Yet More Technology

[John B.]

I was down to a large used bike shop in Bangkok today looking for a
possible "new" bike and came across what might be "The One". Although
granted it will take a little work.

It is a very light weight, lugged steel frame with brazon on down tube
shifter lugs and the old style shift cable guides brazed on the top of
the bottom bracket. The forks are made for a threaded axle, the front
fork is the usual hole and the rear is a, for want of a better
description, a hooked slot with the opening facing forward. It has a
"Shimano SEVEN" rear derailer and no obvious name on the front
derailer. The brakes and levers are Dia-Comp side pull dual pivot. The
pedal arms and chain wheel seem to be Japanese although I don't
remember the actual name - not Shimano or Dia-Comp though. the
shifters are indexed 7 speed Shimano. The wheel hubs are not any brand
I am familiar with but look similar to the usual Shimano road bike
style, 36 spoke wheels and aluminum "Heat Treated" rims. And Oh Yes,
it has chrome plated front forks :-), and there is sufficient
clearance fore and aft to mount fenders.

The price doesn't seem unreasonable for what would likely end up a
frame and a set of wheels and maybe a seat although we haven't got
into the actual discussion of how much will you take?

Anyone offer a guess on the possible age of this thing and what might
be considered a reasonable price for a very light frame and fairly
light set of wheels ?

I would anticipate slotting the front fork ends to use a conventional
skewer axle and filling and slotting the chain stay ends for the same,
and of course spreading the rear frame a bit. I don't remember whether
there were brazon's for fenders but those are easily added as well as
any bottle cage brazon's.

On another subject, I also came across a shop selling padded shorts
and bicycle jerseys for 600 baht a set - about US$ 17 :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

mid 1980s Japanese. The Shimano pieces have a two letter
date code. The inside of the crank arm usually bears a date
stamp as do most handlebar stems of the era. Japanese serial
number standard format is a letter for the maker and one
digit for the year such as Y4 for Yamaguchi Frame 1984 (ten
years of detail changes make a 1974 or a 1994 very much
different)

Check the seatpost diameter if there's no tubing label.
25.4~25.8mm are basic carbon steels, often seamed. 26.8mm is
the Japanese market double butted seat tube on premium
material, 27.2mm being the single butted version usually for
export models.

p.s. if you email a snapshot I can help further

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

[John B.]

I didn't want to get too interested - turning the bike upside down
looking for numbers stamped on the bottom bracket - as that just
raises the asking price :-) but the stem and bars have no visible
names although they look very authentic. The chain ring had a name but
I don't remember it other than it sounded Japanese and began with S,
but not Shimano :-)

There is a certain etiquette involved in dealing with used anything
dealers. One does not exhibit more than a casual interest in anything
before getting to the final throes of the deal with the hope that by
feigning disinterest the price will be lessened. And it worked, the
initial price was 9,000 baht and the owner mentioned that he could
"let it go" for 8,500... (about 35 baht = $1.00) not a major decrease
but an indication :-)

I am interested as (1) it is a steel frame and (2) it is very light. I
built a light frame from Columbus Niobium tubing that weighed 1.7 kg.
completed and painted and this bike seems to be lighter. (and yes, I
know it is possible to built a frame lighter then I did :-) which
would seem to indicate that it is a high end, or at least upper
middle, range frame. And it can take fenders which seems to be
increasingly rare these days.

He also had a couple of new aluminum bikes - 700c wheels, solid forks,
that he was asking 4,500 baht for - complete 9 speed Shimano but with
straight bars and thumb shifters.
--
cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/16/2015 2:25 AM, John B. wrote:
> The chain ring had a name but
> I don't remember it other than it sounded Japanese and began with S,
> but not Shimano :-)

Sugino?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

Sugino, SR-Sakae, Suntour ?

[Sir Ridesalot]

Stronglight?

Cheers

[avag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 10:32:30 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:

AAAAAHHHHH SR-SAKAE incroyable !

[avag...@gmail.com]

hemispherical chain ring bolts ahhhhhhhh .......

[AMuzi]

Unlikely to be Stronglight, Spidel, Solida on a Japanese
bike from the 1980s. Possible just not likely.

[John B.]

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:16:58 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 8/16/2015 2:25 AM, John B. wrote:
>> The chain ring had a name but
>> I don't remember it other than it sounded Japanese and began with S,
>> but not Shimano :-)
>
>Sugino?

Perhaps. It sounds likely.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I'd guess Sugino as the most likely possibility.

I'll probably make another visit later in the week to "investigate the
aluminum frames" :-)

--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

No, I don't believe that is it. It doesn't sound like what I'd think
of if I was thinking of a Japanese name even though it might well be a
Japanese trade name.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

When I think of Japanese "S" words names like Shimano, Sakura,
Sachiko, Seppuku come to mind :-)

--
cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

On 8/16/2015 6:29 PM, John B. wrote:
-snippy snip snip-

>>
>> Unlikely to be Stronglight, Spidel, Solida on a Japanese
>> bike from the 1980s. Possible just not likely.
>
> When I think of Japanese "S" words names like Shimano, Sakura,
> Sachiko, Seppuku come to mind :-)
>
> --
> cheers,
>
> John B.
>

Seppuku is a great name for bicycle parts. Or a garage band.

[Radey Shouman]

Or Sakae Ringyo.
--

[russell...@yahoo.com]

8500 Baht for this bike is $240 USA dollars. Your description makes it seem like a decent but old and outdated lugged steel frame. After you do some work to the frame and fork so it will accept modern parts and hubs. The rest of the parts and wheels, OK if you want to build a commuting bike to ride in town and leave out in the weather and not care if its stolen. But nothing worth anything. At $240 you are not stealing the "frame". Its fair market price or more for a 30 year old mid-price bike. Sounds like you are desperate to buy a new bike or project. So rationality goes out the window. Have fun negotiating for your bike. I'm sure you will feel like a winner after you talk the store down a few dollars. The fact you bought a bike that is OK for commuting in town and nothing more is irrelevant. You made a deal and are a winner!

[Sir Ridesalot]

I have a few 1980's MIELE steel lugged bicycles. One has Tange Infinity tubing.Two have Columbus SL tubing. One has Coloumbus SLX tubing and the touring onr hsd Tsnge 5 tubing. One SL is a single speed. The Tange Infinity has Shimano 600 Arabesque on it. Another SL has N600 on it. The SLX was upgraded in 2001 to a mic of Campy Mirage and Veloce. The Tange 5 has Shimano touring stuff on it except for tthe Campy Mirage Ergos and rear mech. All four of those bicycles frequently get taken on rides of 60 to 100 miles at a time. Even the single speed goes on jaunts f 50 miles. Just because a bicycle is lugged steel frame and old parts does NOT mean it's only suitable for coomuting or a beater. You can ride many many miles in comfort on such a bicycle.

Cheers

[Sir Ridesalot]

Sounds like mid 1980's at the latest but possible upgraded dual-pivot brake calipers.

Adding braze-ons needs to be done by a competent brazer with experience on bicycle frames - lest they just melt the thin tubing.

Why would you need to slot the front fork for a quick-release axle? Just get one the same diameter as the existing axle. I often do this for people and all I do is take a nut from the threaded axle to the shop andbuy the quick release axle with the same threading because that way it's simply a matter of switching the ales themselves and I KNOW tthe cones are the right taper.

Shouldn't be any need to do anything to the rear droputs in order to use a quick release axle there.

An image of the bike would help a whole lot.

Good luck.

