Review: St. John's St. Cycles cheapie 110 PCD alloy crankset (~$60.00 US) for old-fashioned BBs

[retrog...@gmail.com]

The crankset itself is pretty nice, but the supplied steel chainrings are really lousy. That's OK, though, because $60 is still a very good price for such a nice crankset. I'll just have to buy some nice chainrings for it.

[avag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 1:08:00 PM UTC-5, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> The crankset itself is pretty nice, but the supplied steel chainrings are really lousy. That's OK, though, because $60 is still a very good price for such a nice crankset. I'll just have to buy some nice chainrings for it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

WELL, GET OUT THE CAMERA AND FLASH POWDER so weezcan see this art piece.

[AMuzi]

On 1/30/2015 12:07 PM, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> The crankset itself is pretty nice, but the supplied steel chainrings are really lousy. That's OK, though, because $60 is still a very good price for such a nice crankset. I'll just have to buy some nice chainrings for it.
>

How did that chainline measure up?

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

[avag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 1:08:00 PM UTC-5, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:

> The crankset itself is pretty nice, but the supplied steel chainrings are really lousy. That's OK, though, because $60 is still a very good price for such a nice crankset. I'll just have to buy some nice chainrings for it.

nnnnnnnnnnnn

whatsit made of ?

[Peter Gordon]

retrog...@gmail.com wrote in
news:01052bfb-c7ec-4dd6...@googlegroups.com:

It's designed for a touring bike. On a touring bike, weight is relatively
unimportant. but reliability is highly important. Steel chain rings
are far more robust and wear less than alloy rings which makes them
more suitable for long distance touring. I didn't know that good
quality steel rings were still available.

[Clive George]

That ought to be qualified with "Can be far robust and wear less" -
cheap steel rings are worse than decent alloy.

[Andre Jute]

Possibly. But I had some fortuitous experience with what I regarded as a "cheap" steel ring. When I bought my Utopia, I didn't want any of the (expensive) standard house fitments of cranks because I thought they were ugly, but I didn't know what exactly I wanted, except that it should be black. As a temporary measure the German dealer fitted the cheapest black steel crankset with my specified tooth count he could find. It was made by Amar in India. As it turned out, because of some health upsets and an inability to find precisely what I envisaged, it was some years and several thousand kilometers before I found a crankset I wanted. The Amar steel chainring was unmarked at about three times the distance that had worn out the Shimano Nexus aluminium chainrings I'd used on my other bikes. That's really good wear. Maybe the Amar is an isolated example of really good steel rings for a very advantageous price, but it impressed me.

Without a link, I can't see which crankset at SJS is being discussed. SJS offers own-brand thick ali chainrings that are used on both sides and among the touring and hardcore commuter fraternity are legendary for their longevity. But for $60 my bet is that you're getting the Stronglight steel rings that were fitted to the cheapest of the Impact chain sets (of which the cranks, actually being Sugino XD2 hotforged items, are desirable even if the steel rings aren't wanted; the same cranks for many multiples of the money are available under a variety of names). I bought the related, cold forged Stronglight item that is actually a Sugino Cospea for its better looks, and with it came ali rings definitely specced for weight weenies rather than tourers or commuters; I didn't even try them, replacing them immediately with Surly stainless steel to suit my zero-maintenance concept; I bought the crankset for the arms.

Andre Jute

[avag...@gmail.com]

https://www.google.com/#q=steel+bicycle+chainrings&tbm=shop

Surly sez 35% 'stronger'

call Surly on that wudja ?

[avag...@gmail.com]

................

whoa !

https://www.google.com/#q=steel+bicycle+chainrings&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:pd&tbm=shop

[retrog...@gmail.com]

Here you go:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qwrwgo6az8wrn5c/crankset.jpg?dl=0

I forgot to mention, the axle end dust caps are plastic throwaways.

It says "B-9 forged" on the back of the crank. What does that mean?

Of course, I won't know how true it runs until I install it. Nor do I know what the chain line will be yet. This bike is my main rider, and at this time year I am trying to get some foundation miles in, so I'm procrastinating because I'm afraid I might experience complications when I install the new crank (for example, the chain might rub on the nose of the Campy front derailleur with that 34 tooth inner chainring, and I'll have to get a different derailleur).

