Suspended chain ring
Garry Jones
http://www.hisingensck.se/texter-bilder/ovrigt/2005/bilder/050129/IMAG0154_stor.jpg
Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
....and I thought I'd seen it all!
Garry Jones
English Cyclist, ResIDING in Sweden
Leo Lichtman
"Garry Jones" wrote: (clip) Can anyone explain the need for suspension
:-) Very neat design. Serves the useful purpose of turning a profit. If
the manufacturer is lucky, and the bicycling public is gullible, they may
recover their tooling costs. If we're smart, it will go the way of Biopace
chain rings.
The Caretaker ...
> Amazingly, this is not a joke.
>
> http://www.hisingensck.se/texter-bilder/ovrigt/2005/bilder/050129/IMAG0154_stor.jpg
>
> Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
>
> ....and I thought I'd seen it all!
I thought there was something like this a few years ago too. The
explanation was something to do with the springs storing energy whilst
on the downward power stroke, and releasing it on the upward return
stroke of a normal pedalling action. This helps, the claim went, to
iron out the power impulses inherent from pedalling. I'd guess this
acts a bit like the 'cush drive' in motorcycle rear wheels.
I can't find a link for it now though. :)
--
The Caretaker.
www.4x4prejudice.org
A balanced argument.
Werehatrack
may have said:
>Amazingly, this is not a joke.
>
>http://www.hisingensck.se/texter-bilder/ovrigt/2005/bilder/050129/IMAG0154_stor.jpg
>
>Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
There isn't one.
It's possible that this may have been done in emulation of the
spring-equipped hubs of automotive engine clutch discs, where the
springs have a very definite level of usefulness...but their
functionality here is questionable at best. The human leg does not
engage in the same kind of power production cycle that the piston
engine does.
The mere fact that an idea has no valid basis and is nonsensical in
fact will not prevent some people from spending the money to prove
that it was not a good one...and denying the results.
--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
Brian Huntley
It's not a suspension, it's a device to improve efficiency (so
claimed.) It's supposed to even out the power, storing it when then
cranks are horizontal, and releasing it when they're vertical.
Sort of like Biopace with moving parts.
Garry Jones
> The mere fact that an idea has no valid basis and is nonsensical in
> fact will not prevent some people from spending the money to prove
> that it was not a good one...and denying the results.
Amazing statement in a thread that's not about helmets....
(yet)
:)
Garry Jones
English Cyclist ResIDING in Sweden
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Amazingly, this is not a joke.
> Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain
> rings?
This is a joke, and obviously for oldsters who want to put a little
bounce in their stride on the bicycle. It goes with hair restorer and
other such gimmicks. Geritol works wonders!
Jobst Brandt
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
RonSonic
wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:40:48 +0100, Garry Jones <mor...@algonet.se>
>may have said:
>
>>Amazingly, this is not a joke.
>>
>>http://www.hisingensck.se/texter-bilder/ovrigt/2005/bilder/050129/IMAG0154_stor.jpg
>>
>>Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
>
>There isn't one.
>
>It's possible that this may have been done in emulation of the
>spring-equipped hubs of automotive engine clutch discs, where the
>springs have a very definite level of usefulness...but their
>functionality here is questionable at best. The human leg does not
>engage in the same kind of power production cycle that the piston
>engine does.
>
>The mere fact that an idea has no valid basis and is nonsensical in
>fact will not prevent some people from spending the money to prove
>that it was not a good one...and denying the results.
I consider it part of the monkey principle. If all of us monkeys don't go
banging our typewriters with enthusiasm, oblivious to the obvious nonsensicality
of monkeys banging on typewriters, then that Shakespearean sonnet will never get
written.
Or the answer won't come out to be 42. However you want to look at it.
Ron
Werehatrack
may have said:
>I consider it part of the monkey principle. If all of us monkeys don't go
>banging our typewriters with enthusiasm, oblivious to the obvious nonsensicality
>of monkeys banging on typewriters, then that Shakespearean sonnet will never get
>written.
The more conventional approach (if you want Shakespeare, hire him) is
lost on the average tinkerer.
