Rohloff 14 Gear Speedhub
Grenouil
any experience with the Rohloff Speedhub 500/14? Seems like an elegant
concept...
Ari
system. I hate the idea of more of my effort going into heat instead of
forward motion.
"Grenouil" <kae...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:dbN68.30737$Up4.1...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
Tom Ace
> I hear that there's some drag, not as efficient as a stnadard derailleur
> system. I hate the idea of more of my effort going into heat instead of
> forward motion.
'Hate' is a strong word. I get the impression that some riders (not
necessarily Ari) hate some losses more than others. For some reason,
the idea of losing a percent or two of efficiency inside of a hub
annoys people more than a comparable difference in, say, tire rolling
resistance would.
Two weeks ago, Rohloff added an article on efficiency to their web site at
http://www.rohloff.de/technik/wirkungsgrad/wirkungsgrad.html
It's in German language. Bild (=figure) 5 near the end is a graph
showing measured efficiencies of a derailleur drivetrain (shaded band)
and a Speedhub drivetrain (white band) in various gears. The results
are shown as bands to indicate variations in measurement, both due to
tolerances of the test equipment and also due to drivetrain condition.
Rohloff claims to have tested both with new, clean parts and with parts
taken off bikes after 1000 km of riding. If their measurements are
accurate, the derailleur gearing's efficiency was affected more by used,
dirty parts than the Speedhub's drivetrain was.
In any case, the original question was
> Out of curiosity, ($800 is a bit above my biking budget), does anyone have
> any experience with the Rohloff Speedhub 500/14?
I ride one and I like it. Overall, I prefer it to derailleur gearing.
Tom Ace
Jeff Wills
considered. Rohloff's own site (
http://www.rohloff.de/english/products/speedhub/gewichtsvergleich/gewichtsvergleich.htm
)
says a derailleur system is about 99% efficient when new and 95%
efficient when worn while a Rohloff equipped system is 96-98%
efficient. (I'm quoting of their website, which doesn't offer any
details on the tests.)
Personally, I think eliminating the need for cleaning accumulated goo
out of my chain and derailleur goes a long way towards selling me on
the Rohloff.
There's a bunch of first-hand write-ups on MTBR:
http://www.mtbreview.com/reviews/hub/index_R.shtml
Several people have posted comments on the HPV maillist- searching the
archives turned up several reviews: http://www.ihpva.org
Jeff
"Ari" <a...@medicine.creighton.edu> wrote in message news:<UYO68.246601$kf1.71...@news1.rdc1.ne.home.com>...
Edward Kleinbard
magazine) of the relative efficiency of a Rohloff Speedhub and a
conventional Shimano XT setup:
http://www.selbst-machen.de/speedhub_vs_xt.gif
The top two plots are what you care about. They compare the relative
efficiency of the two systems at each comparable gear. The efficiency
("Wirkungsgrad") of the systems is expressed as a percentage, on the
right-hand scale. The red line is the Rohloff; the blue line is the
XT.
The different colored dots on the blue line just show which chainring
is being used (yellow= 22, green = 32, blue =44). So what you have is
a
direct comparison of the Rohloff to a conventional high-end derailleur
system used optimally (no hideously crossed chain).
For example, in 10th gear, the two systems have virtually identical
efficiencies of around 97%. The Rohloff's worst performance is in 5th
gear, where it is 2 percentage points worse than the derailleur
system;
its best is 9th gear, where it is 0.5% better in efficiency than a
derailleur.
These results seem roughly consistent with the new efficiency
information on the Rohloff website (as posted earlier in this
thread), and with my own experience with a Rohloff hub.
Hope this helps.
Edward Kleinbard
Nick Payne
originally had leaky oil seals (replaced by the distributor - apparently was
a known problem with early versions). Since then no problems at all.
Compared with using derailleur gears on the same bike, I would say
efficiency is slightly less than a clean derailleur setup. Weight is
slightly greater (about 400-500g more than a comparable derailleur setup
according to Rohloff).
The shifter is designed for MTB bars and not drop bars. I machined an old
piece of MTB bar to fit in the end of a drop bar and mount the shifter
there.
I'm happy enough with the Speedhub on my tourer that I'm building up a
touring tandem that will also use the Speedhub.
Nick
"Grenouil" <kae...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:dbN68.30737$Up4.1...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Here's another test (this one a scan of a page from a German cycling
> magazine) of the relative efficiency of a Rohloff Speedhub and a
> conventional Shimano XT setup:
> http://www.selbst-machen.de/speedhub_vs_xt.gif
> The top two plots are what you care about. They compare the
> relative efficiency of the two systems at each comparable gear. The
> efficiency ("Wirkungsgrad") of the systems is expressed as a
> percentage, on the right-hand scale. The red line is the Rohloff;
> the blue line is the XT.
I think you wanted to say the lower (nearly straight line plots are
efficiency while the upper shows what gears were used by hunting
around for the closest match a linear progression. Rohloff's
deviation is caused by gear compounding of the given planetary gears
and cannot have a straighter progression, and who cares. The
derailleur doesn't seem to be a lot different, the left scale being
rollout distance for one pedal revolution in meters, "gear inches" so
to speak.
> The different colored dots on the blue line just show which
> chainring is being used (yellow= 22, green = 32, blue =44). So what
> you have is a direct comparison of the Rohloff to a conventional
> high-end derailleur system used optimally (no hideously crossed
> chain).
The point is they jumped around to give the best approximation of a
linear progression. I guess that is what some riders might do but I
doubt it. That's like half-step gearing of old.
Jobst Brandt <jobst....@stanfordalumni.org> Palo Alto CA
Sheldon Brown
>
> > Here's another test (this one a scan of a page from a German cycling
> > magazine) of the relative efficiency of a Rohloff Speedhub and a
> > conventional Shimano XT setup:
>
> > http://www.selbst-machen.de/speedhub_vs_xt.gif
>
> > The top two plots are what you care about. They compare the
> > relative efficiency of the two systems at each comparable gear. The
> > efficiency ("Wirkungsgrad") of the systems is expressed as a
> > percentage, on the right-hand scale. The red line is the Rohloff;
> > the blue line is the XT.
That's a very interesting graphic. In addition to the Rohloff vs. derailer
data, it's interesting to see that the derailer's efficiency is very clearly
a function of the rear sprocket size, with larger rear sprockets being more
efficient. You can see the same curve shape in triplicate with the yellow,
green and blue points representing the 22, 32 and 42 chainrings respctively.
A usually reliable source wrote:
> I think you wanted to say the lower (nearly straight line plots are
> efficiency while the upper shows what gears were used by hunting
> around for the closest match a linear progression. Rohloff's
> deviation is caused by gear compounding of the given planetary gears
> and cannot have a straighter progression, and who cares. The
> derailleur doesn't seem to be a lot different, the left scale being
> rollout distance for one pedal revolution in meters, "gear inches" so
> to speak.
Sorry, I think you've misread the graph, J.B.
The lower lines show the gear value, which they've calibrated in meters
development on the vertical scale on the left.
The upper lines show the efficiency, and corresponds to the vertical scale
on the right, marked from 0.90 to 0.98.
The Rohloff hub actually has a very regular progression of gears, each gear
being 13.6% higher than the next lowest.
> > The different colored dots on the blue line just show which
> > chainring is being used (yellow= 22, green = 32, blue =44). So what
> > you have is a direct comparison of the Rohloff to a conventional
> > high-end derailleur system used optimally (no hideously crossed
> > chain).
>
> The point is they jumped around to give the best approximation of a
> linear progression. I guess that is what some riders might do but I
> doubt it. That's like half-step gearing of old.
Not really. They've used 15 gears of the 27 possible combinations, to allow
for easy comparison with the 14 gears of the Rohloff.
With the 22 tooth granny, they've used the 32, 28, 24 & 21 tooth cogs.
With the 32 tooth middle ring, the 28, 24, 21, 18, 16 & 14
With the 42 tooth outer ring, the 18, 16, 14, 12 & 11
This seems like a perfectly reasonable progression to me. None of thes
gears have particularly bad chainline. It's actually a "2 step" rather than
a "half-step" progression, and is a good approach for a 3 x 9 geartrain.
Sheldon "Doesn't Read German That Well, But Reads Graphs Well Enough" Brown
+-------------------------------------------+
| Never do today what you can do tomorrow. |
| Something may occur to make you regret |
| your premature action. --Aaron Burr |
+-------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772, 617-244-1040 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
Tony Dickson
32-spoke hub. Are there other options? I'm fond of 36 or even 40 spoke
rear wheels, given my weight.
What about the spacing? Is it 135mm? That would make sense, if it's
designed for MTBs. Does the wheel have to be dished at all?
Claude
news:VZy78.55$K%3.240...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
135 mm spacing. 32-hole only. No dish, 60mm between flanges.
I think there's a version for tandems, which can mount 2.34mm spokes.
--
Ciao
Claude
Fred Roses
> The shifter is designed for MTB bars and not drop bars. I machined an old
> piece of MTB bar to fit in the end of a drop bar and mount the shifter
> there.
Nick, any way you could post a link to a picture of that setup??
Sheldon Brown
>
> From the pictures on Sheldon's website, I'm guessing the Rohloff is a
> 32-spoke hub. Are there other options?
No, 32 is it. The good news is that between the symmetrical flanges and the
large diameter of the flanges, a Rohloff wheel is WAY stronger than a
comparable derailer-type wheel, to the point that I'd judge a Rohloff 32 to
be stronger than a derailer-dished 40.