Cheers

[russell...@yahoo.com]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:09:57 AM UTC-5, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:40:01 AM UTC-4, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > 8500 Baht for this bike is $240 USA dollars. Your description makes it seem like a decent but old and outdated lugged steel frame. After you do some work to the frame and fork so it will accept modern parts and hubs. The rest of the parts and wheels, OK if you want to build a commuting bike to ride in town and leave out in the weather and not care if its stolen. But nothing worth anything. At $240 you are not stealing the "frame". Its fair market price or more for a 30 year old mid-price bike. Sounds like you are desperate to buy a new bike or project. So rationality goes out the window. Have fun negotiating for your bike. I'm sure you will feel like a winner after you talk the store down a few dollars. The fact you bought a bike that is OK for commuting in town and nothing more is irrelevant. You made a deal and are a winner!
>
>

> I have a few 1980's MIELE steel lugged bicycles. One has Tange Infinity tubing.Two have Columbus SL tubing. One has Coloumbus SLX tubing and the touring onr hsd Tsnge 5 tubing. One SL is a single speed. The Tange Infinity has Shimano 600 Arabesque on it. Another SL has N600 on it. The SLX was upgraded in 2001 to a mic of Campy Mirage and Veloce. The Tange 5 has Shimano touring stuff on it except for tthe Campy Mirage Ergos and rear mech. All four of those bicycles frequently get taken on rides of 60 to 100 miles at a time. Even the single speed goes on jaunts f 50 miles. Just because a bicycle is lugged steel frame and old parts does NOT mean it's only suitable for coomuting or a beater. You can ride many many miles in comfort on such a bicycle.
>
> Cheers

You are talking about Columbus SL and SLX frames when the original frame in this thread is some low-mid priced frame from the 70s or 80s? Are you really that ignorant of bicycle frames and bicycling that you would compare very high priced premium Columbus frames with the frame mentioned in this thread? You also stated you spent many, many hundreds or thousands of dollars for new, modern components and wheels to go on these frames. Campagnolo Ergo and derailleurs and wheels and cassettes and chains. The person who started this thread is talking about a $240 bike. Double, triple, quadruple that price by the time he is done.

[Sir Ridesalot]

Gads do you have a reading problem?

i stated that ONE bicycle was upgraded to a mix of Veloce ans Mirage. That did NOT cost "many, many hundreds of thousands of dollars for new modern comonents."

I've seen many vintage SL and similar frame bicycles go for what the OP stated = $240.00 or less becuase either the person wanted to get rid of the bike fast or they didn't kow the value of it. A chap I know got a vintage MASI with all Campy stuff (Record iirc) and exra race light tubular wheels for $200.00 CDN from the original owner who just wanted to unload it.

Cheers

[avag...@gmail.com]

SEPPUKU is a position

[avag...@gmail.com]

weird economy

http://goo.gl/hAPs9P

[AMuzi]

We don't know that.

There were dozens of mid-1980s Japanese built Ishiwata and
Tange frames every bit the equal[1] of anything SL/SLX, for
example Bianchi Professional or Panasonic Team, among many
others.

Your point about re-equipping a vintage frame with modern
parts is a good one. If that's the goal, a complete new
bicycle can be much less expensive.

[1] Japanese premium frames of the era had arguably better
finish detail overall than Italian. Crappy mass-market sport
frames from any country being a different thing altogether.

[russell...@yahoo.com]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 1:17:08 PM UTC-5, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 1:59:50 PM UTC-4, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:09:57 AM UTC-5, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:40:01 AM UTC-4, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > 8500 Baht for this bike is $240 USA dollars. Your description makes it seem like a decent but old and outdated lugged steel frame. After you do some work to the frame and fork so it will accept modern parts and hubs. The rest of the parts and wheels, OK if you want to build a commuting bike to ride in town and leave out in the weather and not care if its stolen. But nothing worth anything. At $240 you are not stealing the "frame". Its fair market price or more for a 30 year old mid-price bike. Sounds like you are desperate to buy a new bike or project. So rationality goes out the window. Have fun negotiating for your bike. I'm sure you will feel like a winner after you talk the store down a few dollars. The fact you bought a bike that is OK for commuting in town and nothing more is irrelevant. You made a deal and are a winner!
> > >
> > >
> > > I have a few 1980's MIELE steel lugged bicycles. One has Tange Infinity tubing.Two have Columbus SL tubing. One has Coloumbus SLX tubing and the touring onr hsd Tsnge 5 tubing. One SL is a single speed. The Tange Infinity has Shimano 600 Arabesque on it. Another SL has N600 on it. The SLX was upgraded in 2001 to a mic of Campy Mirage and Veloce. The Tange 5 has Shimano touring stuff on it except for tthe Campy Mirage Ergos and rear mech. All four of those bicycles frequently get taken on rides of 60 to 100 miles at a time. Even the single speed goes on jaunts f 50 miles. Just because a bicycle is lugged steel frame and old parts does NOT mean it's only suitable for coomuting or a beater. You can ride many many miles in comfort on such a bicycle.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> >
> >
> > You are talking about Columbus SL and SLX frames when the original frame in this thread is some low-mid priced frame from the 70s or 80s? Are you really that ignorant of bicycle frames and bicycling that you would compare very high priced premium Columbus frames with the frame mentioned in this thread? You also stated you spent many, many hundreds or thousands of dollars for new, modern components and wheels to go on these frames. Campagnolo Ergo and derailleurs and wheels and cassettes and chains. The person who started this thread is talking about a $240 bike. Double, triple, quadruple that price by the time he is done.
>
> Gads do you have a reading problem?
>
> i stated that ONE bicycle was upgraded to a mix of Veloce ans Mirage. That did NOT cost "many, many hundreds of thousands of dollars for new modern comonents."

I read and understand very well. I have doubts about your abilities.

You wrote the following: "The SLX was upgraded in 2001 to a mic of Campy Mirage and Veloce. The Tange 5 has Shimano touring stuff on it except for tthe Campy Mirage Ergos and rear mech."

The SLX and Tange 5 bikes have Campagnolo shifters and derailleurs on them. That is TWO bikes. How do you think two bikes equal one bike as you stated above? Apparently your math and reading are deficient.

In 2001 I think Ergo shifters, even at Veloce and Mirage level, were $150 or so. Rear derailleurs were $30 to $50 each. Cassettes were $30 or so. New rear wheels, hub, rim, spokes, build labor, were $200-300. Chains, $15. $500 to $1000 just to upgrade your two bikes in 2001.

>
> I've seen many vintage SL and similar frame bicycles go for what the OP stated = $240.00 or less becuase either the person wanted to get rid of the bike fast or they didn't kow the value of it. A chap I know got a vintage MASI with all Campy stuff (Record iirc) and exra race light tubular wheels for $200.00 CDN from the original owner who just wanted to unload it.
>

I suppose its possible to find Columbus SL and SLX frames at garage sales where the sellers do not know the value of the frame. Or somehow find a seller who just wants it gone no matter what. But the person who started this thread said the bike was at a "large used bike shop in Bangkok". Do you assume used bike shop owners in SE Asia are ignorant and misprice the items they are selling? And of course the bike frame being discussed here is not comparable to Columbus SL or SLX.

[John B.]

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 07:54:15 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 8/16/2015 6:29 PM, John B. wrote:
>-snippy snip snip-
>>>
>>> Unlikely to be Stronglight, Spidel, Solida on a Japanese
>>> bike from the 1980s. Possible just not likely.
>>
>> When I think of Japanese "S" words names like Shimano, Sakura,
>> Sachiko, Seppuku come to mind :-)
>>
>> --
>> cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>>
>
>Seppuku is a great name for bicycle parts. Or a garage band.

Or people that ride bicycles with imperfect lighting... we are told

[John B.]