>Or the answer won't come out to be 42. However you want to look at it.
Before you can get the answer to be 42, you must know what base to use
for the problem. (13, in this case.)
Werehatrack
<brian_...@hotmail.com> may have said:
Flawed theory. The problem behind it should be obvious.
All those springs will do in this application is convert a little of
the rider's energy to heat via flexing, if sufficient force is
applied.
Tom Sherman
> Garry Jones writes:
>
>
>>Amazingly, this is not a joke.
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4vnay
>
>
>>Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain
>>rings?
>
>
> This is a joke, and obviously for oldsters who want to put a little
> bounce in their stride on the bicycle. It goes with hair restorer and
> other such gimmicks....
Judging from this thread, the crankset in question functions admirably
as a conversation piece.
--
Tom Sherman - Earth
hhu
http://www.bikedrive.com/english/index.htm
They don't look like they are joking...
Werehatrack
It's not heavy enough to use as a lamp base or a boat anchor, and it
would need a lot of work to make a decent pizza cutter.
Werehatrack
Neither was Velikovsky.
Jim Smith
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:17:31 -0600, hhu <uuhh> may have said:
>
>>Here's the site link:
>>http://www.bikedrive.com/english/index.htm
>>
>>They don't look like they are joking...
>
> Neither was Velikovsky.
Indeed, Bart Hughes and Amanda Fielding are quite serious about their
particular performance enhancing technique.
Leo Lichtman
will not prevent some people from spending the money to prove that it was
not a good one...and denying the results.
I'm standing on my head trying to understand which way this was meant.
Mike Kruger
news:g9gqv0tjea51hfn9u...@4ax.com...
>
> >Or the answer won't come out to be 42. However you want to
look at it.
>
> Before you can get the answer to be 42, you must know what
base to use
> for the problem. (13, in this case.)
>
I understand "42", which is a reference to one of the
"Hitchhiker's Guide" books.
I don't understand the base 13 reference (or it's simply been
a while since I read Adams).
Olebiker
Leo Lichtman
"Olebiker" wrote: Take a look at the Web site (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I just did. They claim that you store energy in the springs at top dead
center, and release it at bottom dead center. Evidently this system is
applicable only to one-legged riders, since, while the right foot is at top
dead center, the left foot would be at bottom dead center, if you had one.
Werehatrack
In the first book, 42 is revealed explicitly as The Answer To The
Great Question Of Life, The Universe, And Everything. In the second
book, it is much *less* explicitly revealed that the question is "What
do you get when you multiply 9 times 6?"...which, in base 10, is 54,
but if you shift up to base 13, then the answer is 42. I once had the
opportunity to directly ask Douglas Adams if he'd made it work that
way on purpose, having heard that he had not. He confirmed that
indeed, he'd intended for it *not* to work, and was a bit annoyed when
it was pointed out that it *did*, in base 13. I'd been prepared to
think that he was being clever, hinting that the real problem is that
most people just don't look at things in the manner that allows them
to see the answers that they need, but no, it was nothing so subtle
after all.
RonSonic
wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:44:14 GMT, RonSonic <rons...@tampabay.rr.com>
>may have said:
>
>>I consider it part of the monkey principle. If all of us monkeys don't go
>>banging our typewriters with enthusiasm, oblivious to the obvious nonsensicality
>>of monkeys banging on typewriters, then that Shakespearean sonnet will never get
>>written.
>
>The more conventional approach (if you want Shakespeare, hire him) is
>lost on the average tinkerer.
That's not his job as a type-monkey.
Or banging the rocks together. It's really little different in terms of being
primate behavior and having occasional positive results
>>Or the answer won't come out to be 42. However you want to look at it.
>
>Before you can get the answer to be 42, you must know what base to use
>for the problem. (13, in this case.)
Hrrruuuhhhh?
Ron
Werehatrack
Yup, but the fact that some people seriously believe (in) something
doesn't make it true.
carl...@comcast.net
<rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:20:39 -0600, Werehatrack <rau...@earthWEEDSlink.net>
>wrote:
[snip]
>>The more conventional approach (if you want Shakespeare, hire him) is
>>lost on the average tinkerer.