Sheldon "Not To Worry" Brown
+----------------------------------------------------+
| War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. |
| -Ambrose Bierce |
+----------------------------------------------------+
Sheldon Brown
> > The shifter is designed for MTB bars and not drop bars. I machined an old
> > piece of MTB bar to fit in the end of a drop bar and mount the shifter
> > there.
Fred Roses wrote
> Nick, any way you could post a link to a picture of that setup??
I did a similar setup on an Atlantis. There's a photo at:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/atlantis/atlantis640-01.jpg
I "machined" this from a mountainbike bar end with a hacksaw.
Sheldon "Materials Available" Brown
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| How harmful overspecialization is. |
| It cuts knowledge at a million points and leaves it bleeding. |
| --Isaac Asimov |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Bluto
> "Tony Dickson" <tdic...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > From the pictures on Sheldon's website, I'm guessing the Rohloff is a
> > 32-spoke hub. Are there other options? I'm fond of 36 or even 40 spoke
> > rear wheels, given my weight.
> >
> > What about the spacing? Is it 135mm? That would make sense, if it's
> > designed for MTBs. Does the wheel have to be dished at all?
>
> 135 mm spacing. 32-hole only. No dish, 60mm between flanges.
> I think there's a version for tandems, which can mount 2.34mm spokes.
Don't tell anyone at Rohloff, but I slapped my hub up on the CNC mill
and added 16 more holes to it (between the shell lugs), which I then
laced with 48 spokes in a crow's-foot pattern. It was actually a
little more complicated than it sounds, but it worked beautifully and
is one of the most unique bike wheels in this star system.
IMO tandem riders would have to be relative morons to mess around with
32 spoke rims.
Dave Bohm of Bohemian Bicycles built my frame, and he has also set up
road bikes with the Rohloff hub. There are photos of one at his site
here:
http://www.bohemianbicycles.com/photo_gallery_5.htm
One nice detail about a frame configured especially for the Rohloff
hub is that the dropouts can be constructed so as to obviate the need
for a torque arm. Rohloff make a counterrotation fitting that
replaces the torque arm, but requires an extra-long dropout slot.
Chalo Colina
Edward Kleinbard
With apologies for jumping in, you can see an example of a Rohloff
shifter mounted on drop bars at:
http://www.bohemianbicycles.com/photo_gallery_5.htm
Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
More illustrations of the latter are at tubus.nl on the Dutch language
part of the site:
I inquired recently about importing a drop bar setup from Tubus;
unfortunately the proprietor, Marten Gerritsen, informed me that for
insurance reasons he won't sell into the United States.
Sheldon Brown has an illustration somewhere on his site of a third
solution -- basically mounting a bar end jutting out from the
vertical part of the stem -- but I can't find the url just now.
James Thomson
news:b9664dd.02020...@posting.google.com...
> Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
>
> http://tubus.nl/splitends.jpg
Giant used to produce a touring bike with grip-shifters mounted on the
upper part of a drop bar that had been split and re-joined.
I recently fitted drop bars to my SO's Moulton Landrover for her to try. I
fitted the 3x7 gripshift controls to a short section cut from an old
straight mtb bar clamped to the main bar via a pair of Cinelli Spinaci
clamps - like a Minoura Spacebar, but a little sturdier. No pictures yet.
James Thomson
Matthew Temple
James Thomson wrote:
>
> "Edward Kleinbard" <eklei...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:b9664dd.02020...@posting.google.com...
>
> > Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
> >
> > http://tubus.nl/splitends.jpg
About that picture ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
How did they do that?!
>
> Giant used to produce a touring bike with grip-shifters mounted on the
> upper part of a drop bar that had been split and re-joined.
>
> I recently fitted drop bars to my SO's Moulton Landrover for her to try. I
> fitted the 3x7 gripshift controls to a short section cut from an old
> straight mtb bar clamped to the main bar via a pair of Cinelli Spinaci
> clamps - like a Minoura Spacebar, but a little sturdier. No pictures yet.
>
> James Thomson
Matt Temple
--
=============================================================
Matthew Temple Tel: 617/632-2597
Director, Research Computing Fax: 617/632-4012
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute m...@research.dfci.harvard.edu
44 Binney Street, JF 314 http://research.dfci.harvard.edu
Boston, MA 02115 Choice is the Choice!
Tom Ace
> > From the pictures on Sheldon's website, I'm guessing the Rohloff is a
> > 32-spoke hub. Are there other options?
>
> No, 32 is it. The good news is that between the symmetrical flanges and the
> large diameter of the flanges, a Rohloff wheel is WAY stronger than a
> comparable derailer-type wheel, to the point that I'd judge a Rohloff 32 to
> be stronger than a derailer-dished 40.
What important advantage, if any, are you suggesting the large
(100 mm) flange diameter confers? Lateral strength of a
symmetric (non-dished) rear wheel is quite adequate even
with a small flange hub. I mean, if bigger flanges helped
in general, wouldn't we see more large-flange hubs?
I found the 100mm flange diameter awkward for a 700C wheel, as
none of the possible lacing patterns appealed to me. 1x results
in a small effective lever arm, hovering around the barely adequate
size for handling drive torque (by my calculations). 2x on the
other hand results in a severe angle where spokes meet the rim,
requiring a bit of manual correction of the spoke line (as
described in Jobst's book). I settled on 2x (which is also
Rohloff's recommendation for 26" and larger wheels).
I love having no dish, and 32 spokes works for me (I weigh 83 kg)
but I definitely would've bought a 36 hole hub if Rohloff made one.
Tom Ace
Tony Dickson
question I had but didn't ask was answered as well. :)
Sheldon Brown
> > > From the pictures on Sheldon's website, I'm guessing the Rohloff is a
> > > 32-spoke hub. Are there other options?
and replied:
> > No, 32 is it. The good news is that between the symmetrical flanges and the
> > large diameter of the flanges, a Rohloff wheel is WAY stronger than a
> > comparable derailer-type wheel, to the point that I'd judge a Rohloff 32 to
> > be stronger than a derailer-dished 40.
Tom Ace asked:
> What important advantage, if any, are you suggesting the large
> (100 mm) flange diameter confers?
I never said it was "important, but the wider bracing angle clearly will
increase the lateral strength.
> Lateral strength of a
> symmetric (non-dished) rear wheel is quite adequate even
> with a small flange hub.
This is true. I know this well because I sell a great many fixed gear
wheels, and very rarely have any come back, even though typical first-time
fixed-gear riders don't learn the knack of unweighting the saddle without
coasting right off the bat.
> I mean, if bigger flanges helped
> in general, wouldn't we see more large-flange hubs?
Hmm...I sell a lot of large-flange hubs...
The person I was replying to implied that he was a very abusive rider, and
that he'd really prefer a 40 spoke wheel. I don't know if he's just
overcautious, or is unusually stressful on wheels.
> I found the 100mm flange diameter awkward for a 700C wheel, as
> none of the possible lacing patterns appealed to me. 1x results
> in a small effective lever arm, hovering around the barely adequate
> size for handling drive torque (by my calculations). 2x on the
> other hand results in a severe angle where spokes meet the rim,
> requiring a bit of manual correction of the spoke line (as
> described in Jobst's book). I settled on 2x (which is also
> Rohloff's recommendation for 26" and larger wheels).
>
> I love having no dish, and 32 spokes works for me (I weigh 83 kg)
> but I definitely would've bought a 36 hole hub if Rohloff made one.
I generally prefer 36 for rear wheels myself, and if the Rohloff folks had
asked my advice, I'd have told them to go with 36 spokes.
Unfortunately, Rohloff seems to have tunnel-vision marketing, and the
primary market they seem to see for this hub is (yuck!) downhill racing.
For some bizarre reason most DH rims are 32 holers.
This is a bit reminiscent of the tunnel-vision marketing of
"triathlon-specific" products a decade back. Makers of, for instance,
clip-on "aero" bars never seemed to realize that these were potentially as
useful to touring cyclists as to triathletes. Minor tweaking of many of
these products would have considerably increased their potential market, but
they just didn't see that.
Sheldon "2 To The Fifth--Plus 4" Brown
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| This message has been sent to you using recycled electrons |
| exclusively. Please do not discard them after use, |
| send them along and help conserve these irreplaceable |
| sub-atomic resources for future generations. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Tony Dickson
"Sheldon Brown" <capt...@sheldonbrown.com> wrote
> The person I was replying to implied that he was a very abusive rider, and
> that he'd really prefer a 40 spoke wheel. I don't know if he's just
> overcautious, or is unusually stressful on wheels.
Not abusive, far from it. I just weigh over 300lbs. I've actually only had
one wheel failure so far, a broken spoke.
Bluto
> What important advantage, if any, are you suggesting the large
> (100 mm) flange diameter confers? Lateral strength of a
> symmetric (non-dished) rear wheel is quite adequate even
> with a small flange hub. I mean, if bigger flanges helped
> in general, wouldn't we see more large-flange hubs?
If lateral strength of a rear wheel were "quite adequate", we wouldn't
see frequent rear wheel lateral failures. But we do, even in
coaster-brake wheels and the like. Ordinary large-flange hubs don't
really have much ability to brace side loads, since most have thin
unsupported flanges canted at something less than spoke angle. Since
the Rohloff hub's flanges are buttressed by the large hub body, they
can support its unusually high bracing angle.
Chalo Colina
Markus Imhof
>
> James Thomson wrote:
> >
> > "Edward Kleinbard" <eklei...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:b9664dd.02020...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
> > >
> > > http://tubus.nl/splitends.jpg
> About that picture ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> How did they do that?!