I sure would like to know what the story is on the steel chainrings. Some of the teeth seem like they are all wallowed out, like they already have a bunch of miles on them, and a couple of other teeth are rather pointed. Is this just from poor manufacturing, or is there maybe some engineering reason for it? OTOH I guess I don't care that much because I intend to find some nice alloy chainrings for it anyway. Maybe I'll try the SJSC rings that Andre mentioned.

[AMuzi]

B-9 may be that one Chinese girl who makes cranks.

The shaping of modern chainring teeth isn't a defect, it's a
feature. Compare with any equivalent Shimano product which
will show the same uneven stampings, usually with truncated
teeth at four evenly spaced intervals known as 'shift
gates'. The tooth shapes are optimized for modern gearing
with modern chains and changers.

[retrog...@gmail.com]

I didn't know that.

Since the steel chainrings are probably OK, then, I'll give them a try as-is and report back.

[avag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 12:16:14 PM UTC-5, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> I didn't know that.
>
> Since the steel chainrings are probably OK, then, I'll give them a try as-is and report back.

.................

the chain might rub on the nose of the Campy front derailleur...

OH NO ! drill, install small bolt/jamb nut with red locktite. Space with extra nuts n washers.

take rings to lBS ask for an opinion. buy something first. bathe.

Andy, are the failed crank and med records ready to roll ?

[Zarniwoop]

On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 10:08:00 AM UTC-8, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> The crankset itself is pretty nice, but the supplied steel chainrings are really lousy. That's OK, though, because $60 is still a very good price for such a nice crankset. I'll just have to buy some nice chainrings for it.

I equipped my 110 - 74 triple with steel chainrings for their wear longevity..
in the 80's


though now putting Surly's Stainless steel ones would do similar, look nicer,
though they didn't get any 24t made.

[Andre Jute]

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 5:16:14 PM UTC, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> I didn't know that.
>
> Since the steel chainrings are probably OK, then, I'll give them a try as-is and report back.

Smart thinking. Even if they aren't OK, you haven't lost anything because even unsatisfactory steel cogs will outlast at least one chain.

Andre Jute

[jbeattie]

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 9:16:14 AM UTC-8, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> I didn't know that.
>
> Since the steel chainrings are probably OK, then, I'll give them a try as-is and report back.

Don't go to any Paramount club meetings with those rings. You'll be shunned.

-- Jay Beattie.

[avag...@gmail.com]

HANG OEM RINGS ON WALL

[retrog...@gmail.com]

I can handle being shunned, Jay (it wouldn't be the first time!), but I can't find any Paramount Club meeting to attend! Does anybody really care about old steel frames anymore? (Not counting that "classic bike" website where the webmaster is a petty dictator. I refuse to go there anymore because my free-speech rights are too important to me.)

[retrog...@gmail.com]

Of course, Gene. I always do everything you say.

The chain line was terrible (way too far out), but of course that has nothing to do with the quality of the crankset. It runs nice and true, and the steel chainrings seem run pretty quietly and smoothly.

I am going to correct the chain line by hook or crook. Mostly by crook. (I'm going to file and grind, since I intend to get rid of the old-fashioned bottom bracket some day anyway.)

Also, I have found that St. John's Street Cycles gives quite good customer service. They responded to my email inquiry promptly and in detail. I think they're almost as good a shop as that one in Madison, WI. And besides, they taught me a new cycling word: Audax!

[AMuzi]

On 2/2/2015 9:22 AM, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> I can handle being shunned, Jay (it wouldn't be the first time!), but I can't find any Paramount Club meeting to attend! Does anybody really care about old steel frames anymore? (Not counting that "classic bike" website where the webmaster is a petty dictator. I refuse to go there anymore because my free-speech rights are too important to me.)
>

As much as classic cars or motorcycles, and across a similar
spectrum.

There are riders who just prefer steel, new or vintage.

Then there are people who like the aesthetic of vintage
bicycles and are manic about getting every bit exactly
period correct.

[retrog...@gmail.com]

Of course I'm going to move my Phil BB over to the left as far as possible before doing any filing.

[AMuzi]

If you want a suggestion, ask the vendor for the correct
spindle dimensions and buy one. The likelihood of a
successful adventure with "file and grind" is vanishingly small.

