.

Lou

[Frank Krygowski]

We're all different down there.

I've proposed that our bike club have a Saddle Trading Event after our
monthly meeting. I assume many members have a collection of saddles that
didn't work for them.

Years ago my best cycling friend gave me a saddle that came on his
Santana tandem. He hated it, I love it.

--
- Frank Krygowski