Don't know - but if I look closely, I imagine a welding scar just under
the left end of the shifter.
Bye
Markus
Helmut Springer
> IMO tandem riders would have to be relative morons to mess around
> with 32 spoke rims.
Actually even some doing off road races with the Rohloff do.
Successfully.
--
MfG/best regards, "Those who would give up essential liberty
helmut springer to purchase a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
peter.kidwell
This is true. I know this well because I sell a great many
fixed gear
> wheels, and very rarely have any come back, even though typical
first-time
> fixed-gear riders don't learn the knack of unweighting the
saddle without
> coasting right off the bat.
Could you give me an explanation on the bit about 1st time fixed
gear riders.
I am about to fit a Nexus 7 speed hub to a lightweight but the
Rohloff would be the
ultimate.
What is the price of the Rohloff in the US
PK
Sheldon Brown
> > > > Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
> > > >
> > > > http://tubus.nl/splitends.jpg
Matthew Temple asked:
> > About that picture ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > How did they do that?!
Markus Imhof theorized:
> Don't know - but if I look closely, I imagine a welding scar just under
> the left end of the shifter.
My guess is that they cut the bar apart right in the middle. Note the stem
has an unusually wide clamp area. If we could see it, I'd bet the bottom
has two separate pinch bolts, one to hold each half of the handlebar.
I tried something like this using a BMX stem to make an unusually narrow
drop bar for my daughter when she was little, removing the entire bulged
area of the middle of the handlebar.
Sheldon "That Was When My Daughter Weighed Less Than 50 Lbs" Brown
+------------------------------------------------+
| Nobody who has anything to do with bicycles |
| has _all_ of their marbles, and some of us |
| are certifiable! |
| --Sheldon Brown |
+------------------------------------------------+
Sheldon Brown
> This is true. I know this well because I sell a great many
> fixed gear wheels, and very rarely have any come back, even though typical
> first-time fixed-gear riders don't learn the knack of unweighting the
> saddle without coasting right off the bat.
Peter Kidwell asked:
> Could you give me an explanation on the bit about 1st time fixed
> gear riders.
When riding fast over rough patches, rail crossings, potholes and the like,
riders of lightweight bikes need to unweight the saddle, and carry their
weight briefly on bent legs. The legs act as suspension for the rider's
weight, protecting the rear wheel (and the rider's bum) from trauma. This
is similar to the practice of "posting" while horseback riding.
Most cyclists who don't have fixed gear experience need to coast to do this.
One of the many ways fixed gear riding improves a rider's skills is that it
teaches him or her to "post" while continuing to pedal.
> I am about to fit a Nexus 7 speed hub to a lightweight but the
> Rohloff would be the
> ultimate.
> What is the price of the Rohloff in the US
See: http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/rohloff.html
Sheldon "Post, Don't Coast" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| It is good to learn from your mistakes; |
| It is better to learn from the mistakes of others. |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
alex wetmore
$ET2.2...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net:
>> Snip
> This is true. I know this well because I sell a great many
> fixed gear
>> wheels, and very rarely have any come back, even though typical
>> first-time fixed-gear riders don't learn the knack of unweighting the
>> saddle without coasting right off the bat.
>
> Could you give me an explanation on the bit about 1st time fixed
> gear riders.
You need to be able to unweight the rear wheel when you get to a bump in
the road. On a bike with a freewheel (like your Nexus, so you won't need
to worry about this) most people coast for a second and stand. On a
fixed gear you need to keep pedalling.
> I am about to fit a Nexus 7 speed hub to a lightweight but the
> Rohloff would be the
> ultimate.
> What is the price of the Rohloff in the US
About $800
I would suggest the Sachs/SRAM Super 7 over the Nexus. I own both. The
Super 7 has a much easier to deal with cable attachment mechanism, feels
more efficient, has a wider range, and is user servicable (with spare
parts availability too). The only advantages to the Nexus are that it is
$50 cheaper and the trigger shifter can be used more easily on drop bars
than the gripshift of the Super 7. I wish I had bought a Super 7 for my
commuter bike instead of the Nexus 7.
Sheldon will probably respond to this that he prefers the Nexus 7 because
all of the shifting bits are inside of the dropouts, so they are better
protected from damage. This is true, but it makes removing the shift
cable (for fixing a flat for instance) much more difficult (on my bike
the chaincase gets in the way, making it even a bit harder). The Super 7
comes with a protector to protect the clickbox from damage which works
well in my experience.
alex
alex wetmore
news:8b4b7de4.02020...@posting.google.com:
>
>> "Tony Dickson" <tdic...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > From the pictures on Sheldon's website, I'm guessing the Rohloff is
>> > a 32-spoke hub. Are there other options? I'm fond of 36 or even 40
>> > spoke rear wheels, given my weight.
>> >
>> > What about the spacing? Is it 135mm? That would make sense, if
>> > it's designed for MTBs. Does the wheel have to be dished at all?
>>
>> 135 mm spacing. 32-hole only. No dish, 60mm between flanges.
>> I think there's a version for tandems, which can mount 2.34mm spokes.
>
> Don't tell anyone at Rohloff, but I slapped my hub up on the CNC mill
> and added 16 more holes to it (between the shell lugs), which I then
> laced with 48 spokes in a crow's-foot pattern. It was actually a
> little more complicated than it sounds, but it worked beautifully and
> is one of the most unique bike wheels in this star system.
>
> IMO tandem riders would have to be relative morons to mess around with
> 32 spoke rims.
daVinci makes 32 spoke rims which are designed for tandem use.
http://www.davincitandems.com/index.html
I've used these on my tandem and my single bike with no problems (since
Jobst is probably reading this the wheels have somewhat more than 5000
miles on them in mixed weather conditions, no cracks at the spoke nipples).
I didn't build the wheels (Peter White did), so I don't know how true the
rim was when brand new. I think I bought the first pair of these from him,
and he had pretty favorable comments.
Most of my tandem riding has been on bikes with 36 spoke, 26" (or 20", but
those don't count for this conversation) wheels and they have always held
up well.
> One nice detail about a frame configured especially for the Rohloff
> hub is that the dropouts can be constructed so as to obviate the need
> for a torque arm. Rohloff make a counterrotation fitting that
> replaces the torque arm, but requires an extra-long dropout slot.
PBW Bikes (folding bicycle manufacturer) makes some nice Rohloff specific
dropouts for his bikes.
http://www.pbwbikes.com/pics/ia2a.jpg and
http://www.pbwbikes.com/pics/ia26.jpg are good pictures of them. They are
vertical dropouts with provisions for adjusting the chain tension.
alex
alex wetmore
news:3C5F445F...@research.dfci.harvard.edu:
>>
>> "Edward Kleinbard" <eklei...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:b9664dd.02020...@posting.google.com...
>>
>> > Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
>> >
>> > http://tubus.nl/splitends.jpg
> About that picture ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> How did they do that?!
Various companies modify drop bars to split in the middle. Bike Friday
uses such drop bars on their bikes to make it easier to pack the bike.
The shifter's clamp probably needed to be machined out a little bit to make
it fit around a 23.8mm bar instead of a 22.2mm one.
alex
Claude
news:3C600193...@sheldonbrown.com...
> See: http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/rohloff.html
Are the declared weights of the Speedhub real?
--
Ciao
Claude
Claude
news:a3p02g$f7h$2...@216.39.149.189...
> http://www.pbwbikes.com/pics/ia2a.jpg and
> http://www.pbwbikes.com/pics/ia26.jpg are good pictures of them. They are
> vertical dropouts with provisions for adjusting the chain tension.
that's the Rohloff-suggested setup, you can download pdf at
http://www.rohloff.de/english/index.htm -----> OEM
--
Ciao
Claude
A Muzi
>
> > > From the pictures on Sheldon's website, I'm guessing the Rohloff is a
> > > 32-spoke hub. Are there other options?
> >
> > No, 32 is it. The good news is that between the symmetrical flanges and
the
> > large diameter of the flanges, a Rohloff wheel is WAY stronger than a
> > comparable derailer-type wheel, to the point that I'd judge a Rohloff 32
to
> > be stronger than a derailer-dished 40.
>
news:3C5F4269...@qnet.com...
> What important advantage, if any, are you suggesting the large
> (100 mm) flange diameter confers? Lateral strength of a
> symmetric (non-dished) rear wheel is quite adequate even
> with a small flange hub. I mean, if bigger flanges helped
> in general, wouldn't we see more large-flange hubs?
>
> I found the 100mm flange diameter awkward for a 700C wheel, as
> none of the possible lacing patterns appealed to me. 1x results
> in a small effective lever arm, hovering around the barely adequate
> size for handling drive torque (by my calculations). 2x on the
> other hand results in a severe angle where spokes meet the rim,
> requiring a bit of manual correction of the spoke line (as
> described in Jobst's book). I settled on 2x (which is also
> Rohloff's recommendation for 26" and larger wheels).
>
> I love having no dish, and 32 spokes works for me (I weigh 83 kg)
> but I definitely would've bought a 36 hole hub if Rohloff made one.
I had the same reservations with a Sachs Elan 12-speed 36h on a Velocity
Deep-V rim. The spokes definitely look precarious entering the nipples ten
degrees off. Of course the customer only cared that this rim was a bright
enamel yellow and I could not dissuade him from it.
--
Andrew Muzi
http://www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April 1971
Julian C. Westerhout
> I would suggest the Sachs/SRAM Super 7 over the Nexus. I own both. The
> Super 7 has a much easier to deal with cable attachment mechanism, feels
> more efficient, has a wider range, and is user servicable (with spare
> parts availability too). The only advantages to the Nexus are that it is
> $50 cheaper and the trigger shifter can be used more easily on drop bars
> than the gripshift of the Super 7. I wish I had bought a Super 7 for my
> commuter bike instead of the Nexus 7.