[jbeattie]

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 8:47:13 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/2/2015 9:22 AM, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I can handle being shunned, Jay (it wouldn't be the first time!), but I can't find any Paramount Club meeting to attend! Does anybody really care about old steel frames anymore? (Not counting that "classic bike" website where the webmaster is a petty dictator. I refuse to go there anymore because my free-speech rights are too important to me.)
> >
>
> As much as classic cars or motorcycles, and across a similar
> spectrum.
>
> There are riders who just prefer steel, new or vintage.
>
> Then there are people who like the aesthetic of vintage
> bicycles and are manic about getting every bit exactly
> period correct.

Gads, around here, there is a steel frame builder under every rock -- sharing space with a barista and a stripper.

http://madeinportland.org/bikes

O.K., Renovo is wood. Speaking of wood:

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-20636-dr_know_the_truth_laid_bare.html

Classic steel bikes are big around here. This is my neighborhood bike shop (five minute ride from my house, including the stop light). http://www.burlingamebikes.com/

The best old bike display is at River City. http://tinyurl.com/q5e65ty A classic Paramount on display -- among many others including very early (scary) CF.

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

Sharp Saronni. I would ride that. I see they have a Chris
Kvale imported from across the tundra of Minnesota. Very nice.

[avag...@gmail.com]

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCRRrrrrrrrrr....____/

what the old rings ? Yes, hangum high. The old rings will remind of goodtimes.

There is a formula A-C(d=J)-Y=N-1 like that for axle crank CR dimensions...find it on line. I may have found it at the old Third Hand/Loosescrews. Andy would know maybe JB.

With old steel no problem. does it all, isnot an object sought by thieves following you around town. I have a '78 Raleigh upgraded to 21C specs with mod brake mechanisms/hubs/cable/bar/wheels but retaining the quill so far.

I would look for a Ti with geometry for my extra long body but that would be a secret under rustoleum. I had fancied a Tuscany but diverted into kayaking with Orca and whales leaving -N time for rec cycling.

The moderators doahn like me either. They are in it for potential monetary gains but are control freaks.

Bikepacking is an example. Bikepacker is a first off forum but with $$$ on the horizon a second packer site emerged shoving the first down the Goolist with multiple listings alongside a magazine n newsletter.

Here, we were undone by color print, formats giving the illusion of importance if you signed and off course Utube. The actual need for discussion and advice s waaaay done with vastly improved componentry.

Before Sheldon Brown and Harris online, cycle mechanics tended toward a guild mentality where asking the LBS only produced obfuscations. Now we're snowwwwed under online.

Frankly the Paramount looks a bit weak n weenie like you bought from Woolworths.

[Andre Jute]

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 3:35:31 PM UTC, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> Of course, Gene. I always do everything you say.
>
> The chain line was terrible (way too far out), but of course that has nothing to do with the quality of the crankset. It runs nice and true, and the steel chainrings seem run pretty quietly and smoothly.
>
> I am going to correct the chain line by hook or crook. Mostly by crook. (I'm going to file and grind, since I intend to get rid of the old-fashioned bottom bracket some day anyway.)

Christ, don't start filing; you'll never get it right and, besides the fit, you'll wreck the temper of the metal at the critical interface. Just get the right length spindle. And as for getting "rid of the old-fashioned bottom bracket", why should you want to get rid of square taper? All the alternatives are short-lived crap, all marketing promise and no road performance. Every top custom bicycle house in the world fits square taper bottom brackets because they're a known-reliable quantity. Your Phil is rebuildable, but some of the best square taper bottom brackets in the world cost under twenty bucks (try the cheapest Stronglight; I've had those in the Czech maker's own brand, and they're outstanding, fitted on some of the best bikes you can buy).

> Also, I have found that St. John's Street Cycles gives quite good customer service. They responded to my email inquiry promptly and in detail. I think they're almost as good a shop as that one in Madison, WI. And besides, they taught me a new cycling word: Audax!

SJS is famous for the quality and depth of their service. They also make outstanding bikes, called Thorn, if you're in the market for a quality bike at the rational end of the market (no frills, no passing trends, everything thoroughly thought through, no boutigue crap, just a solid superb-fitting bike with the best components to serve your forever and not let you down in OuterUncivilizedStan); there are quite a few American owners of Thorns. The late Sheldon Brown, the most famous bike mechanic in the world (obituary in The Times of London for a bike mechanic in a small town outside Boston; unheard of, till then) rode a Thorn. I hang out on the Thorn forum with the Thorn owners because they are knowledgeable and amusing and have manners, and the Thorn designer is an unremitting rationalist: if he didn't insist on welding his frames, I'd ride one of his bike.