>
>That's not his job as a type-monkey.
[snip]
Dear Ron and Werehatrack,
Actually, French typesetters have demonstrated that what we
get is "Ulysses" with thousands of typos.
James Joyce
Werehatrack
said:
And, lest we forget, the instructions for Tounge of Frog.
http://members.shaw.ca/tom.t/l/tounge.html
I can attest personally that the product genuinely existed, and that
the instructions are accurately depicted.
Rich
I agree that the text is poorly worded, but this appears to have been
something worth trying, on a MtB anyway. I have at times came to a halt
while climbing steep hills when I lacked the momementum necessary to get
past the TDC/BDC pedal postitions. However, wether this actaully works
to solve that problem would have to be proven by actual testing. They
built it, and now people can test it. People pay to test things all the
time. That's certainly better then not trying new things.
Rich
Leo Lichtman
"Rich" wrote: wether this actaully works to solve that problem would have
to be proven by actual testing. (clip) That's certainly better then not
trying new things.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I am also open to trying new ideas, when they appear promising. However,
this one just doesn't seem feasible. If you stall out on a steep hill with
your crank arms vertical, you will stop. Compressing a spring may let your
feet move a few millimeters but the bike will still be stopped.
On the other hand, I have a set of chain rings on one of my bikes that DOES
solve that problem. They are elliptical, and positioned so that you have a
lower gear when you are pushing down, and a higher gear at top-dead-center.
The effect is that you go through top-dead-center quicker, so there is less
chance to stall, and you have more time in the effective part of the
rotation. This works--I have used it.
trg
"Garry Jones" <mor...@algonet.se> a écrit dans le message de news:
41FD3632...@algonet.se...
> Werehatrack wrote:
>
>> The mere fact that an idea has no valid basis and is nonsensical in
>> fact will not prevent some people from spending the money to prove
>> that it was not a good one...and denying the results.
>
> Amazing statement in a thread that's not about helmets....
>
> (yet)
>
> :)
Or Iraq (yet)
trg
"Olebiker" <ddu...@tfn.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
1107138145.0...@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
I'll bet you'd really fly with the version that uses feathers instead of
springs-
"Yesterday, for the first time a Bikedrive System was used for a profi race.
It was set up with the cycles of Jimmy Madsen and Marcellino Garcia, both
are members of CSC Tiscali. The Bikedrive is a crank system which is
produced by an Austrian factory. A system with two feathers which are
connected with the pedal crank, the dead point is being conquered easier,
and the driver is able to develop more power."
http://www.bikedrive.com/english/index.htm
Garry Jones
> I once had the opportunity to directly ask Douglas Adams if he'd made it work that way on purpose,
I heard that he was 42 when he wrote it.
Garry Jones
Garry Jones
> Or Iraq (yet)
Lol
Garry
Garry Jones
Rumours in Sweden are that this device is from 2002 and that the UCI
have already banned it. Any update on that?
m-gineering
>
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:40:48 +0100, Garry Jones <mor...@algonet.se>
> may have said:
>
> >
> >
> >Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
>
>
> It's possible that this may have been done in emulation of the
> spring-equipped hubs of automotive engine clutch discs, where the
> springs have a very definite level of usefulness...but their
> functionality here is questionable at best. The human leg does not
> engage in the same kind of power production cycle that the piston
> engine does.
>
> fact will not prevent some people from spending the money to prove
> that it was not a good one...and denying the results.
ISTR the original austrian company felt that scantily clad ladies got
very exited about these cranks. The company went bust, and the cranks
are now offered from switserland
--
---
Marten Gerritsen
INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl
Phil, Squid-in-Training
news:pzlLd.45043$8u5....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Rich" wrote: wether this actaully works to solve that problem would have
> to be proven by actual testing. (clip) That's certainly better then not
> trying new things.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I am also open to trying new ideas, when they appear promising. However,
> this one just doesn't seem feasible.
So because it doesn't seem feasible, it shouldn't even be tried?