>
> Sheldon will probably respond to this that he prefers the Nexus 7 because
> all of the shifting bits are inside of the dropouts, so they are better
> protected from damage. This is true, but it makes removing the shift
> cable (for fixing a flat for instance) much more difficult (on my bike
> the chaincase gets in the way, making it even a bit harder). The Super 7
> comes with a protector to protect the clickbox from damage which works
> well in my experience.
I've not used the Sachs/SRAM, so can't comment on it. I will say though that
I have no real problem with removing the cable on my Nexus-7. It doesn't
take longer than about 15 seconds or so -- you just grab the cable clamp,
pull the cable carrier all the way down (or forward -depending upon your
perspective) and pop the cable out through the convenient release hole. As
Alex notes, an enclosed chain case would make things more difficult.
Another possible consideration arises if you use a BOB trailer, as I do. The
Bob NUTZ for attaching the trailer forks add at least 1 cm on each side of
the axle. They do make a set of NUTZ for the SRAM/Sachs as well -- and I'm
not sure if the cable goes all the way to the end, but if so, then it is
really starting to hang out there quite a bit.
Julian Westerhout
alex wetmore
news:B885982C.215C%juwe...@indiana.edu:
>> I would suggest the Sachs/SRAM Super 7 over the Nexus. I own both.
>> The Super 7 has a much easier to deal with cable attachment mechanism,
>> feels more efficient, has a wider range, and is user servicable (with
>> spare parts availability too). The only advantages to the Nexus are
>> that it is $50 cheaper and the trigger shifter can be used more easily
>> on drop bars than the gripshift of the Super 7. I wish I had bought a
>> Super 7 for my commuter bike instead of the Nexus 7.
>>
>> Sheldon will probably respond to this that he prefers the Nexus 7
>> because all of the shifting bits are inside of the dropouts, so they
>> are better protected from damage. This is true, but it makes removing
>> the shift cable (for fixing a flat for instance) much more difficult
>> (on my bike the chaincase gets in the way, making it even a bit
>> harder). The Super 7 comes with a protector to protect the clickbox
>> from damage which works well in my experience.
>
> I've not used the Sachs/SRAM, so can't comment on it. I will say though
> that I have no real problem with removing the cable on my Nexus-7. It
> doesn't take longer than about 15 seconds or so -- you just grab the
> cable clamp, pull the cable carrier all the way down (or forward
> -depending upon your perspective) and pop the cable out through the
> convenient release hole. As Alex notes, an enclosed chain case would
> make things more difficult.
With practice (and I'm usually not a klutz) it takes me a couple of minutes
to get it out and back in again. I've had a lot of practice this weekend
since I've been overhauling a bunch of stuff on my Nexus bike (the fender
is no longer secured with paper clips and I'm no longer using zip-ties as a
cable housing stop).
My chain case comes off easily, but one of the brackets sits near the cable
mounting position (picture at
http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/bikes/chaincase/reduced/0418_006.jpg).
What I have difficulty with is holding down the spring loaded cable carrier
while turning the end of the cable 90 degrees to fit it through the end of
the cable carrier. The cable carrier is thin and has a lot of spring
tension, so pushing on it with ones finger is a bit painful. It is narrow,
so it tends to slip when I use a screwdriver.
Shimano's instructions recommend popping the cable housing out of the
slotted cable housing stop on the hub, but my section of cable housing is
too short to really do this (the picture above is out of date and shows
when I was using zipties as a cable housing stop). I haven't looked at a
bike designed for the Nexus 7 to see if they mount the cable housing stop
farther up the chainstay. I went to check on this at my LBS yesterday, but
their only Nexus 7 equipped bike used a full chaincase (and the chaincase
was designed for the Nexus 7 and had its own cable management features).
Even ignoring the cable mounting system, the ability to overhaul (and get
replacement parts for) the Super 7 is well worth $50 in my mind.
> Another possible consideration arises if you use a BOB trailer, as I
> do. The Bob NUTZ for attaching the trailer forks add at least 1 cm on
> each side of the axle. They do make a set of NUTZ for the SRAM/Sachs as
> well -- and I'm not sure if the cable goes all the way to the end, but
> if so, then it is really starting to hang out there quite a bit.
BOB Nutz might be an issue with the SRAM Super 7. The clickbox fits over
the end of the axle and positioning of it is critical (the axle has a
slight indent that you can feel the clickbox slip over). There isn't much
space in between the end of the clickbox and the hub for something as wide
as a BOB nut.
I prefer two wheels trailers to the BOB trailers (having owned both types),
and my Burley trailer works fine on both my Nexus 7 and Super 7 equipped
bicycles without requiring me to buy any special axle nuts.
alex
tubus import en framebouw
>
> > > > > Another very elegant approach from a Dutch builder at:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://tubus.nl/splitends.jpg
>
> Matthew Temple asked:
>
> > > About that picture ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > How did they do that?!
>
> Markus Imhof theorized:
>
> > Don't know - but if I look closely, I imagine a welding scar just under
> > the left end of the shifter.
>
> My guess is that they cut the bar apart right in the middle. Note the stem
> has an unusually wide clamp area. If we could see it, I'd bet the bottom
> has two separate pinch bolts, one to hold each half of the handlebar.
>
The bars consist of a double wide stemclamp (two bolts) in which two
pieces of cromoly (25.4 x 24 diameter) are fitted. The outside of the rh
sleeve is machined to double as the inner barrel for the Rohloff
shifter, which is machined of the origibal shifter. Handlebars are cut
in two, the crimped sleeve is removed (can't use a bulgebutted
handlebar) and glued/riveted in the sleeve.
--
Marten
James Thomson
> I had the same reservations with a Sachs Elan 12-speed 36h on a Velocity
> Deep-V rim. The spokes definitely look precarious entering the nipples
ten
> degrees off. Of course the customer only cared that this rim was a
bright
> enamel yellow and I could not dissuade him from it.
In the summer I briefly test-rode a Sachs Elan hub in a 16" Moulton wheel.
You can imagine the spoke angles.
James Thomson
A Muzi
> "Julian C. Westerhout" <juwe...@indiana.edu> wrote in
> news:B885982C.215C%juwe...@indiana.edu:
> > On 2/5/02 11:02 AM, , "alex wetmore" <al...@phred.org> wrote:
A wrench is very helpful with the Nexus cable carrier- don't unbolt it but
use the wrench to turn the carrier so it will release from the slot. This is
difficult with fingers only.
Secondly, Alex made a comment about the Sachs cost. Since Nexus and Super7
cost me the same I sell them at the same price. But I'd happily _accept_
an extra $50!
Bluto
> Even ignoring the cable mounting system, the ability to overhaul (and get
> replacement parts for) the Super 7 is well worth $50 in my mind.
Agreed. I use a Sachs S7 hub on one of my utility bikes, because of
its wide gear range, relative simplicity, and overall robustness.
There is one application for which I used a Nexus hub, though, where a
Sachs unit would be clearly less than ideal.
I recently built a tallbike, 6' at the saddle and 36" high at the BB,
for which I used a Nexus hub. One important criterion for this bike
was that it be able to withstand hard falls without functional
impairment. It was much easier to design the chainstays/dropouts in
such a way that they shielded the long axle nuts than if I'd had to
protect the entire clickbox assembly of the Sachs hub. I did wind up
using the SRAM grip shifter for the Shimano hub, since it was out of
harm's way and less likely to get snagged during mounting and
dismounting operations than a trigger shifter.
FWIW, the shifting seems a bit quicker and cleaner on the Shimano hub
than on the Sachs. Not that either one is what you'd call hesitant.
Chalo Colina
Julian C. Westerhout
<al...@phred.org> wrote:
<snip>.
>
> With practice (and I'm usually not a klutz) it takes me a couple of minutes
> to get it out and back in again.
It's very quick to release for me, but putting it back in can be tricky, and
sometimes does take a while.
<snip>
>
> My chain case comes off easily, but one of the brackets sits near the cable
> mounting position (picture at
> http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/bikes/chaincase/reduced/0418_006.jpg).
> What I have difficulty with is holding down the spring loaded cable carrier
> while turning the end of the cable 90 degrees to fit it through the end of
> the cable carrier. The cable carrier is thin and has a lot of spring
> tension, so pushing on it with ones finger is a bit painful. It is narrow,
> so it tends to slip when I use a screwdriver.
I use a rag doubled over as an ersatz thimble over my finger. That seems to
do the trick.
>
<snip>
>
> Even ignoring the cable mounting system, the ability to overhaul (and get
> replacement parts for) the Super 7 is well worth $50 in my mind.
I agree parts availability and overhaul ease is nice -- I in no way intended
to demean the SRAM/Sachs -- I think it is great to have options!
>
>> Another possible consideration arises if you use a BOB trailer, as I
>> do. The Bob NUTZ for attaching the trailer forks add at least 1 cm on
>> each side of the axle. They do make a set of NUTZ for the SRAM/Sachs as
>> well -- and I'm not sure if the cable goes all the way to the end, but
>> if so, then it is really starting to hang out there quite a bit.
>
> BOB Nutz might be an issue with the SRAM Super 7. The clickbox fits over
> the end of the axle and positioning of it is critical (the axle has a
> slight indent that you can feel the clickbox slip over). There isn't much
> space in between the end of the clickbox and the hub for something as wide
> as a BOB nut.