Andre Jute

[Peter Gordon]

Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:e3f091c0-b49c-4bf4...@googlegroups.com:

> I hang out on the Thorn forum with the Thorn owners
> because they are knowledgeable and amusing and have manners, and the
> Thorn designer is an unremitting rationalist: if he didn't insist on
> welding his frames, I'd ride one of his bike.
>
> Andre Jute
>

I ride an old Thorn Nomad with the straight toptube. The joins
are fillet brazed and look very attractive.

[avag...@gmail.com]

https://www.google.com/#q=SHELDON+BROWN+SQUARE+TAPER+SPINDLE+TORQUE

Andy what's your take on torque ? 65 pounds on anti seize ?

we use red Loctite on the nut referring torch to failure. and pedal shaft.

[retrog...@gmail.com]

"Christ, don't start filing; you'll never get it right and, besides the fit, you'll wreck the temper of the metal at the critical interface."

Nonsense. You're talkin' to an (admittedly amateur) machinist here, Andre! I just applied Prussian blue to the square taper and filed where the blue dye was pushed out. Then I machined 1/8" off the end of the axle so the crank wouldn't bottom out. In doing so, I managed to maintain perfect alignment and moved the crankset 1/8" that way, plus another 1/8" by adjusting the Phil BB.

When I got the chain line where I wanted it, I filed lightly on the crank's taper opposite the chainring runout until the runout disappeared.

Now I have less than 10 thou runout at the chainring: better than some Campy cranks I've had! And the Prussian blue pattern inside the crank's square taper is smoother than it was before I began filing, so the taper's fit is, if anything, BETTER than it was originally.

"Surface temper"?? I don't believe so; not with a forged crank. To my knowledge, you can't shot-peen or nitride forged aluminum (the two primary surface-hardening methods). A forged piece is hard all the way through; that's why they forge it. Besides, the mating surface area of the crank's square taper is so large compared to the load imposed on it that the actual pedaling load is virtually insignificant (assuming a good fit to begin with, and that it doesn't loosen up).

If anyone disagrees with me about the surface hardening issue, please feel free to correct me. I have thick skin.

[AMuzi]

Here's Campagnolo's opinion on that:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/crk_torq.jpg

[avag...@gmail.com]

less torque than I'm using but we would expect Campy machining using less.

I have a 1 foot tube extension on a Sears 3/8ths ratchet, block up the frame, aluminum antiseize, file cleaned parts, and BEAR DOWN as tight as possible.
Maybe 50 pounds max...35 ?

taper cranks potential for coming loose is directly proportional to distance from home base.

[retrog...@gmail.com]

But Andrew, no self-respecting redneck mechanic would use a torque wrench. It is just totally unnecessary. Watch this video of Jeff Bradshaw of "This Old Truck" infamy demonstrate the alternative method as he installs an exhaust manifold. Note the tool's cool audible warning when the specified torque has been reached and, at the end of the clip, its special audible warning concerning some pesky partially-stripped threads:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k2t804f530tc1kj/redneck%20torque%20wrench.mp4?dl=0

[jbeattie]

You could have just purchased the right BB for $22: http://www.amazon.com/Shimano-Square-Taper-Bottom-Bracket/dp/B0068FVOEM

But hey, filing crank and BB axle tapers is a perfectly fine way to kill time while waiting for the Messiah. I spend my time rebuilding Silca floor pumps that even when new worked about half as well as a modern, $30 Nashbar pump.


-- Jay Beattie.

[jbeattie]

The gear range on that Kvale is too wide. On my 70s-80s 6 speeds with 42/53 rings, I preferred 13,13,13,13,13, 14 (bail out gear for the big climbs) -- or the Jobst preferred combination with 48/53 rings.

Seriously, though, that freewheel scares my knees.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Andre Jute]

On Tuesday, February 3, 2015 at 12:21:31 AM UTC, Peter Gordon wrote:
> Andre Jute <> wrote in

Your bike must be from back in the days when Thorn had their own frame-huilder on the premises. But today the frames and forks are welded in Taiwan from Thorn's custom tubes and some Reynolds.