:-) No, it was a single word.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 07:39:54 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
<russell...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>8500 Baht for this bike is $240 USA dollars. Your description makes it seem like a decent but old and outdated lugged steel frame. After you do some work to the frame and fork so it will accept modern parts and hubs. The rest of the parts and wheels, OK if you want to build a commuting bike to ride in town and leave out in the weather and not care if its stolen. But nothing worth anything. At $240 you are not stealing the "frame". Its fair market price or more for a 30 year old mid-price bike. Sounds like you are desperate to buy a new bike or project. So rationality goes out the window. Have fun negotiating for your bike. I'm sure you will feel like a winner after you talk the store down a few dollars. The fact you bought a bike that is OK for commuting in town and nothing more is irrelevant. You made a deal and are a winner!
>

Well, I would not say desperate. After all I already have several
bikes including one used specifically to ride in N.E. Bangkok.

But I do take exception to "outdated" as I see a great many custom
frame builders that build in steel. But I suppose it is possible that
blokes, in what many consider a very spendthrift society, would spend
two or three thousand dollars for what you describe as an "outdated"
frame.

Unfortunately though, you brand yourself as a foolish consumer if you
feel that striving for a lower or better price is foolish, or at least
I will say that in doing business with companies such as ARCO, TEXICO,
MOBILE, BP, et al, I found that each and every one of them expended
considerable effort in getting the "lowest and best" price possible,
Or at least I assume they did as all of them used that term as part of
their contractual agreements.

--
cheers,

John B.

[Sir Ridesalot]

Are you psychic? How the hell do you know what the frame the OP is talking about is made of?

Sometimes a shop will have an old vintage bike they'll sell/give away for a song simply because it's been hanging around for years.

Cheers

[John B.]

And again you are making foolish assertions or at least you seemed to
have skipped over the part where I wrote that this bike seemed lighter
than a bike I built with a Columbus SL tubing... which is usually
considered a pretty light tube.

As for additional bits, well, I've got two spare sets of rather
lightweight wheels one with conventional bearings another with ceramic
cartridge bearings, Shifters? Brakes? Take them off the older bike.

As for Campagnolo, I remember having a bike built, probably twenty
years ago (gee, I just counted on my fingers and it was almost 30
years ago) now, and when we got to discussing shifters - down tube of
course in those days - the guy building the bike commented "If you
want it to click use Shimano", I did and have been very happy ever
since. After all, Shimano made the first reliable indexed shifters. In
1984, I believe.

I reckon that my actual out of pocket expenses in building a bike with
the afore mentioned frame, disregarding the cost of the frame, will
be, my labour, but of course I'm retired now, and the cost of powder
coating - I've gone to powder coating for bicycles as it is (1) cheap
and (2) provides a much harder, stronger, and longer lasting coating.

So? Frame plus maybe $50 for a new (to me anyway) light weight steel
bicycle?
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Actually the bike is being sold by a bloke who is in the business and
has probably 50 or 75 bikes on sale. I suspect that the price reflects
the market demand (and of course I am a foreigner) for an older, down
tube shifter, bicycle.

He also has brand new aluminum frame bikes, 700 wheel and straight
bar, 9 speed thumb shifters, for about US$130. China made of course
(Isn't everything made in China?)
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Very possible with a second? hand bike.

>Adding braze-ons needs to be done by a competent brazer with experience on bicycle frames - lest they just melt the thin tubing.

As I wrote in another post I've built a bike from raw tubes (Columbus
SL) and was certified to weld aircraft parts for 50 years, or more,
ago (although the latter skills aren't really applicable to bike
frames :-)

>Why would you need to slot the front fork for a quick-release axle? Just get one the same diameter as the existing axle. I often do this for people and all I do is take a nut from the threaded axle to the shop andbuy the quick release axle with the same threading because that way it's simply a matter of switching the ales themselves and I KNOW tthe cones are the right taper.

I though that slotting the front fork ends might make it easier to fit
the front wheel... Imagine - on the side of the roads, all sweaty and
nasty, big black rain cloud rapidly approaching, flat tire...

>Shouldn't be any need to do anything to the rear droputs in order to use a quick release axle there.

True, but again I thought it might make things easier. Perhaps not
though.

>An image of the bike would help a whole lot.

If I buy it :-)

>Good luck.
>
>Cheers
--
cheers,

John B.

[Sir Ridesalot]

I've never had to enlarge the slot on front fork of a vintage bicycle unless I was using a larger axle the same size as the rear one. I just buy the same diameter axle (but quick release0) as the original nutted axle was. Saves all that potential problems of getting the slots exact.

I hope you get a bike that you can really enjoy riding. My old MIELE Columbus SLX frame has a Cinelli bottom bracket shell and fits me like a glove. I can quite literraly ride it all day long.

Good luck and cheers.

[John B.]

Or, I suspect, at least in the case I described, because the young and
rowdy want the new plastic or aluminum models :-)

But being older, slower, and hopefully more mature, I've decided that
when you are out there, 50 km from home and it starts pouring down
that fenders are a very nice device to have on the bicycle, and I've
yet to see one of the plastic two wheeled rockets that one could fit
fenders on.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 22:21:23 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot

Yes, but then you need to spread the forks about a quarter of an inch
to get them over the axle stubs... I had a bike that I spread the rear
frame to fit 9 speed cassette and didn't get it quite wide enough and
it was a bit awkward to hold the bike upright, fold back the drailer,
spread the frame and line the wheel up all at the same time :-) Yes it
was possible but on the side of the road there, with the big trucks
whizzing by and the rain starting to come down, and you left your
slicker in the wagon, again, it was unhandy, to say the least :-).

>I hope you get a bike that you can really enjoy riding. My old MIELE Columbus SLX frame has a Cinelli bottom bracket shell and fits me like a glove. I can quite literraly ride it all day long.
>

It is usually not a problem getting a bike that fits here. I'm not
vary tall and like a 50 - 51 cm. seat tube which is likely the most
common size here. The rest of it is pretty much getting the right
parts to suit YOU.

>Good luck and cheers.
--
cheers,

John B.

[avag...@gmail.com]

And of course the bike frame being discussed here is not comparable to Columbus SL or SLX.....

there are buyers for ex-whatshisname frames ad nauseum walking the streets...
and looking to steal yours .

most common WOW BUY is having the seller place the ex- in your path caws he wants YOU to care for the pipe.

on costs...redoing the ex- frame up to 21C standrads in the mid range components costs may be sunstanstailly less...the seller committee decided that if your groupo can afford $1500 costs above frame then surly yawl can afford $2100 above the frame

crunch cunch cnruc

[AMuzi]

http://bmxmuseum.com/forsale/dscn1024_copy1_blowup.jpg

[jbeattie]

Any bike that fits and has a reasonably comfortable saddle can be ridden all day long. Depending on your size, weight and aspirations, frame material doesn't make much difference. I couldn't tell the difference between 531 and SP back when I owned bikes made of both -- or a mix of both.

I haven't shopped for a retro bike, but I've got one for sale on Craigslist for $250 (probably high, but might as well prepare for the half-price offers). It's my wife's old Centurion Ironman (rebranded Novara), Tange 1 tubing and Shimano SIS 6 speed. She's tall -- it's a 58cm -- but I was riding it around to make sure everything worked, and found it to be a really peppy bike. Not terribly heavy. I'd look for something like it that didn't need to be filed or require braze-ons, and if I wanted to go 130mm, it wouldn't take much effort to respace.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/18/2015 7:45 AM, John B. wrote:
>
>
> But being older, slower, and hopefully more mature, I've decided that
> when you are out there, 50 km from home and it starts pouring down
> that fenders are a very nice device to have on the bicycle, and I've
> yet to see one of the plastic two wheeled rockets that one could fit
> fenders on.