>
> I prefer two wheels trailers to the BOB trailers (having owned both types),
> and my Burley trailer works fine on both my Nexus 7 and Super 7 equipped
> bicycles without requiring me to buy any special axle nuts.
For me the BOB is a better choice due to its narrow profile -- it is easier
to get it up and down stairs (which I need to do in my apartment building),
and in and out of the small elevator in the building in which I work.
For whatever it's worth, I used to own a cycletote touring trailer with two
700c wheels, and I really liked it -- unfortunately, so did someone else,
and it was stolen during a brief and ill-fated stay on Long Island in 1997
-- mysteriously they left the hitch behind -- my guess is that they had no
idea what it was :(
Julian.
alex wetmore
> for which I used a Nexus hub. One important criterion for this bike
> was that it be able to withstand hard falls without functional
> impairment. It was much easier to design the chainstays/dropouts in
> such a way that they shielded the long axle nuts than if I'd had to
> protect the entire clickbox assembly of the Sachs hub. I did wind up
> using the SRAM grip shifter for the Shimano hub, since it was out of
> harm's way and less likely to get snagged during mounting and
> dismounting operations than a trigger shifter.
If I'm reading this correctly you found that the Shimano Nexus 7 and SRAM
Super 7 shifters are interchangable. Is that really correct?
If not, what shifter are you using for the Nexus?
alex
alex wetmore
> Super7 cost me the same I sell them at the same price. But I'd happily
> _accept_ an extra $50!
I was basing the prices off of what is listed at Harris Cyclery (Nexus is
$159 + $35 for shifter, Sachs is $199 plus $40 for shift). What are your
prices for the hubs?
I bought my Nexus many years ago and got my Sachs hub used, so I don't
really know what my LBS is charging for them.
alex
peter.kidwell
On hitting your first bump sat in the saddle you ease yourself
off the saddle in future, this is early learning say at about 5
yrs old riding your tricycle.
PK
peter.kidwell
Nexus. I do not know the gearing ? This hub has a coaster brake
fitted.
PK
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
Spokes work only in tension. There are no "side loads" that affect
their flanges, large or small. Changes in tension occur with side
loads at the rim, but these are only change tension, so if the flange
does not break radially, there is no effect. What sort of failures
are you attributing to "un-buttressed flanges"?
Jobst Brandt <jobst....@stanfordalumni.org> Palo Alto CA
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> Could you give me an explanation on the bit about 1st time fixed
>> gear riders.
> When riding fast over rough patches, rail crossings, potholes and
> the like, riders of lightweight bikes need to unweight the saddle,
> and carry their weight briefly on bent legs. The legs act as
> suspension for the rider's weight, protecting the rear wheel (and
> the rider's bum) from trauma. This is similar to the practice of
> "posting" while horseback riding.
> Most cyclists who don't have fixed gear experience need to coast to
> do this. One of the many ways fixed gear riding improves a rider's
> skills is that it teaches him or her to "post" while continuing to
> pedal.
What I find amazing, is how many bicyclists cannot pedal standing, be
that on a hill or for a sprint... of course they don't sprint, that's
dangerous kid's stuff. Besides, what significance is there in a City
Limits sign or for that matter a State Line? This is why riders, who
began riding when young, cannot imagine what it is to ride with such a
conservative outlook on bicycling.
Teaching riders to get off the saddle for a bump in the road sounds
preposterous at first, but then I know of many who have responded to
my question with disgust "I never ride no-hands", as if to say what a
foolish thing to do.
Matt O'Toole
<jobst....@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message
news:mQ_78.17043$TI3.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> Teaching riders to get off the saddle for a bump in the road sounds
> preposterous at first, but then I know of many who have responded to
> my question with disgust "I never ride no-hands", as if to say what a
> foolish thing to do.
Well, when I was in grade school, the bicycle safety people taught that it
was not only dangerous, but illegal. And I believe it is in CA.
Matt O.
Bluto
> chump...@hotmail.com (Bluto) wrote:
> > I did wind up
> > using the SRAM grip shifter for the Shimano hub, since it was out of
> > harm's way and less likely to get snagged during mounting and
> > dismounting operations than a trigger shifter.
>
> If I'm reading this correctly you found that the Shimano Nexus 7 and SRAM
> Super 7 shifters are interchangable. Is that really correct?
SRAM make twist shifters for the Shimano hubs under the "Transit"
model name. I believe that this is an attempt to cash in on the fact
that Shimano sell gearhubs and shifters separately.
I don't have any knowledge as to whether either Sachs gearhubs or
Shimano gearhubs are compatible with any other type of shifters. I
can say that my "four-speed" twist shifter has seven (!) clicks in it,
though. Hmm...
Chalo Colina
Sheldon Brown
> On hitting your first bump sat in the saddle you ease yourself
> off the saddle in future, this is early learning say at about 5
> yrs old riding your tricycle.
Right, that's obvious. My point is that most cyclists who don't have fixed
gear experience have to _coast_ to "ease themselves" thus.
A bit of fixed gear riding teaches one how to unweight the saddle without
breaking stride.
Sheldon "Ouch!" Brown
+-------------------------------------+
| One can never know what is enough |
| until one knows what is too much. |
| --William Blake |
+-------------------------------------+
Sheldon Brown
> What I find amazing, is how many bicyclists cannot pedal standing, be
> that on a hill or for a sprint... of course they don't sprint, that's
> dangerous kid's stuff. Besides, what significance is there in a City
> Limits sign or for that matter a State Line? This is why riders, who
> began riding when young, cannot imagine what it is to ride with such a
> conservative outlook on bicycling.
I think some of this may be attributable to poor geometry in children's
bikes. Many kids' bikes are assembled by dad on Christmas morning, and,
assuming he manages to get the fork facing forward, he many or may not get
the handlebars set in an orientation that works for standing pedaling.
I believe the relationship of the hand gripping area to the steering axis is
quite critical to out of the saddle pedaling. Especially, if the grips are
too far back (as is often done with poorly fitted children's bikes) standing
pedaling may be nearly impossible.
If a child tries standing once or twice, and finds the bike uncontrollable,
he or she may well conclude that standing pedaling is just too hard or too
dangerous. This mindset may never be outgrown.
Another factor may be the increased use of multi-speed bikes for children.
With a single speed bike, standing is an essential skill for those who live
where there are hills. With multi-speed bikes, it is never _necessary_ to
stand, though many people enjoy doing so.
> Teaching riders to get off the saddle for a bump in the road sounds
> preposterous at first, but then I know of many who have responded to
> my question with disgust "I never ride no-hands", as if to say what a
> foolish thing to do.
This may also be related to childrens' bike design. When we were growing
up, bikes had more standard geometry, and had wheel sizes proportional to
the rider. With the demise of 24 inch wheels, most kids are on 20 inch
wheel bikes with big, heavy handlebars, and these bikes don't lend
themselves to no-hands riding, hélas!
Sheldon "Curmudging" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Absurdity, n.: A statement or belief manifestly |
| inconsistent with one's own opinion. |
| --Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Buck
> Jobst wrote:
>
> > What I find amazing, is how many bicyclists cannot pedal standing, be
> > that on a hill or for a sprint... of course they don't sprint, that's
> > dangerous kid's stuff. Besides, what significance is there in a City
> > Limits sign or for that matter a State Line? This is why riders, who
> > began riding when young, cannot imagine what it is to ride with such a
> > conservative outlook on bicycling.
>
> I think some of this may be attributable to poor geometry in children's
> bikes. Many kids' bikes are assembled by dad on Christmas morning, and,
> assuming he manages to get the fork facing forward, he many or may not get
> the handlebars set in an orientation that works for standing pedaling.
>
> I believe the relationship of the hand gripping area to the steering axis
is
> quite critical to out of the saddle pedaling. Especially, if the grips
are
> too far back (as is often done with poorly fitted children's bikes)
standing
> pedaling may be nearly impossible.
OOOOH! I can second that notion! When I bought my first "modern" road bike,
I was shocked how difficult it was to stand while pedalling with my hands on
the hoods or tops. In the drops, no problem. I attributed it to too many
years on the mountain bike (and too many years away from old road bike). I
was too embarrased to bring it up here, but I'm glad to see there might be
something more to it!
I can't remember who mentioned wheelies on road bikes (was it even in this
thread?), but my commuting buddy and I used to do this all the time. It's
something I'd never even considered trying on my new road bike. After
pondering this for a few minutes, maybe I'll just stick to wheelies on my
mountain bikes....
-Buck
Bluto
Chalo Colina wrote:
> > Ordinary large-flange hubs
> > don't really have much ability to brace side loads, since most have
> > thin unsupported flanges canted at something less than spoke angle.
> > Since the Rohloff hub's flanges are buttressed by the large hub
> > body, they can support its unusually high bracing angle.
>
> Spokes work only in tension. There are no "side loads" that affect
> their flanges, large or small. Changes in tension occur with side
> loads at the rim, but these are only change tension, so if the flange
> does not break radially, there is no effect. What sort of failures
> are you attributing to "un-buttressed flanges"?
I did stipulate that the flanges in question were not in line with the
spokes, Jobst. I know the nincompoops are constantly raising your
hackles, but get it straight, man.
A thin flange that does not lie within the conical surface described
by the spokes is going to flex proportionally to load (or variation in
net load). This obviously can't contribute to wheel lateral stiffness
like a oversized hub shell with a small, stiff flange.
You can argue with me on that point, but don't bother knocking down
assertions I didn't make.