Andre Jute

[Andre Jute]

On Tuesday, February 3, 2015 at 11:56:55 AM UTC, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> "Christ, don't start filing; you'll never get it right and, besides the fit, you'll wreck the temper of the metal at the critical interface."
>
> Nonsense. You're talkin' to an (admittedly amateur) machinist here, Andre! I just applied Prussian blue to the square taper and filed where the blue dye was pushed out. Then I machined 1/8" off the end of the axle so the crank wouldn't bottom out. In doing so, I managed to maintain perfect alignment and moved the crankset 1/8" that way, plus another 1/8" by adjusting the Phil BB.
>
> When I got the chain line where I wanted it, I filed lightly on the crank's taper opposite the chainring runout until the runout disappeared.

I just purely love machinists, even amateur ones. My teacher's pochade box (a sort of paintbox and tabletop easel all in one) has come to me, and I want to use it on top of a sturdy Manfrotto 055 tripod but. though I have all kinds of tools, I've been hesitating about sawing the brace and drilling the hole while I wonder how to ensure squareness and precision.

> Now I have less than 10 thou runout at the chainring: better than some Campy cranks I've had! And the Prussian blue pattern inside the crank's square taper is smoother than it was before I began filing, so the taper's fit is, if anything, BETTER than it was originally.

Congratulations. The green bike left against your door for fettling is mine. I'll pick it up in a few days.

> "Surface temper"?? I don't believe so; not with a forged crank. To my knowledge, you can't shot-peen or nitride forged aluminum (the two primary surface-hardening methods). A forged piece is hard all the way through; that's why they forge it. Besides, the mating surface area of the crank's square taper is so large compared to the load imposed on it that the actual pedaling load is virtually insignificant (assuming a good fit to begin with, and that it doesn't loosen up).

Ah. I hadn't realized the esoteric Phil BB has an ali BB axle. Mine are steel.

> If anyone disagrees with me about the surface hardening issue, please feel free to correct me. I have thick skin.

Some puns are stubborn; they just won't be avoided.

Andre Jute

[Andre Jute]

I use the correct shave-leg roadie racing pump, the SKS Rennkompressor. See it in action on the TdF or here:
http://www.amazon.com/SKS-Germany-10062-Rennkompressor-Floor-Pump/dp/B0019HKEV8/ref=sr_1_1?m=AP9E8IPQAKIY0&s=merchant-items&ie=UTF8&qid=1423003473&sr=1-1&keywords=rennkompressor
It is a wonderful pump, quick as a flash on the 2 bar I want, even into the huge air chamber of my 60x622 Big Apples, and capable of 16 bar for those who believe in 1/4in tyres. But the head of this wonderful, expensive pump is held together by a pressed-through pin that isn't peened over at the ends, and keeps slipping out, making the pump totally ineffective. It's infuriating. Sooner or later it will be lost and then I'll buy another type of head to avoid the problem.

Andre Jute

[avag...@gmail.com]

UNIVERSAL prob has the BB.

of interest is no response on lubed tapers or generally taper installation whereas 10 years ago breathing taper and antiseize would avalanche posts from resolute retards

[John B. Slocomb]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2015 03:56:50 -0800 (PST), retrog...@gmail.com
wrote:

Well, technically one could do some form of casehardening on a forged
item, and one could do some form of surface hardening, perhaps by
coating the forging with various thickness of some sort of refractory
material as the Japanese sword makers do, and I once had an old
blacksmith tell me about hardening the face of a hammer head by
heating the entire head and than splashing water on the face of the
hammer, but who would bother.

As for selectively filling or scrapping and using Prussian blue to fit
parts, it has a long history of use and was universally used when
fitting cast bearings and I suspect that those who would condemn it
are simply ignorant of the capabilities of a competent craftsman.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[jbeattie]

No, the Phil has a SS axle -- unless you opt for Ti in their current models. My Phil BB also has a SS shell, which is pitted and oxidized. It was a 70s vintage and saw a lot of action. Now it lives in a box. I think Retrogrouch was talking about the treatment and temper of the crank.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Andre Jute]

Thanks Jay. On rereading I get it. He's talking about filing the inside of the square taper on the crank. Holy shit! If that's what an "amateur machinist" can handle these days...

Andre Jute

[avag...@gmail.com]

GNAW he cut off the end with a grinder.....'machineing'.... then cleaned it up.

corners are depressed from flats. 'just' file down....I would hope for no hardening too....filing takes forever...with 4 new files and a VISE at belt hi.