> On the other hand, I have a set of chain rings on one of my bikes that
> DOES solve that problem. They are elliptical, and positioned so that you
> have a lower gear when you are pushing down, and a higher gear at
> top-dead-center. The effect is that you go through top-dead-center
> quicker, so there is less chance to stall, and you have more time in the
> effective part of the rotation. This works--I have used it.
How do you know it doesn't work? Have you tried it? No. How can anybody
know if it works if nobody tries it?
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
Phil, Squid-in-Training
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 16:36:36 -0600, Jim Smith <3.141...@gmail.com>
> may have said:
>
>>Werehatrack <rau...@earthWEEDSlink.net> writes:
>>
>>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:17:31 -0600, hhu <uuhh> may have said:
>>>
>>>>Here's the site link:
>>>>http://www.bikedrive.com/english/index.htm
>>>>
>>>>They don't look like they are joking...
>>>
>>> Neither was Velikovsky.
>>
>>Indeed, Bart Hughes and Amanda Fielding are quite serious about their
>>particular performance enhancing technique.
>
> Yup, but the fact that some people seriously believe (in) something
> doesn't make it true.
Unless everybody believes it's true. Is the world flat? Does God exist?
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training (agnostic)
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Phil,
Reality rarely depends upon wishful thinking, unless you
click your heels together three times and desperately want
to be back in Kansas.
Even then, fiction is required. In the movie, Dororthy's
ruby slippers worked just fine, even though they were
originally silver in "The Wizard of Oz" because Baum was
writing a badly tangled allegory involving the thankfully
forgotten politics of the time, with the free silver party,
the bi-metallic question, and the gold bugs. That's why the
Yellow Brick Road (gold standard) leads to the Emerald Green
City (Washingtion, where they printed greenbacks). Dorothy
skips all that and returns to Kansas, bastion of the free
silver farmers--whose belief in the magical economic
qualities of silver didn't make them prosperous.
When you wish upon a star, it makes no difference who you
are--you're still just wishing, and the star pays no
attention.
Jiminy Cricket
Leo Lichtman
"Phil, Squid-in-Training" wrote: How do you know it doesn't work? Have you
Phil, the reason I posted a description of the elliptical chain rings was to
prove that I am willing to try things. But I went to school. I have a
degree in mechanical engineering. I don't have to try EVERYTHING. If the
science and engineering say it won't work, I'd rather put my money and
energy elsewhere. If you think it might work, YOU try it.
Werehatrack
<phil_leeIHEA...@hotmail.com> may have said:
>"Leo Lichtman" <l.lic...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>news:pzlLd.45043$8u5....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>> "Rich" wrote: wether this actaully works to solve that problem would have
>> to be proven by actual testing. (clip) That's certainly better then not
>> trying new things.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> I am also open to trying new ideas, when they appear promising. However,
>> this one just doesn't seem feasible.
>
>So because it doesn't seem feasible, it shouldn't even be tried?
He's saying that he's not going to try it. If you want to, you can
ignore his advice.
>> On the other hand, I have a set of chain rings on one of my bikes that
>> DOES solve that problem. They are elliptical, and positioned so that you
>> have a lower gear when you are pushing down, and a higher gear at
>> top-dead-center. The effect is that you go through top-dead-center
>> quicker, so there is less chance to stall, and you have more time in the
>> effective part of the rotation. This works--I have used it.
>
>How do you know it doesn't work? Have you tried it? No. How can anybody
>know if it works if nobody tries it?
It is not necessary to grab the flaming log to know that your hands
will be burnt. With sufficient experience, an individual's accuracy
of prediction of the outcome of relatively straightforward things will
increase. The collective experience of several posters here predicts
that this device will have no practical value. Please feel free to
buy one, test it, and report your results. We'll happily watch.
If I were inclined to bet, I'd almost be willing to wager that this is
an idea that's been tried before. It's amazing how many such
"marvelous new inventions" turn out to be neither marvelous nor new.
Garry Jones
> If I were inclined to bet, I'd almost be willing to wager that this is
> an idea that's been tried before. It's amazing how many such
> "marvelous new inventions" turn out to be neither marvelous nor new.
The biopace rings were first manufactured by Worthingtons in the 1930's.