Chalo Colina
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> Teaching riders to get off the saddle for a bump in the road sounds
>> preposterous at first, but then I know of many who have responded
>> to my question with disgust "I never ride no-hands", as if to say
>> what a foolish thing to do.
> Well, when I was in grade school, the bicycle safety people taught
> that it was not only dangerous, but illegal. And I believe it is in
> CA.
I doubt it. At least it isn't known to the many policemen I have
passed riding no-hands... except once in Switzerland on a wide
deserted road where I got a lecture and was let go because I was a
foreigner.
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> What I find amazing, is how many bicyclists cannot pedal standing,
>> be that on a hill or for a sprint... of course they don't sprint,
>> that's dangerous kid's stuff. Besides, what significance is there
>> in a City Limits sign or for that matter a State Line? This is why
>> riders, who began riding when young, cannot imagine what it is to
>> ride with such a conservative outlook on bicycling.
> I think some of this may be attributable to poor geometry in
> children's bikes. Many kids' bikes are assembled by dad on
> Christmas morning, and, assuming he manages to get the fork facing
> forward, he many or may not get the handlebars set in an orientation
> that works for standing pedaling.
I think it has more to do with TV and the image teenagers feel they
must project. They don't ride bike and then, belatedly, take it up
after their formative years are long gone, bringing with them all the
fears they have built up over the years of watching "geeks" ride
bicycles. Back in the days when young people rode bicycles (more than
to the store and back) the athletically inclined could do all the
tricks and learned the limits by falling, something older riders avoid
"like the plague" so they don't know where the limits are.
>> Teaching riders to get off the saddle for a bump in the road sounds
>> preposterous at first, but then I know of many who have responded to
>> my question with disgust "I never ride no-hands", as if to say what a
>> foolish thing to do.
> This may also be related to children's' bike design. When we were
> growing up, bikes had more standard geometry, and had wheel sizes
> proportional to the rider. With the demise of 24 inch wheels, most
> kids are on 20 inch wheel bikes with big, heavy handlebars, and
> these bikes don't lend themselves to no-hands riding, h las!
I think the "children" phase has nothing to do with this. The real
activity of bicycling starts in the teens for most riders and that is
the part that is missing. Teenagers drive cars, only weirdos ride
bike.
Matt O'Toole
"Buck" <bu...@galaxycorp.gibberish.com> wrote in message
news:a3rntm$ero$1...@news.tamu.edu...
> I can't remember who mentioned wheelies on road bikes (was it even in this
> thread?), but my commuting buddy and I used to do this all the time. It's
> something I'd never even considered trying on my new road bike. After
> pondering this for a few minutes, maybe I'll just stick to wheelies on my
> mountain bikes....
When I was a kid we all rode Stingrays. Wheelieing was probably the most
celebrated skill, and the "best" riders were the ones who could wheelie
indefinately. If you could wheelie on a Varsity, you were really, really
good.
Matt O.
A Muzi
news:Ixg88.17388$TI3.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
>only weirdos ride bike.
Which explains nearly everything!
Matt O'Toole
It's true! I still rode a bike to school in high school, even though I had
a car (parking was a pain). A lot of other people did too, and there was no
social stigma against it (though it was certainly cooler to drive if you had
a cool car). However, by the time my brother came along 7 years later, no
one would be caught dead riding a bike to school. It just wasn't done.
Furthermore, even young kids don't ride bikes to school anymore. When I was
in grade school, everyone rode. Being driven to school was for sissies, and
walking was too damned slow. Bikes were freedom and independence, just like
cars are for teenagers. All schools had "bike corrals" made of chain link
fence to prevent theft, and probably to prevent kids from taking off on
their bikes during the day. These were packed full- if you got there late,
there was no place to lock your bike. Now, the corrals are still there, but
they're mostly empty. Most kids get chauffered to school. Traffic jams
around schools at 3pm are incredible.
What a waste. I can only guess at the reasons. One is probably just a
cultural change- kids don't seem as active as they once were. They're
watching more TV, playing video games, listening to music, and fooling with
computers. There seem to be a lot more 9-10 year old lardballs around. But
mostly, parents are completely paranoid about letting their kids out around
town. The media has them scared shitless. They're not so worried about
kids getting hit by cars- they're convinced there's a kidnapper or child
molester hiding behind every tree. It's absurd.
Matt O.
Toby Hamilton
> What I find amazing, is how many bicyclists cannot pedal standing, be
> that on a hill or for a sprint... of course they don't sprint, that's
> dangerous kid's stuff. Besides, what significance is there in a City
> Limits sign or for that matter a State Line? This is why riders, who
> began riding when young, cannot imagine what it is to ride with such a
> conservative outlook on bicycling.
It's easy to get out of the habit of standing, for hills, sprints, or
anything else. I remember doing this all the time as a kid and not thinking
anything of it. I think Sheldon is right when he says, elsewhere in this
thread, that the single speed bikes I had to start with are partly
responsible for that. But even after I switched to multi speed bikes I still
stood without ever thinking about it. It was just easier that way.
After an interruption of several years (when I only 'cycled' on indoor
exercise equipment) I came to my senses and went back to riding a real
bicycle in the great ourdoors again. For a couple of years I climbed every
hill seated, partly because with the gearing I had I could do so, and partly
because my legs always felt like jello and I thought they would not tolerate
any extra effort. <g>
Eventually I decided that was silly and forced myself to get back into the
habit of standing up occasionally. It didn't take long for the ability to do
so to come back, and of course now I do it all the time without thinking
about it. Similar to the natural transition from walking to running I
suppose, where at a certain level of effort it just feels easier to stand.
--
Toby Hamilton (th-...@rogers.com)
Sheldon Brown
> > This may also be related to children's' bike design. When we were
> > growing up, bikes had more standard geometry, and had wheel sizes
> > proportional to the rider. With the demise of 24 inch wheels, most
> > kids are on 20 inch wheel bikes with big, heavy handlebars, and
Jobst disagreed:
> I think the "children" phase has nothing to do with this. The real
> activity of bicycling starts in the teens for most riders and that is
> the part that is missing. Teenagers drive cars, only weirdos ride
> bike.
But the activity of _learning_ to ride a bike takes place usually around the
age of six. The general perception is that once the child can get around
the block without putting a foot down, that child "knows how to ride a bike"
and no further instruction is necessary.
I think that overprotective parents place much more emphasis on the dangers
of cycling, and that this rubs off on the child's perception.
When we were kids, bicycles were regarded as toys, like bb guns and
see-saws. All of these "toys" had their risks, but it was assumed that the
major risk of cycling, excuse me, bike riding, was skinned knees and elbows.
Much as we now decry the perception of the bicycle as a "toy", there was a
small silver lining in that cloud.
Sheldon "Messing About On Bikes" Brown
+------------------------------------------------------+
| Idiot, n.: A member of a large and powerful tribe |
| whose influence in human affairs has always been |
| dominant and controlling. |
| --Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" |
+------------------------------------------------------+
Tim McNamara
> When I was a kid we all rode Stingrays. Wheelieing was probably the most
> celebrated skill, and the "best" riders were the ones who could wheelie
> indefinately. If you could wheelie on a Varsity, you were really, really
> good.
Do a wheelie on a Varsity? Hell, in my neighborhood we were impressed
if you could just pick the dang thing up!
Tim McNamara
> What a waste. I can only guess at the reasons. One is probably just a
> cultural change- kids don't seem as active as they once were. They're
> watching more TV, playing video games, listening to music, and fooling with
> computers. There seem to be a lot more 9-10 year old lardballs around. But
> mostly, parents are completely paranoid about letting their kids out around
> town. The media has them scared shitless. They're not so worried about
> kids getting hit by cars- they're convinced there's a kidnapper or child
> molester hiding behind every tree. It's absurd.
Amen to that! Our kids never learn that sense of freedom and
self-reliance, they don't get the exercise they need and they're going
to be in worse shape than we are in 30 years when we need them working
to support our Social Security... ;-)
Denny Coyle
Sheldon Brown wrote:
> When we were kids, bicycles were regarded as toys, like bb guns and
> see-saws. All of these "toys" had their risks, but it was assumed that the
> major risk of cycling, excuse me, bike riding, was skinned knees and elbows.
>
> Much as we now decry the perception of the bicycle as a "toy", there was a
> small silver lining in that cloud.
Your lamenting on days of yesteryear, when you should be "A Dad on a
BMX"- always! out of the saddle, with perpetually bruised/skinned shins,
having nothing but fun and going nowhere in particular.
dc
Russ Price
> I think the "children" phase has nothing to do with this. The real
> activity of bicycling starts in the teens for most riders and that is
> the part that is missing. Teenagers drive cars, only weirdos ride
> bike.
Certainly, once the teenagers get cars, things change. I think a lot of
that is, of course, that cars are a lot faster and hold more passengers
than bikes.
In this area, though, I see *lots* of kids out on bikes. Most of them
are BMX and mountain bikes; when I was growing up, they were Stingrays
and Varsitys, with BMX just getting started. Yes, the electro-forged
Schwinns were tanks, but they could take anything short of an asteroid
impact and keep on going. The Varsity (actually a Caliente) that I
rode when I was in my teens and early twenties endured some spectacular
wipeouts[1], and it also went a lot of places I'd never even consider
taking a modern ultra-lightweight road bike.
The road bikes I see on the heavily-used Old Plank Road Trail in
Chicago's far south suburbs are piloted by adults of widely varying age.
Even in the cold[2] I've seen kids out and about, in smaller numbers.
In warmer weather, the bike racks at the local grade schools are packed.