We pass...

if this is all real, I am pleased someone is doing it.

[John B. Slocomb]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 00:40:59 +0000, Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk>
wrote:

>John B. Slocomb <sloc...@invalid.com> considered Wed, 04 Feb 2015

>The ability to perform such tasks accurately used to be regarded as
>the difference between a mere mechanic and a fitter.

I believe that you are in the U.K. I think that the terms used to be
"fitter - turner" which I believe would be "machine operator" in
America and "Machinist". The Bloke from Newcastle I have mentioned
told me that a "fitter-turner" could not, according to union rule pick
up a file and file the burr off he end of a piece he was turning in
the lathe, although he went on to say that he'd never actually seen
anyone admonished for doing it.

I don't know what they called the guys at Purdey fitting the barrels
on the 1,000 Pound (in those days) shotguns though.

And I've heard English people describe themselves as an "Engineer"
when Americans would use the term Mechanic, or "car repairman", so
obviously the terms vary.

But then, I've heard the present Queen speak and I assume that she by
definition must be speaking the "Queen's English". Which puzzles me a
bit when I hear a mine from Yorkshire speaking "English" :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[avag...@gmail.com]

a reliable educated mechanic who turns out AAA work is called a:

DO ALL

[Sir Ridesalot]

I like the term used these days for garbage collectors; they're now called sanitation engineers although they do no engineering whatsoever.

Cheers

[avag...@gmail.com]

ah choo chooo

that lone diesel whine......

[AMuzi]

Uh, you can't burn it.
You have to pay for the service.

Social engineering at its finest.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 1:55:12 PM UTC-5, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>

> I like the term used these days for garbage collectors; they're now called sanitation engineers although they do no engineering whatsoever.
>

Yep. For a while, there were several attempts to inflate the dignity of certain
jobs by attaching the word "engineer." The various societies of Professional
Engineers were very much against that. And as a (retired) PE, I certainly agreed.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

Well, I'm not much in favor of everyone burning their garbage, either.

When my dad moved the family into a brand new house sometime around 1960, it
came with a gas-fired garbage incinerator. So did the rest of the nearby
houses. When they were fired up, there was a very different smell to the
neighborhood. And I imagine less sophisticated ways of burning it would
smell worse.

When that incinerator wore out, my dad had no inclination to replace it.

- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

When that incinerator wore out, my dad had no inclination to replace it.

.....

what were yawl doing with defecations ?

[John B. Slocomb]

I suspect that it is something like "political correct", which seems
to be a parody as the two words so often seem to have dramatically
different meanings, neither of which, at times, seem to have the
meaning that the dictionary indicates is correct.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B. Slocomb]

If I remember correctly, when I was in high school "PE" meant Physical
Education :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 2/5/2015 9:23 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:

> On Thu, 5 Feb 2015 16:16:01 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 1:55:12 PM UTC-5, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>>>
>>> I like the term used these days for garbage collectors; they're now called sanitation engineers although they do no engineering whatsoever.
>>>
>>
>> Yep. For a while, there were several attempts to inflate the dignity of certain
>> jobs by attaching the word "engineer." The various societies of Professional
>> Engineers were very much against that. And as a (retired) PE, I certainly agreed.
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
>
> If I remember correctly, when I was in high school "PE" meant Physical
> Education :-)

There aren't enough acronyms to go around.

Maybe the engineers should have chosen Greek letters. Pi Epsilon (ΠΕ)
would have worked with other engineers, mathematicians and scientists.
But then, few others in America would know what that first squiggle meant.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

Frank - quick now go 14 numbers on Pi

[retrog...@gmail.com]

I installed the crankset and took the bike for a few rides. By filing the taper inside the aluminum crank and moving the Phil BB over, I was able to get the chain line to point almost down the middle of the cassette.

I really like these compact crank ratios (34-50) a lot better than those of my old standard crankset (42-52). I should have gotten a compact crank long ago.

The steel chainrings work fine and shift well. They don't feel like they are particularly smooth-running, though, like a good alloy chainring would be. Hopefully they'll run smoother when they wear in a bit.

The crank didn't loosen up after my rides, which I think means I fit it to the spindle OK.