+1. Very, very few of the folks I ride with use fenders. Perhaps they
think the weight or aerodynamic drag will slow them? Perhaps it's just
a "style" thing, wanting to look sporty? I don't know. (I'm quite
content to look like an old tourist.)

But old as I am, very few of them can keep up with me going up hills or
going down hills. If the fenders are hurting, it's not enough to be
noticeable.

The only downside I notice is if I happen to be laying my bike down
inside my hatchback, instead of putting it on a rack. Then, with the
front wheel out, I have to be a bit careful to avoid bending the front
fender.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Sir Ridesalot]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:02:43 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> Yes, but then you need to spread the forks about a quarter of an inch
> to get them over the axle stubs... I had a bike that I spread the rear
> frame to fit 9 speed cassette and didn't get it quite wide enough and
> it was a bit awkward to hold the bike upright, fold back the drailer,
> spread the frame and line the wheel up all at the same time :-) Yes it
> was possible but on the side of the road there, with the big trucks
> whizzing by and the rain starting to come down, and you left your
> slicker in the wagon, again, it was unhandy, to say the least :-).
>

> cheers,
>
> John B.

Ah, SPREADING tthe REAR fork to fit a 9 speed or higher wheel is an entirely different thing than SLOTTING a fork end. Sheldon Brown's site has a fantastic How To article on cold setting a rear triangle on a steel frame. Another advantage to a steel frame. Just be sure that you have the rear drop outs parallel to each other after spreading the frame.

Again, good luck.

Cheers

[John B.]

Yes I read that and didn't like it as it depends on bending each side
independently and likely provides a better chance to NOT get both
sides the same. I concocted a screw jack that (1) holds the dropouts
parallel and (2) applies pressure evenly to both side at once.
Apparently Sheldon's method worked for him and my method works for me
so which method is better I don't know.

But in either case it certainly isn't rocket science although hack
sawing a section out of a fork end isn't either :-)

But my point was that trying to stretch the "fork" ends, just a little
bit, by hand when you insert the wheel is "unhandy". (Especially if it
is raining :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[Sir Ridesalot]

To each his own. I prefer to use a string gauge around each dropout and the headtube and then measure the distance from the stat tube to the string. When coldsetting the rear I use the one side at a time method as I found that often times the two sides would NOT move the same distance when screwed apart. That was usually due to a divot in the right chainstay to accomodate either a small chainring or chainring bolts. As long as the distances are equal and the droputs themselves are parallel I guess it doesn't matter what method you use. Non-parallel droputs can lead to one breaking which is not a fun thing to have happen.

Cheers

[John B.]

There was an article published some time ago about a test that some
guy made. He got some custom builder interested in the scheme and
built two identical bikes, out of different tubing, and painted one
red and one blue. The writer than got a number of experienced cyclists
to ride the bikes and comment on which one was "better". It turned out
that if anything, the color may have been the most important factor in
determining which one was "best" as none of the cyclists could pick
the "good" bike from the "cheap" bike.

I had much the same experience. I read in some cycle magazine about
testing "old" racing bikes by having them ridden by "modern" racers.
All the Modern" blokes accurately commented on how heavy the old bikes
were compared with their modern racing bikes but a number commented on
how dangerous the down tube shifters were. One chap, I think, said
that he was afraid of taking his hands off the bars to shift.

Amazing! I had never realized how much of a daredevil I must be riding
a bike with down tube shifters. And never realized how risky it was

[John B.]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:50:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 8/18/2015 7:45 AM, John B. wrote:
>>
>>
>> But being older, slower, and hopefully more mature, I've decided that
>> when you are out there, 50 km from home and it starts pouring down
>> that fenders are a very nice device to have on the bicycle, and I've
>> yet to see one of the plastic two wheeled rockets that one could fit
>> fenders on.
>
>+1. Very, very few of the folks I ride with use fenders. Perhaps they
>think the weight or aerodynamic drag will slow them? Perhaps it's just
>a "style" thing, wanting to look sporty? I don't know. (I'm quite
>content to look like an old tourist.)
>

I believe that it is either the desire to look "cool" or simply
ignorance. After all, you seldom see fenders on a "road bike". They
seem restricted to the old folks riding sedately down to the market
and back with the basket on the front.

>But old as I am, very few of them can keep up with me going up hills or
>going down hills. If the fenders are hurting, it's not enough to be
>noticeable.

Yup. Going down hill is one aspect of bike riding where the elderly
can keep up :-) And, old steel bikes are often faster, down the hill,
than modern plastic rockets :-)

And, apparently riding safely is another attribute :-)

>
>The only downside I notice is if I happen to be laying my bike down
>inside my hatchback, instead of putting it on a rack. Then, with the
>front wheel out, I have to be a bit careful to avoid bending the front
>fender.
--

cheers,

John B.

[Duane]

You ever ride in a tight peloton? Taking your hand from the brake at the
wrong second can be bad. Brifters are unquestionably better in those
circumstance.

>
> --
> cheers,
>
> John B.


--
duane

[Sir Ridesalot]

I put Campy 9 speed Mirage Ergos and a Mirage rear mech on my touring bike. it's utterly fantastic to be able to sit up and shift without moving my hand whilst climbing a steep grade with loaded bike; or whilst riding loaded on a loose surfaced road. And what's nice with the Ergos is that there's no exposed cable housing to interfere with anything.

Cheers

[Duane]

It's pretty nice being able to brake and shift in a twisty decent with out
taking my hands from the bar as well. I was not unhappy to see down tube
shifters disappear.
--
duane

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/18/2015 10:14 PM, John B. wrote:
> I read in some cycle magazine about
> testing "old" racing bikes by having them ridden by "modern" racers.
> All the Modern" blokes accurately commented on how heavy the old bikes
> were compared with their modern racing bikes but a number commented on
> how dangerous the down tube shifters were. One chap, I think, said
> that he was afraid of taking his hands off the bars to shift.
>
> Amazing! I had never realized how much of a daredevil I must be riding
> a bike with down tube shifters. And never realized how risky it was
> :-)

Cue the "Danger! Danger!" remarks about moving your hands away from the
brakes.

FWIW, I never liked downtube shifters. It seemed I was doing a sort of
half-pushup each time I reached down to shift, and on a long ride, that
got annoying. But I'm fine with bar end shifters.

Speaking of moving my hands away from brakes: I do drink from my water
bottle at appropriate times even when riding in a group. When there's
enough space around me, I've been known to ride "no hands," sitting up.
And I recall a ride where a friend expressed astonishment that I could
take my jacket off while riding. I guess some "modern" guys would never
do any of those things.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Sir Ridesalot]

Riding no hands in a casual group ride is imho irresponsible as it'd take very little for something to deflect a front wheel of yours or someone moving into your path. I'd never consider riding no hands in any group ride unless I was at the tail end of the group.

What I find amusing at times is when I'm riding one of my Ergo bikes after having ridden one of mine with the downtube shifters. That's because the muscle memory has me reaching down to shift even though the shifter is no on the brake lever body.

Cheers

[Joe Riel]

I didn't get brifters until 2000---which replaced downtube friction
shifters. Rode with a racing club every Saturday and raced occasionally
and didn't have problems. The brifters are nicer for other reasons, its
not like there is a huge safety advantage.

--
Joe Riel

[Duane]

Someone riding with no hands on the bar would not be invited back.
--
duane

[Duane]

Sure. I'm just saying brifters are better.

--
duane

[John B.]