I'm seeing more and more 'bents in the area, too... none with kids on
them. :) I have seen a few kids on custom low-rider cruisers, though,
and I hear lots of "COOL BIKE!" comments from the younger crowd when I'm
on my Rocket. It's a shame that recumbents and high-performance road
bikes are a bit too expensive for kids.
Of course, a discarded BMX bike can be turned into a 'bent...
http://www.wisil.recumbents.com/wisil/junkbike/junkbike.htm
Anyway, I don't think things are as bleak for cycling as you paint them,
at least not around Chicago.
[1] There's nothing quite like hooking your wheels in an
extremely-oblique-angle railroad crossing at 20+ MPH. *OUCH!* I was
lucky to be able to ride away from that one with just a few minor
scrapes! I stop and walk for that crossing now.
[2] For small values of "cold." This winter has been quite mild by
Chicago standards.
--
Russ Price * mudturtl...@excite.com * kill the wabbit to email
2001 RANS Rocket, 1987 Sekai Rockhound
"Bus error - passengers dumped"
Mark(unMASK)Forsyth
"Russ Price" <mudturtl...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:3C61EC64...@excite.com...
[deletia]
>
> [1] There's nothing quite like hooking your wheels in an
> extremely-oblique-angle railroad crossing at 20+ MPH. *OUCH!* I was
> lucky to be able to ride away from that one with just a few minor
> scrapes! I stop and walk for that crossing now.
Come to Melbourne in Oz. We've got tramlines !!! They normally run down the
centre of the road and where they turn you get to ride over a lovely slick,
steel, tyre width wheel trap.. Trams also pose another problem in as much as
you can't legally ride past a tram while it is stopped or if it will come to
a stop before you get past it. Lotsa people give up cycling because of
getting caught up in 'em.
Ooroo
Mark F...
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Jobst disagreed:
>> I think the "children" phase has nothing to do with this. The real
>> activity of bicycling starts in the teens for most riders and that
>> is the part that is missing. Teenagers drive cars, only weirdos
>> ride bike.
This was in respect to bicycle handling and discovering the limits of
braking, cornering, pedaling with one hand on the bar while shifting,
and how to brake hard, among other things.
> But the activity of _learning_ to ride a bike takes place usually
> around the age of six. The general perception is that once the
> child can get around the block without putting a foot down, that
> child "knows how to ride a bike" and no further instruction is
> necessary.
> I think that overprotective parents place much more emphasis on the
> dangers of cycling, and that this rubs off on the child's
> perception.
> When we were kids, bicycles were regarded as toys, like BB guns and
> see-saws. All of these "toys" had their risks, but it was assumed
> that the major risk of cycling, excuse me, bike riding, was skinned
> knees and elbows.
> Much as we now decry the perception of the bicycle as a "toy", there
> was a small silver lining in that cloud.
I agree with this entirely. I also find sad that parents believe a
skinned elbow or knee is entirely avoidable and hover over their
children as long as they are still at home. This created "time bombs"
that often go off when these children go off to school and later to
college. They have no perception of obstacles in life, be that
falling off a bicycle or joining the Taliban. Realities of life are
those that they learned from watching TV under the protectiveness of
their parents. They couldn't get hurt there, could they.
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> I think the "children" phase has nothing to do with this. The real
>> activity of bicycling starts in the teens for most riders and that
>> is the part that is missing. Teenagers drive cars, only weirdos
>> ride bike.
> It's true! I still rode a bike to school in high school, even
> though I had a car (parking was a pain). A lot of other people did
> too, and there was no social stigma against it (though it was
> certainly cooler to drive if you had a cool car). However, by the
> time my brother came along 7 years later, no one would be caught
> dead riding a bike to school. It just wasn't done.
Already in my day, after the 6th grade bicycling was out. Still, I
did not need to lock my Rollfast coaster brake "MTB" (it had fat
tires). No one wanted a bicycle like that and the seat was too high
even then. I rode a couple of miles home for lunch daily.
After switching schools for high school (9th-12th) I rode to the train
station and parked the old clunker, unlocked there. It was not
bothered during the four years, however, the train once stayed in the
station long enough for my classmates to see me get on my bicycle,
which brought out great ridicule.
Toby Hamilton
> Come to Melbourne in Oz. We've got tramlines !!! They normally run down
the
> centre of the road and where they turn you get to ride over a lovely
slick,
> steel, tyre width wheel trap.. Trams also pose another problem in as much
as
> you can't legally ride past a tram while it is stopped or if it will come
to
> a stop before you get past it. Lotsa people give up cycling because of
> getting caught up in 'em.
Or Toronto where there are streetcar tracks nicely hidden underneath the
snow on some days. A friend of mine who was a bike courier here for a few
years declared these to be the bane of her existence. I even managed to get
my front wheel jammed in one once by not crossing it at enough of an angle.
Luckily that was at low speed. But I've never heard anyone saying they
planned to give up riding to avoid them. At worst some people seem to just
walk across the notoriously bad intersections.
The reason for not passing the trams (or streetcars) when they're stopping
is because they can't pull over to the curb, and you'll hit the people
stepping off. In the case of cars it's a guaranteed serious injury to the
innocent victim. In the case of bicyclists this is a possibility, but
there's also the danger that the guy you crash into may be huge and not
pleased. <g>
--
Toby Hamilton (th-...@rogers.com)
Sheldon Brown
> After switching schools for high school (9th-12th) I rode to the train
> station and parked the old clunker, unlocked there. It was not
> bothered during the four years, however, the train once stayed in the
> station long enough for my classmates to see me get on my bicycle,
> which brought out great ridicule.
I was the only member of the Marblehead HS class of 1962 to ride bike to
school. I also wore a tweed sports jacket, carried my books in a briefcase,
smoked a briar pipe, and generally made no effort to fit in to teenaged
norms of the day.
Sheldon "I Did It My Way" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| Mad, adj.: |
| Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence... |
| -- Ambrose Bierce, 'The Devil's Dictionary' |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Mark(unMASK)Forsyth
"Toby Hamilton" <th-...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:flE88.7523$6lf1...@news2.bloor.is...
[deletia]
>
> Or Toronto where there are streetcar tracks nicely hidden underneath the
> snow on some days. A friend of mine who was a bike courier here for a few
Thankfully we don't get snow...:-)
> years declared these to be the bane of her existence. I even managed to
get
I've worked as a cycle courier too and I know exactly what she means.
> my front wheel jammed in one once by not crossing it at enough of an
angle.
> Luckily that was at low speed. But I've never heard anyone saying they
Over the years I've been caught quite a few times - luckily I've never
crashed because of 'em. One time a BIG bloke on a Harley complemented me on
a nice recovery and applauded...:-) I though he was about to rip my head off
because my antics caused him to have to brake REALLY hard in case I did come
off.
> planned to give up riding to avoid them. At worst some people seem to just
> walk across the notoriously bad intersections.
Quite a few people that I know won't ride to work because of tram tracks. In
some streets, Chapel St. in Prahran being the worst, if you ride wide enough
of the parked cars to avoid being "Car Door'd(tm)" you get perilously close
to the track. Had a bloke in Chapel St. slam his own head in a car door once
after he flung it open. He gave me enough time to scream and for him to see
that I was gonna hit the door if he didn't close it, so he did...:-)
>
> The reason for not passing the trams (or streetcars) when they're stopping
> is because they can't pull over to the curb, and you'll hit the people
> stepping off. In the case of cars it's a guaranteed serious injury to the
> innocent victim. In the case of bicyclists this is a possibility, but
> there's also the danger that the guy you crash into may be huge and not
> pleased. <g>
Either that or the sole source of support for 14 kids...:-) Trams /
streetcars make life a bit more interesting as well as being damn good
public transport.
Ooroo
Mark F...
>
> --
> Toby Hamilton (th-...@rogers.com)
>
>
Mark Hickey
>Jobst reminisced:
>
>> After switching schools for high school (9th-12th) I rode to the train
>> station and parked the old clunker, unlocked there. It was not
>> bothered during the four years, however, the train once stayed in the
>> station long enough for my classmates to see me get on my bicycle,
>> which brought out great ridicule.
>
>I was the only member of the Marblehead HS class of 1962 to ride bike to
>school. I also wore a tweed sports jacket, carried my books in a briefcase,
>smoked a briar pipe, and generally made no effort to fit in to teenaged
>norms of the day.
Kids, don't follow Sheldon's example or you might end up in some
disreputable business like selling bikes for a living.
There were enough of my classmates riding bikes to school (small town
in southern Illinois) that I don't think I was that unusual (well,
until I continued to do it - sometimes - after I got a car..). But
I'm making up for it now. Pulled my bike into the motorcycle shop to
buy a part yesterday and got a lot of funny looks from the young guys
behind the counter (but I think the young lady at the checkout
appreciated the lycra shorts).
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
James Thomson
news:hjfv3a.6ch.ln@really...
> Quite a few people that I know won't ride to work because of tram tracks.
> In some streets, Chapel St. in Prahran being the worst, if you ride wide
> enough of the parked cars to avoid being "Car Door'd(tm)" you get
> perilously close to the track.
Happened to me in that very street - swung wide to avoid a taxi pulling
out, and found myself on the ground with the bike on top of me. Received a
generous round of applause from a crowd of passing drunks.
> Trams / streetcars make life a bit more interesting as well as being
> damn good public transport.
I agree. Despite the problems they can cause cyclists, one of the things I
most miss about Melbourne is the tram system. The other is the football.