[avag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 8:16:22 PM UTC-5, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> I installed the crankset and took the bike for a few rides. By filing the taper inside the aluminum crank and moving the Phil BB over, I was able to get the chain line to point almost down the middle of the cassette.
>
> I really like these compact crank ratios (34-50) a lot better than those of my old standard crankset (42-52). I should have gotten a compact crank long ago.
>
> The steel chainrings work fine and shift well. They don't feel like they are particularly smooth-running, though, like a good alloy chainring would be. Hopefully they'll run smoother when they wear in a bit.

errrrrrrrrrkkk

The crank didn't loosen up after my rides, which I think means I fit it to the spindle OK.

(( SUPER....how were the nuts cranked in ?

[jbeattie]

On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 5:16:22 PM UTC-8, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
> I installed the crankset and took the bike for a few rides. By filing the taper inside the aluminum crank and moving the Phil BB over, I was able to get the chain line to point almost down the middle of the cassette.
>
> I really like these compact crank ratios (34-50) a lot better than those of my old standard crankset (42-52). I should have gotten a compact crank long ago.
>

I agree, although with a 34/50 you have to have a rear derailleur that can wrap a bit of chain, particularly if you have a wide ratio and like to use all your gears. I have a 34/50 and a 27t low on my rain bike, which produces a ridiculously low gear. I don't have any cross-chaining problems (the bike has an inherently good chain line with my two piece crank and BB30 bearings with Wheels Mfg Shimano adapter), and I can find myself in a 50/27 if I'm not paying attention -- but the drive train doesn't seem to mind,and it's kind of fun riding a 1X10. I do notice if I go 34/11 or 12 because the chain droops -- but not enough to justify taking out a link and losing my 50/27.

Bottom line is that with modern compacts, you're getting gears in a range formerly reserved for triples. I have a 34/50 on my plastic bike with a 23 or 25t cog depending on the wheel, and even in my advanced state of decrepitude, the 34/25 is plenty low enough, and it doesn't look dorky.

With the conversion, you'll need to shorten your chain and drop your FD, if you haven't done that already. If you like big gears, you'll need to get a 12 or 11t cog, which may or may not be easy depending on how retro you really are.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Tim McNamara]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 13:47:21 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
> Social engineering at its finest.

Best bit of social engineering ever accomplished was variously called
the National City Lines scandal," the "General Motors streetcar
conspiracy, etc." Looking at the Wikipedia entry, I see the right wing
revisionists have had at it and are trying to rewrite history again. He
who controls access to information controls the world.

[sms]

On 2/7/2015 2:51 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 5:16:22 PM UTC-8, retrog...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I installed the crankset and took the bike for a few rides. By filing the taper inside the aluminum crank and moving the Phil BB over, I was able to get the chain line to point almost down the middle of the cassette.
>>
>> I really like these compact crank ratios (34-50) a lot better than those of my old standard crankset (42-52). I should have gotten a compact crank long ago.
>>
>
> I agree, although with a 34/50 you have to have a rear derailleur that can wrap a bit of chain, particularly if you have a wide ratio and like to use all your gears. I have a 34/50 and a 27t low on my rain bike, which produces a ridiculously low gear. I don't have any cross-chaining problems (the bike has an inherently good chain line with my two piece crank and BB30 bearings with Wheels Mfg Shimano adapter), and I can find myself in a 50/27 if I'm not paying attention -- but the drive train doesn't seem to mind,and it's kind of fun riding a 1X10. I do notice if I go 34/11 or 12 because the chain droops -- but not enough to justify taking out a link and losing my 50/27.

Heh. Can you climb Tunitas Creek with a 34-27? A low gear is 28-34 or
28-32 and that's not backwards. That's not even as low as you can go.
The "Mountain Tamer" system offered front chain rings as low as 17
teeth. You could not be on your smallest cog in the rear but you
wouldn't want to do that anyway.

[jbeattie]

I used to climb it in a 42/19 or 21 -- I'd probably just drive these days. I still miss the long, classic climbs in and around the SCV.

My plastic bike has 34/25 on it, and that's good enough for anything I do around here -- although I end up creeping the last two miles in to my neighborhood, but I don't think a lower gear would help. EPO might help. All of my rides on the east side (many this time of year) end with a mandatory climb up some hill -- usually this one in reverse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUXgvgWIURY An almost car-free zone, but look out for the walkers.

Speaking of -- just got a call for a ride. Another wet one. Hope my shoes are dry from yesterday. I forgot to put them on the shoe dryer.

-- Jay Beattie.