On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 02:22:47 +0000 (UTC), Duane <sp...@flarn.com>
wrote:

I wasn't arguing which shifter was better but the fact that a guy,
shown riding by himself, commented that he was afraid on a down hill
ride to take his hand off the handle bar to shift.

But I will also say that I read a comment from a top tier European
rider the first or second year that brifters were being used, that on
a climb when he decided to get the jump on another rider reaching down
to shift would give him away but these new shifters, "why you just
flick your finger to be in the right gear and the other guy probably
won't notice until you are gone".
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I have problems drinking on the bike, maybe because I have full plates
and don't wear them when I ride - damned expensive to cough and have
your false teeth fall on the blacktop, particularly on a fast decent
:-), but I find that with any lever shifter, down tube or bar end,
that I tend to shift less frequently and often find myself in a gear
that is a bit too low or a bit too high for best efficiency. With
brifters I shift a lot more, even on a small short grade and seem to
be able to maintain the same pedal cadence better. Perhaps I'm "set in
my ways" but I find that maintaining the same cadence all the time
give me the best performance with the least effort.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 10:53:35 +0000 (UTC), Duane <sp...@flarn.com>
wrote:

A year or so ago I as watching the TdeF and I saw most of the riders
riding with no hands. Most noticeable at the top of a col when they
are stuffing newspapers in their jerseys before the decent.
--
cheers,

John B.

[Duane]

I don't think we have many TDF riders in our group. Over the years we've
had a couple who may have thought they were TDF riders but they didn't
last. No matter how Frank wants to hook this to his Danger! Danger!
thing, that's just irresponsible.

What you do by yourself is up to you. With a non professional group of
riders if you feel the need to show off your abilities wait until you've
rotated to the back.


--
duane

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 6:53 AM, Duane wrote:
> Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 11:29:19 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>
>>> Speaking of moving my hands away from brakes: I do drink from my water
>>> bottle at appropriate times even when riding in a group. When there's
>>> enough space around me, I've been known to ride "no hands," sitting up.
>>> And I recall a ride where a friend expressed astonishment that I could
>>> take my jacket off while riding. I guess some "modern" guys would never
>>> do any of those things.
>>

>> Riding no hands in a casual group ride is imho irresponsible as it'd take
>> very little for something to deflect a front wheel of yours or someone
>> moving into your path. I'd never consider riding no hands in any group
>> ride unless I was at the tail end of the group.
>>

> Someone riding with no hands on the bar would not be invited back.

Oh good grief! Are you guys really so unskilled and fearful about
balancing??

Note my statement: "When there's enough space around me..." On a long
sociable ride, there will certainly be times when there's plenty of
space. Sitting up and stretching can be relaxing, comfortable and safe.

Oh, and I guess none of these guys would be invited back to Duane's
prissy crew:

http://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2010/01/CAV_WINS2.jpg

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2007/07/11/va1237256077324/fabian-cacellara-tour-de-france-5562406.jpg

http://www.steephill.tv/2012/tour-de-france/photos/stage-04/317-RTR34L5C.jpg

http://bikecult.com/superquiz/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/salute04.jpg

... not that they would care.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 9:16 AM, Duane wrote:
> John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

>> A year or so ago I as watching the TdeF and I saw most of the riders
>> riding with no hands. Most noticeable at the top of a col when they
>> are stuffing newspapers in their jerseys before the decent.
>

> I don't think we have many TDF riders in our group. Over the years we've
> had a couple who may have thought they were TDF riders but they didn't
> last. No matter how Frank wants to hook this to his Danger! Danger!
> thing, that's just irresponsible.
>
> What you do by yourself is up to you. With a non professional group of
> riders if you feel the need to show off your abilities wait until you've
> rotated to the back.

Again, good grief! Riding no hands for a bit is not showing off; it's
just something that a person can do to relax, to stretch, to rest one's
hands, to get something out of a jersey pocket... whatever. Ten year
old kids can do it! It's ludicrous to say that a
thousands-of-miles-yearly roadie must never do it in front of anyone.

Hell, years ago _Bicycling_ magazine had an article explaining the
benefits of doing so. Amazing that the "Danger! Danger!" nannies now
want to forbid it.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[sms]

On 8/19/2015 6:16 AM, Duane wrote:

<snip>

> I don't think we have many TDF riders in our group. Over the years we've
> had a couple who may have thought they were TDF riders but they didn't
> last. No matter how Frank wants to hook this to his Danger! Danger!
> thing, that's just irresponsible.
>
> What you do by yourself is up to you. With a non professional group of
> riders if you feel the need to show off your abilities wait until you've
> rotated to the back.

+1 Pretty irresponsible to go hands-free in a group. But you're right,
this may be one more item on the "Danger Danger" list. Someone should do
a spreadsheet that lists these.

[Sir Ridesalot]

It's one thing for a PROFESSIONAL bicyclist to ride no hands in a PROFESSIONAL bicycle race but it's quite another thing for someone in a group of riders of unknown skills/experience to ride no hands anywhere but at the back where a sudden movement caused either by something on the road or a person moving won't cause someone to spill.

Duane's club is NOT UNIQUE in that a no hands rider would not be invited back especiallt if that rider was riding no hands in tthe group ans not at the rear.

Cheers

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 12:50 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 11:02:29 AM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 8/19/2015 9:16 AM, Duane wrote:
>>> John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A year or so ago I as watching the TdeF and I saw most of the riders
>>>> riding with no hands. Most noticeable at the top of a col when they
>>>> are stuffing newspapers in their jerseys before the decent.
>>>
>>> I don't think we have many TDF riders in our group. Over the years we've
>>> had a couple who may have thought they were TDF riders but they didn't
>>> last. No matter how Frank wants to hook this to his Danger! Danger!
>>> thing, that's just irresponsible.
>>>
>>> What you do by yourself is up to you. With a non professional group of
>>> riders if you feel the need to show off your abilities wait until you've
>>> rotated to the back.
>>
>> Again, good grief! Riding no hands for a bit is not showing off; it's
>> just something that a person can do to relax, to stretch, to rest one's
>> hands, to get something out of a jersey pocket... whatever. Ten year
>> old kids can do it! It's ludicrous to say that a
>> thousands-of-miles-yearly roadie must never do it in front of anyone.
>>
>> Hell, years ago _Bicycling_ magazine had an article explaining the
>> benefits of doing so. Amazing that the "Danger! Danger!" nannies now
>> want to forbid it.
>

> It's one thing for a PROFESSIONAL bicyclist to ride no hands in a PROFESSIONAL
bicycle race but it's quite another thing for someone in a group of
riders of
unknown skills/experience to ride no hands anywhere but at the back where a
sudden movement caused either by something on the road or a person
moving won't
cause someone to spill.

Hmm. Do do professional racing licenses include a line saying "You are
now certified to take both hands off the handlebars?"

> Duane's club is NOT UNIQUE in that a no hands rider would not be invited back...

Oh, I'm sure Duane's club is not unique! The "Danger!" nannies are
multiplying like crazy these days.

> especiallt if that rider was riding no hands in tthe group ans not at
the rear.

OK: Yesterday's ride, at one point I was with a group of five at the
front, then decided to wait for a certain friend to catch up from oh,
100 yards behind. There was a gentle downhill maybe 1/4 mile long and
no problems with the road surface. I sat up and coasted no-hands until
my friend nearly caught up with me. There were probably five other
cyclists back there, a bit further back. Nobody complained. In fact,
nobody has ever complained about this. It's never caused the least bit
of trouble.