James Thomson (Melbourne bike courier for 2 days in 1996)
peter.kidwell
> Jobst reminisced:
>
> > After switching schools for high school (9th-12th) I rode to
the train
> > station and parked the old clunker, unlocked there. It was
not
> > bothered during the four years, however, the train once
stayed in the
> > station long enough for my classmates to see me get on my
bicycle,
> > which brought out great ridicule.
>
> I was the only member of the Marblehead HS class of 1962 to
ride bike to
> school. I also wore a tweed sports jacket, carried my books in
a briefcase,
> smoked a briar pipe, and generally made no effort to fit in to
teenaged
> norms of the day.
Johnny Cash sang a song about you " A Boy named Sheldon or was it
Sue
PK
peter.kidwell
"Mark Hickey" <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message
news:3c63434c....@netnews.att.net...
She may have been thinking you come from outer space
In countries where the average cyclist looks normal such as in
Holland or Denmark cycling levels are higher
PK (distrust any enterprise that requires new cloths David
Thoreau 1817-1862) From CTC Mag
Brian Huntley
> [about Sheldon Brown]
> Johnny Cash sang a song about you " A Boy named Sheldon or was it
> Sue
>
Based on what I've seen of his hobby bikes, I think the Johnny Cash
song htat best fits Sheldon is "One Piece at a Time."
- Brian Huntley
Well, It's a '49, '50, '51, '52, '53, '54, '55, '56,'57, '58' 59'
automobile
It's a '60, '61, '62, '63, '64, '65, '66, '67,'68, '69, '70
automobile.
peter.kidwell
> I was the only member of the Marblehead HS class of 1962 to
ride bike to
> school. I also wore a tweed sports jacket, carried my books in
a briefcase,
> smoked a briar pipe, and generally made no effort to fit in to
teenaged
> norms of the day.
> Bizarre
Kurt Zasadil
O'Toole <ma...@deltanet.com> wrote:
> <jobst....@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message
> news:mQ_78.17043$TI3.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> > Teaching riders to get off the saddle for a bump in the road sounds
> > preposterous at first, but then I know of many who have responded to
> > my question with disgust "I never ride no-hands", as if to say what a
> > foolish thing to do.
>
> Well, when I was in grade school, the bicycle safety people taught that it
> was not only dangerous, but illegal. And I believe it is in CA.
>
In California, it's also illegal to bilk ratepayers and taxpayers out
of millions and millions of dollars through a non-existent "energy
crisis."
Same difference.
Gregory White
>
> Jobst reminisced:
>
> > .... to see me get on my bicycle,
> > which brought out great ridicule.
>
> I was the only member of the Marblehead HS class of 1962 to ride bike to
> school. I also wore a tweed sports jacket, carried my books in a briefcase,
> smoked a briar pipe, and generally made no effort to fit in to teenaged
> norms of the day.
Bikes AND books!!!??? Man, you really don't care what people think of
you.
gw
R. J. (Bob) Eltgroth
pedal standing when my sports orthopedist tells me to keep a high
cadence as well as to avoid pedaling standing to keep from
further knee damage. Just because I can't walk doesn't keep me
from riding. If I did stand to pedal, I'd have to keep knee
braces on which chafe and get real uncomfortable after much over
1/2 hour in the saddle. Besides, a brace doesn't fit well under
rain gear for commuting or loaded touring.
Bob
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> What I find amazing, is how many bicyclists cannot pedal standing,
>> be that on a hill or for a sprint... of course they don't sprint,
>> that's dangerous kid's stuff. Besides, what significance is there
>> in a City Limits sign or for that matter a State Line? This is why
>> riders, who began riding when young, cannot imagine what it is to
>> ride with such a conservative outlook on bicycling.
> I get tired of having well meaning cyclists say that I should pedal
> standing when my sports orthopedist tells me to keep a high cadence
> as well as to avoid pedaling standing to keep from further knee
> damage. Just because I can't walk doesn't keep me from riding. If
> I did stand to pedal, I'd have to keep knee braces on which chafe
> and get real uncomfortable after much over 1/2 hour in the saddle.
> Besides, a brace doesn't fit well under rain gear for commuting or
> loaded touring.
So what's your gripe and why do you connect this what I said above?
I'm not telling anybody how to ride a bicycle, in fact it is the
opposite, with conservative riders admonishing those who ride other
than they, who are the problem.
Besides, DON'T STUFF MY E-MAILBOX WITH YOUR POSTINGS!
re...@mailandnews.com
1) sudden drivetrain failure without warning is most likely at max
stress, just when it'll likely cause me to slam my nads into the top
tube and crash
2) riding out of the saddle feels off-balance and not as much in
control as in the seated position
Tim McNamara
re...@mailandnews.com wrote:
> I hesitate to pedal standing because:
>
> 1) sudden drivetrain failure without warning is most likely at max
> stress, just when it'll likely cause me to slam my nads into the top
> tube and crash
"Sudden drive train failure?" What are you envisioning will happen?
> 2) riding out of the saddle feels off-balance and not as much in
> control as in the seated position
It's a skill to be learned through practice, although your bike could
have unstable steering geometry, your position could be not quite
right, etc.
I feel very fortunate to be old enough that I grew up in a time when
every kid used their bike to get everywhere they wanted to go. I've
been riding since I was 8 years old with the result that riding a bike
is second nature. It's harder to develop the instinctive coordination
in later years, just like it's harder to learn a second language.
craz...@webtv.net
to a complete stop and can't pedal anymore. I've got bad knees , back
, shoulders but I keep on going and enjoy life and never bitch about
this hurts or that hurts.
MTB 2002
David L. Johnson
>
> I hesitate to pedal standing because:
>
> 1) sudden drivetrain failure without warning is most likely at max
> stress, just when it'll likely cause me to slam my nads into the top
> tube and crash
If your drivetrain is so broken that it will suddenly fail without warning --
often enough to plan for! -- you have serious trouble. Address that, rather
than spreading paranoia about the "dangers" of riding out of the saddle.
Most experienced riders climb, at least under some circumstances, out of the
saddle. Falling on the downtube because something failed should be a
vanishingly rare occurrence. If it is not, it is due to poor maintenance.
You limit yourself serously by not learning how to ride out of the saddle.
Not only while climbing, but on rough roads you _do_ risk damage to your bike,
and your body, by not getting out of the saddle. Your legs are much better
shock absorbers than your butt. You will get more pinch flats, and you will
fatigue yourself more quickly, if you stay seated over bumps and rough roads.
>
> 2) riding out of the saddle feels off-balance and not as much in
> control as in the seated position
It's a skill that you should learn.
This obviously does not apply to the guy with knee damage, but for riders
without special circumstances it is essential to improve your riding comfort
and ability.
--
David L. Johnson
__o | If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a
_`\(,_ | conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw
(_)/ (_) |
Jon Isaacs
>I hesitate to pedal standing because:
>
>1) sudden drivetrain failure without warning is most likely at max
>stress, just when it'll likely cause me to slam my nads into the top
>tube and crash
I hope you pay sufficient attention to your mechanicals that this should not be
a problem.
>2) riding out of the saddle feels off-balance and not as much in
>control as in the seated position
>
Out of the saddle comfort is quite dependent on the bicycle and how it is
setup. In my experience some bikes are just not as stable when ridden out of
the saddle, I have never put a finger on it, I think it has to do with fork
rake and trail as well as bar width.
But when a bike is properly setup, riding out of the saddle provides a change
of position and when climbing long steep hills it is a necessity in order to
keep the front wheel down.
jon isaacs
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> I hesitate to pedal standing because:
> 1) sudden drivetrain failure without warning is most likely at max
> stress, just when it'll likely cause me to slam my nads into the top
> tube and crash
Hypothesizing will get you nowhere. Had you really experienced that
some time in your bicycling experience, you would know that the rider
flies over the bars. That you strike the top tube with your crotch is
an old bugaboo passed on by imagining souls. The same is true of
striking the handlebar stem when going over the front when striking an
obstacle. It doesn't happen that way.
> 2) riding out of the saddle feels off-balance and not as much in
> control as in the seated position
That may be your experience but not that of most bicyclists who
actively ride. You had best not argue that case with most tourists
and racers who ride instead of hypothesizing about it.
Peter Cole
news:9jED8.6745$lX2....@typhoon.sonic.net...
> anonymous writes:
>
> > 2) riding out of the saddle feels off-balance and not as much in
> > control as in the seated position
>
> That may be your experience but not that of most bicyclists who
> actively ride. You had best not argue that case with most tourists
> and racers who ride instead of hypothesizing about it.
It has been my experience that hard pedaling out of the saddle can have risks,
but they're really a matter of form. I once fell forward when my chain skipped
badly, but my weight was very far forward, and I was straining as I pedaled up a
steep section, more bad form than anything else. I saw another rider go down in
similar circumstances when a clipless pedal released while he was pulling up
hard, causing a loss of balance. If you don't lean excessively forward, or pull
up hard, I don't think you have to worry about these kinds of falls.
re...@mailandnews.com
wrote:
>In article <3cddf333...@news.bellatlantic.net>,
> re...@mailandnews.com wrote:
>
>> I hesitate to pedal standing because:
>>
>> 1) sudden drivetrain failure without warning is most likely at max
>> stress, just when it'll likely cause me to slam my nads into the top
>> tube and crash
>
>"Sudden drive train failure?" What are you envisioning will happen?
Not sure. Keep it well maintained, new clipless pedals. Worry about
the chain breaking or popping out without warning. Long ago had poorly
maintained bikes, like a S-A 3-speed hub gear with the cable
unlubricated and out of adjustment. Would go into neutral when between
gear selections.