When everyone who had tried them had stopped cycling they came back. So
I would not be surprised to see these come back later.
Mark Hickey
The REALLY funny thing was that the Shimano Biopace rings started out
really pretty egg-shaped. Then every year, they "improved them" by
making them a little rounder. Pretty soon, they had re-invented the
round chainring and we were all back where we started.
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
Tom Sherman
> ...
> It is not necessary to grab the flaming log to know that your hands
> will be burnt. With sufficient experience, an individual's accuracy
> of prediction of the outcome of relatively straightforward things will
> increase. The collective experience of several posters here predicts
> that this device will have no practical value. Please feel free to
> buy one, test it, and report your results. We'll happily watch....
This reminds me, how is Andy Coggan getting along testing Rotor Cranks?
--
Tom Sherman - Earth
Mike Kruger
>
> opportunity to directly ask Douglas Adams if he'd made it
work that
> way on purpose, having heard that he had not. He confirmed
that
> indeed, he'd intended for it *not* to work, and was a bit
annoyed when
> it was pointed out that it *did*, in base 13. I'd been
prepared to
> think that he was being clever, hinting that the real
problem is that
> most people just don't look at things in the manner that
allows them
> to see the answers that they need, but no, it was nothing so
subtle
> after all.
Thanks for the explanation. It's a good story.
A Muzi
>>>If I were inclined to bet, I'd almost be willing to wager that this is
>>>an idea that's been tried before. It's amazing how many such
>>>"marvelous new inventions" turn out to be neither marvelous nor new.
>>Werehatrack wrote:
>>The biopace rings were first manufactured by Worthingtons in the 1930's.
>>When everyone who had tried them had stopped cycling they came back. So
>>I would not be surprised to see these come back later.
Mark Hickey wrote:
> The REALLY funny thing was that the Shimano Biopace rings started out
> really pretty egg-shaped. Then every year, they "improved them" by
> making them a little rounder. Pretty soon, they had re-invented the
> round chainring and we were all back where we started.
That's funny! In fairness, there were only Biopace and the
rounder Biopace II (each came in 2 quality grades)
Ya gotta hand it to Shoji Onozawa for renaming his
'old-fashioned' SR-Sakae rings "Round Tech" during the
Biopace years.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
meb
You store energy through the horizontal. You merely commence storing
the energy in the example at TDC through 3:00, then you commence
releasing it through bdc. I suspect at speed you actually would be
releasing energy beyond BDC (TDC on the other arm).
--
meb
Joe Kochanowski
> Amazingly, this is not a joke.
>
>
http://www.hisingensck.se/texter-bilder/ovrigt/2005/bilder/050129/IMAG0154_stor.jpg
>
> Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain
rings?
>
>
> Garry Jones
> English Cyclist, ResIDING in Sweden
When a mountain climber at high altitude with a heavy pack takes a
step, it is a quick step with a rest after that. If you want to lift
something heavy you try to do it as fast as you can. You would not try
to spend a long time holding something heavy. Sometimes muscles like to
to work in small spurts with rests instead of long continuous output. A
rider could use this crankset to spin high rpm normally while also
having the option to hammer at low rpm. It is not comparable to
Biopace. An easier way to get this "suspended chainring" effect is to
devise a pulley on a spring tensioned lever on the drive side of the
chain. It can always be disengaged for efficient spinning. I have been
meaning to try more experiments with this.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<rau...@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote in message
<thcqv056ou148fsj1...@4ax.com>:
>>Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
>There isn't one.
I beg to differ. The existence of fools and money, and the
well-publicised ease of parting the latter from the former, is surely
justification enough.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
Werehatrack
<u...@ftc.gov> may have said:
>On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:22:26 -0600, Werehatrack
><rau...@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote in message
><thcqv056ou148fsj1...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>Can anyone explain the need for suspension springs in the chain rings?
>>There isn't one.
>
>I beg to differ. The existence of fools and money, and the
>well-publicised ease of parting the latter from the former, is surely
>justification enough.
For that, there is no need to even have a product, as is demonstrated
on a minute-by-minute basis on eBay.