Would your riding friends _really_ freak out? Did you do a group letter
to _Bicycling_ magazine when it had an article on how to ride no hands?
Do you stop teenagers on the street and lecture them for no-hands
riding, after they've spent the hour doing these?
http://www.redbull.com/us/en/bike/stories/1331629427214/timeless-bmx-tricks-photos

There are times riding no-hands is inappropriate, sure. But there are
many times it's fine. The reaction here is sanctimonious and prissy.
Get a grip.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

Duane was very clear that his group was not a bunch of professionals.

There are some people I wouldn't ride around regardless of whether they had their hands on the bars. I ride to work every morning around people with questionable skills -- and I avoid them like the plague. OTOH, I frequent ride no hands with my usual band of merry men and women, and so do they. I don't do it in a sprint or riding tempo in a pace line. There's a time and place for everything.

Duane may be leading rides with the over-powered and under-experienced Cat. 5 and wanna-be racer set. That's a squirrelly lot. They can cross-up wheels and even run into you while trying to learn pack etiquette -- and even with both hands on the bars. It's not like a bunch of retirees rolling down the road, enjoying the scenery -- sitting up and stretching. Its more like demolition derby on some days.

Now, about taking hands off the bars, shifting in the days of yore did not require you to remove both hands from the bars. It was not particularly dangerous, although there was sort of a pack-wide wobble when people shifted before hills or into/out of corners. There was also a dip in speed because people were not that sure of the next gear. STI changed all that, and like John B says, it resulted in a lot more shifts and more efficiency. I love my STI.

-- Jay Beattie

[avag...@gmail.com]

is an electric ride able in your climate ?

[avag...@gmail.com]

yeah riding in the B group is No. 1

[Sir Ridesalot]

ze Frank! No need to get insulting. The simple factt is that riding no hands in a close group IS dangerous to all due to unforseen variables. If as you sday you ride no hands with LOTS of room between you and any other rider that's different. But then that's not what most people think ofg when they read "riding in a group". Like it or not riding no hands in a group can get you banned from future rides with that group if you do it whilst close to other riders or if you cause or nearly cause a spill. You really need to know the group's policy and rider skill level before doing no hands riding in that group.

It's one reason that many groups wil discourage "fleas*" from tacking onto a group.

Cheers

*flea - a rider who is not part of a group ride trying to tack onto the group or paceline. A flea can be very annoying or even dangerous as no one kmows what skills the flea has or doesn't have. Some fleras are also "squirrels" or "Freds" that ride all over the the place, couldn't ride a straight line any distance if their life depended on it and think they're Grand Tour capable riders.

[Duane]

More trolling from the expert. Ad hominem attacks are a clear indication.
What is apparently not multiplying like crazy these days is the number of
cyclists in Ohio.

Don't bother. Frank has no tolerance for ideas other than his own. And
insulting seems to be second nature to him.

Riding in a group with plenty of room between? Why do they do that?
Afraid someone might fall in front of them? Or do they lack the skill to
do otherwise? Anyway it's not how all clubs ride.

--
duane

[Duane]

After rotating to the rear a rider can do what they want. Stretch, coast,
eat a cheeseburger or whatever. No one is going to complain.


--
duane

[Duane]

Mourners rides are usually somewhat performance oriented. Not what I'd
call racers but not what you're referring to as retirees. But we tend to
ride on each other's wheels. Someone changing tempo or swerving can cause
bad things to happen.

Frank doesn't have to join us and as far as I know he wasn't invited.
Strange though that any caution about riding technique triggers this
Danger! Danger! crap from a guy that espouses buying these VC how-to books.
I pointed out to a rider yesterday that she was too close to a door zone.
Is that Danger! Danger! as well?

> Now, about taking hands off the bars, shifting in the days of yore did
> not require you to remove both hands from the bars. It was not
> particularly dangerous, although there was sort of a pack-wide wobble
> when people shifted before hills or into/out of corners. There was also
> a dip in speed because people were not that sure of the next gear. STI
> changed all that, and like John B says, it resulted in a lot more shifts
> and more efficiency. I love my STI.
>

Exactly.


--
duane

[Frank Krygowski]

Speaking of intolerance! So it's now forbidden to ride with others
without maintaining a tight formation?? Is this your club?
http://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-96166db7d9a824822552989275489bff?convert_to_webp=true

In the incident last night, some of us were better climbers than others,
and were attacking hills. Others were climbing more slowly. At the
crest of the hill, there was thus a big gap in the pack. I wanted to
talk to someone way behind, so I coasted sitting up.

If you don't allow different climbing speeds, if you must always ride in
close formation, if you ban riders for taking their hands off the bars,
you can't complain about intolerance in others.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 2:21 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 1:16:08 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> There are times riding no-hands is inappropriate, sure. But there are
>> many times it's fine. The reaction here is sanctimonious and prissy.
>> Get a grip.
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
> ze Frank! No need to get insulting. The simple factt is that riding no hands
in a close group IS dangerous to all due to unforseen variables. If as
you sday
you ride no hands with LOTS of room between you and any other rider
that's different.
But then that's not what most people think ofg when they read "riding in
a group".

Look upthread for my original statement, Sir. Or to save you the
trouble, I'll copy it here:

"When there's enough space around me, I've been known to ride 'no
hands,' sitting up."

I don't know what's confusing about "When there's enough space around me."

I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given workshops
and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written articles on
it for the club newsletter and for other publications. I've had other
cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they learned and
improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took me aside and
asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously needed advice on
group riding.

I know what I'm doing. The reaction here was unreasonable.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Sir Ridesalot]

More nonsens Frank. You were not originally talking abou that you were t alking about riding no hands in a group. you keep changing the scenario in order to promote your stance. However, riding no hands in a group unless you're at the back of it, is usually frowned upon by others in that group. BTW, if there's a big gap beteen a number of riders and another number of riders then that's usually considered to be TWO SEPARATE GROUPS in which case riding no hands att he back of Group A is okay as long as it doesn't interfere with the riders in Group B.

I see by the way you're shifing your scenario that once again (as Duane pointed out) you're trolling and promoting your own agenda.

Therefore you're not discussing anything and thus I'm not bothering further with this with you.

Cheers

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 3:30 PM, Duane wrote:
>>

> Frank doesn't have to join us and as far as I know he wasn't invited.

I doubt that I'd want to. Based on your statements, it sounds like a
very intolerant group.

> Strange though that any caution about riding technique triggers this
> Danger! Danger! crap from a guy that espouses buying these VC how-to books.

Don't try to whitewash your prose, Duane. What you and Sir offered up
was not "any caution." It was prissy intolerance.

Sir said "Riding no hands in a casual group ride is imho
irresponsible..." and he added no qualifiers.

You, Duane, then said : "Someone riding with no hands on the bar would
not be invited back" and "No matter how Frank wants to hook this to his

Danger! Danger! thing, that's just irresponsible."

Jay was much more reasonable, and described precisely what I do: "OTOH,

I frequent ride no hands with my usual band of merry men and women, and
so do they. I don't do it in a sprint or riding tempo in a pace line.
There's a time and place for everything."

If you want to be consistent, you'll now insult Jay, say he wouldn't be
invited on your rides, and that he's irresponsible. If you want to be
gentlemanly, you'll say that you misunderstood me and that you retract
your "irresponsible" claim.

I expect you'll do neither.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

I changed no scenario. I gave exactly one example from yesterday's
ride. It didn't conflict with anything I said before or since.

>
> I see by the way you're shifing your scenario that once again (as Duane pointed out) you're trolling and promoting your own agenda.
>
> Therefore you're not discussing anything and thus I'm not bothering further with this with you.

It's good for you to drop it. Riding no-hands on appropriate occasions
is common practice. You're sounding like a hand-wringing, scolding
nanny. The sooner you stop, the better.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[James]

On 19/08/15 20:53, Duane wrote:

>
> Someone riding with no hands on the bar would not be invited back.
>

Wow. On very long rides I would pick a time when I deem it safe and sit
up, no hands, and have a good stretch.

Perhaps my bike is more stable than others?

I wouldn't do it with a cross wind or with wind gusts, or if the road
was peppered with debris, for example.

Others do it to. We have no problem with someone riding no hands. It
doesn't happen often, and hasn't caused a problem.

--
JS

[James]

On 20/08/15 02:50, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

>
> It's one thing for a PROFESSIONAL bicyclist to ride no hands in a
> PROFESSIONAL bicycle race but it's quite another thing for someone in
> a group of riders of unknown skills/experience to ride no hands
> anywhere but at the back where a sudden movement caused either by
> something on the road or a person moving won't cause someone to
> spill.
>

As I said in another reply, it's more about picking an appropriate time
and place. Obviously not when the hammer is down and you're riding
within millimetre of the other riders. I would normally move a little
out of the line so I can see the road ahead easily, and then have a stretch.

> Duane's club is NOT UNIQUE in that a no hands rider would not be
> invited back especiallt if that rider was riding no hands in tthe
> group ans not at the rear.
>

Militant.

--
JS

[jbeattie]

One could write a book on the sociology of drafting a strange group of riders or another rider. I don't like being drafted without an introduction or some acknowledgment. And if I am drafted, I expect the other rider to pull through. I can't tell you how many times I've blown by some rider only to look back and see him [women don't do this generally] hanging on my wheel, bug-eyed, clutching his bars. It's not like I'm that fast, so these folks tend to be sport riders with nice bikes, reasonable fitness but little skill. I pull off, and they invariable drop back and look sheepish -- never pulling through. I start going again, and they latch back on. Pisses me off. I yelled at some fool a few weeks ago who was doing that to me on the way to work.

Some groups are so large around here that nobody would notice if you tagged on -- but then again, you probably wouldn't want to be in that group. The giant, lumbering groups of recreational riders are a hazard. Racing teams dress alike, so you stand out if you try to tag on -- but if you ride up and talk a little, or if your riding with a little group that looks plausible and gets absorbed, then it's O.K. I frequently ride with people who are current racers, and we catch or get caught by groups and end up in ad hoc packs. Racing clubs are kind of weird, though, because they go like hell and stop -- usually to allow dropped team members to catch up or because they are doing a sprint or a Strava segment or have some unknown agenda. They are a nice pull so far as they go -- but you have to get some sort of permission and know that you're not messing up the group dynamic. If they slow to let you go -- then go. If they scowl at you, you're not wanted.

I was riding a popular route along one of the local rivers with a few racer friends, and we passed through some big club event, and all of these riders clung to us as we passed through -- the usual bug-eyed, death grip scenario with no one pulling through. Weird. It winnowed down to two or three tag-alongs, and I scowled and told them repeatedly that we were not on their ride. A few miles later, one of them asked about the route and mentioned a road, and I again said that we we're not on the same ride and that I had no idea where they needed to be. I assume someone had an iPhone/Garmin and it all worked out -- but I didn't really care. These guys were totally clueless. I could have sat up, taken my hands off the bars and screamed at them "f*** off!," and they would have stayed back there, hunkered down ready to tag on the second I started moving.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Duane]

Quebec law limits a group to 15. Club policy is 12. I prefer probably 8.
I would know every one in the group.

I get what you're describing though on my commutes. Some guy comes up and
grabs your wheel. You have no clue what they'll do when you slow or turn.
You hope they know the hand signals.

And we have the additional issue of language. I had one guy who instead
of calling "car back" was yelling " auto" which in French sounds more like
"oh tow" and to me sounded like he was yelling "hole". At least he was
trying. Lol.


--
duane

[Duane]

Pretty much. But we're normally riding pretty close and pretty fast. A
certain militancy is required. I'm sure you're not doing this at speed
either.

--
duane

[Duane]

Maybe it's our bad roads. I don't know. But We don't like it so you would
wait until you rotated to the back. It wouldn't be an issue for most
people.

--
duane

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 5:35 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>
> One could write a book on the sociology of drafting a strange group of riders or another rider. I don't like being drafted without an introduction or some acknowledgment. And if I am drafted, I expect the other rider to pull through. I can't tell you how many times I've blown by some rider only to look back and see him [women don't do this generally] hanging on my wheel, bug-eyed, clutching his bars. It's not like I'm that fast, so these folks tend to be sport riders with nice bikes, reasonable fitness but little skill. I pull off, and they invariable drop back and look sheepish -- never pulling through. I start going again, and they latch back on. Pisses me off. I yelled at some fool a few weeks ago who was doing that to me on the way to work.
>
> Some groups are so large around here that nobody would notice if you tagged on -- but then again, you probably wouldn't want to be in that group. The giant, lumbering groups of recreational riders are a hazard. Racing teams dress alike, so you stand out if you try to tag on -- but if you ride up and talk a little, or if your riding with a little group that looks plausible and gets absorbed, then it's O.K. I frequently ride with people who are current racers, and we catch or get caught by groups and end up in ad hoc packs. Racing clubs are kind of weird, though, because they go like hell and stop -- usually to allow dropped team members to catch up or because they are doing a sprint or a Strava segment or have some unknown agenda. They are a nice pull so far as they go -- but you have to get some sort of permission and know that you're not messing up the group dynamic. If they slow to let you go -- then go. If they scowl at you, you're not wanted.
>
> I was riding a popular route along one of the local rivers with a few racer friends, and we passed through some big club event, and all of these riders clung to us as we passed through -- the usual bug-eyed, death grip scenario with no one pulling through. Weird. It winnowed down to two or three tag-alongs, and I scowled and told them repeatedly that we were not on their ride. A few miles later, one of them asked about the route and mentioned a road, and I again said that we we're not on the same ride and that I had no idea where they needed to be. I assume someone had an iPhone/Garmin and it all worked out -- but I didn't really care. These guys were totally clueless. I could have sat up, taken my hands off the bars and screamed at them "f*** off!," and they would have stayed back there, hunkered down ready to tag on the second I started moving.

Try riding tandem, especially if the team is fairly strong. On event
rides, you pick up a train of drafters (draftsmen?) anywhere except on
an uphill. And if there's a headwind, the train can become quite long.

And nobody following a tandem will ever take a turn at the front.
(Well, except one super-strong racer friend of ours.) I never really
minded, though. We never had any bad incidents caused by this behavior.

But I recall touring through Cambridge, England back in the '70s,
grinding into a headwind. Some commuter type latched onto my rear wheel
like a leech. I was interested in talking with people, and I tried to
make conversation over my shoulder. He totally ignored my questions,
and just scowled and hung on an inch or two from my wheel. Weird.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2015 6:11 PM, Duane wrote:
>
> Quebec law limits a group to 15. Club policy is 12. I prefer probably 8.

Wow. A club policy on how many people can ride together? Sheesh.
Sounds like less fun than a convention of retired nuns.

(Not that there's anything wrong with retired nuns.)

--
- Frank Krygowski

[James]

Speed isn't such an issue. In fact we are generally more stable at
speed. It's proximity to other riders, weather and road conditions that
matter more.

--
JS

[James]

I wonder if they limit groups of cars similarly?

--
JS

[jbeattie]

Big crowds are unruly -- unless you're racing and you're in a pack. And big crowds of sport riders break down into little groups after a while anyway. Why not just start with the little group? Or have multiple little groups with different ability levels? This is particularly helpful where the riders don't know the route or there is some sort of instruction going on.

The last thing I would want to do is get into a big group of riders comprised of novices, recovering heart patients, spin class heroes, disaffected divorcees who ride insane miles but have no social skills, the recumbent rider who must convince others of the superiority of his ride, the fixed gear guy, ten people with mechanical issues, etc., etc. Gak! See you later.

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:16:42 +0000 (UTC), Duane <sp...@flarn.com>

wrote:

>John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 10:53:35 +0000 (UTC), Duane <sp...@flarn.com>

>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>>>> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 11:29:19 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 8/18/2015 10:14 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> I read in some cycle magazine about
>>>>>> testing "old" racing bikes by having them ridden by "modern" racers.
>>>>>> All the Modern" blokes accurately commented on how heavy the old bikes
>>>>>> were compared with their modern racing bikes but a number commented on
>>>>>> how dangerous the down tube shifters were. One chap, I think, said
>>>>>> that he was afraid of taking his hands off the bars to shift.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Amazing! I had never realized how much of a daredevil I must be riding
>>>>>> a bike with down tube shifters. And never realized how risky it was
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cue the "Danger! Danger!" remarks about moving your hands away from the
>>>>> brakes.
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, I never liked downtube shifters. It seemed I was doing a sort of
>>>>> half-pushup each time I reached down to shift, and on a long ride, that
>>>>> got annoying. But I'm fine with bar end shifters.
>>>>>

>>>>> Speaking of moving my hands away from brakes: I do drink from my water

>>>>> bottle at appropriate times even when riding in a group. When there's

>>>>> enough space around me, I've been known to ride "no hands," sitting up.

>>>>> And I recall a ride where a friend expressed astonishment that I could
>>>>> take my jacket off while riding. I guess some "modern" guys would never
>>>>> do any of those things.
>>>>>

>>>>> --
>>>>> - Frank Krygowski

>>>>
>>>> Riding no hands in a casual group ride is imho irresponsible as it'd take
>>>> very little for something to deflect a front wheel of yours or someone
>>>> moving into your path. I'd never consider riding no hands in any group
>>>> ride unless I was at the tail end of the group.
>>>>

>>>> What I find amusing at times is when I'm riding one of my Ergo bikes
>>>> after having ridden one of mine with the downtube shifters. That's
>>>> because the muscle memory has me reaching down to shift even though the
>>>> shifter is no on the brake lever body.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>

>>> Someone riding with no hands on the bar would not be invited back.
>>

>> A year or so ago I as watching the TdeF and I saw most of the riders
>> riding with no hands. Most noticeable at the top of a col when they
>> are stuffing newspapers in their jerseys before the decent.

>> --
>> cheers,

>>
>
>
>I don't think we have many TDF riders in our group. Over the years we've
>had a couple who may have thought they were TDF riders but they didn't
>last. No matter how Frank wants to hook this to his Danger! Danger!
>thing, that's just irresponsible.
>
>What you do by yourself is up to you. With a non professional group of
>riders if you feel the need to show off your abilities wait until you've
>rotated to the back.

I was responding to the " Someone riding with no hands on the bar
would not be invited back" comment as I believe that some of the TdeF
riders do get invited back. Even after demonstrating on international
T.V. that they sometimes do ride with no hands :-)

--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I see. While you apparently agree with the fact that many professional
rider do, in fact, ride with no hands that when riding with a bunch of
stupid people who don't know how to ride properly it isn't safe.

I can only agree with you as I assume that you know your compatriots
far better then I do.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:27:59 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot

But of course he is promoting his own agenda, just exactly as your
side of the argument promotes theirs.

Someone commented about the dangers of ridding "no hands" and I
replied that I see the TdeF riders doing it. then your group respond
to that saying, in essence, that the TdeF riders are all highly
skilled but the group you ride are comprised of people who aren't safe
riding with no hands. Frank then replies saying that he has and does
do it, apparently with no comments from his group of riders. Than you
take offence.

So, taking your own comments into consideration it appears that (1)
TdeF rider do it, (2) TdeF riders are considered highly skilled, (3)
In your group of riders it isn't considered safe, (4) In Frank's group
it apparently passes with no comment.

Thus, it is apparent among your group of lesser skilled riders it
isn't considered safe while among Franks group, the higher skilled, or
perhaps more adult, riders it is ignored, or at least no comment is
made.

Seems logical.
--
cheers,

John B.

[Duane]

Yeah but like I said there are no professional riders in our group. So
your response was a bit odd in context.


--
duane

[Duane]

No they reserve stupid laws for cyclists I think. Is it different where
you are?

--
duane

[Duane]

Sure. But at speed and in a tight pack stuff happens quickly.

--
duane

[Duane]

It's funny but you seem to understand the situation much better than our
self professed cycling advocate and Demi God.


--
duane

[John B.]

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 09:47:11 +1000, James <james.e...@gmail.com>

Goodness! Logic in the discussion? James you may be banned from the
peloton for using banned substances :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[Duane]

Your grasp of logic seems to parallel that of the master. The higher
skilled or more adult? Really?

> --
> cheers,
>




--
duane

[Duane]

So are you a pro or stupid? Seems to be your only two options.

> I can only agree with you as I assume that you know your compatriots
> far better then I do.
> --

An attempt at levity?

> cheers,
>
> John B.


--
duane

[Duane]

Wait I thought riding with no hands made you more expert and adult?


--
duane

[Sir Ridesalot]

Read the damn post again Frank! It's not Duane's Club that sets that policy it's QUEBEC LAW that states the number or riders permitted in a group!

Geeze talk about an agenda blinding someone!

Cheers

[Duane]

Quebec law is 15. The club does limit it to 12. The type of formations we
use tends to get unwieldy with more than that. Not sure why that's hard to
understand.

I doubt if the riding we do has anything to do with Frank's bunch. That's
fine. Telling riders who he doesn't know how to behave while riding in a
style that he doesn't know in a place he's never been is the problem. And
that's where you're right about the agenda. It's like trumpeting that
every rider has the right to take the lane in the face of many people
telling him that the local laws prohibit it. Just getting the gospel out.

BTW isn't there a similar law in Ontario? Most of the groups I see there
are pretty similar in size to us.

--
duane

[sms]

Recumbent riders are as bad as Mac Fanbois.

[Sir Ridesalot]

Not sure what the legal limit is in Ontario. Kanata Nepean Bicycle Club limits their groups to 8 or 10 riders.

Cheers

[Duane]

Thanks.
--
duane

[Frank Krygowski]

Oh, blinding indeed, Sir. Got a mirror? It might help you see _your_
agenda.

Here, I'll quote the pertinent part slowly for you. Be sure to read it
slowly for full effect, and think, and take notes if necessary:

"Quebec law limits a group to 15. Club policy is 12."

In other words, the club has a policy that's stricter than Quebec law.
Got that?

They also don't permit riding no hands, apparently.

They don't like people to ride too far apart, either, based on Duane's
comment. ("Riding in a group with plenty of room between? Why do they
do that?")

I wonder what other regulations they have. Maybe the 1880s
military-style uniforms? Maybe the club trumpeter signals for changes
in formation when approaching a village?

The club ride I attended last weekend had, IIRC, about 16 people. There
were certainly more than 12.

We did lots of other evil things, too. We controlled narrow lanes so
drivers had to pass by changing lanes. We spread out from time to time,
too, with some going faster, some going slower. I think I might have
(horrors!) ridden no-hands for a while. Oh, and I used my aero bars
when appropriate; I wonder if that's another unforgivable sin.

Somehow, somehow, we survived. In fact, we had fun.

--
- Frank Krygowski