Best & worst of cycling products

[David L. Johnso]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 06:13:00 +0000, Rik O'Shea wrote:

> Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from the past
> few years.

> 3 of The Worst
> (1) Tires that you glue onto the rim

You do realize, don't you, that these tires are almost as old as the bicycle itself. Hardly from
"the last few years".

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Enron's slogan: Respect, Communication, Integrity, and _`\(,_ | Excellence. (_)/ (_) |

 

[Larry Fieman]

> Worst:
> 1. I use to have a thing against "boutique" wheels. Now I love them -- since I found a virtually
> brand new wheel set at a yard sale (ultegra
hubs,
> 24 spokes, laced to Mavic Open Pro Silver rims, with velox tape). The
owner
> had just "upgraded."
>
>Correction: Um...I mean 32 spokes,not 24.

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 20:11:22 +0000, Matt O'Toole wrote:

> This is simply not true. Most quill stems have about 2" of adjustment, which is the same as most
> threadless setups (three (1/4") spacers, plus flipping the stem over).
>
> *Some* quill stems like the Nitto Technomic have lots of range, but most bikes *do not* come
> with those.

And most bikes with threadless do not come with 3 spacers, either, nor with enough steerer to add
spacers. For most bikes sold with threadless, the only way to raise the bars is to buy another stem.

> It's sure a lot cheaper to stock just one size of every fork. And not deal with stuck quill stems
> anymore... or headset wrenches...

But the threadless forks are not cheaper. Cheaper for the dealer, maybe, but not the customer.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | The lottery is a tax on those who fail to understand _`\(,_ | mathematics. (_)/ (_) |

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from the past
>few years. 4 of The Best (well I thought I'd be positive on the best side of things)
>(1) Index shifting What a great invention. I remember the cycling press telling us that the real
> pros & racers would still be using friction shifting for the smooth gear changing they required
> - of course this had nothing to do with the fact Campag at the time were miles behind Shimano
> in producing an index shifter that worked. My thoughts are with poor Andre Vander Pol - who at
> the time finishing second (again) in the World Cyclo Cross Championships because he fluffed the
> gear change with his Campag friction shifters at the start of a two-up sprint.
>(2) Clipless Pedals It seems almost barbaric now (like something from Ben Hur) that racers used to
> fly along with their feet tightly strapped into toe clips and straps.
>(3) Brifters I remember when Phil Anderson first used the Dura Ace prototye in the pro peleton and
> beat faster sprinters by virtue of his ability to shift to a higher gear during the sprint.
> Everybody wanted these but they were only a prototype and we had to wait.
>
>(4) High quality clincher rims & tires What Joie de vie when Michelin Hi-lite tires came a long -
> the start of a revolution for a quality alternative to gluing ...

Funny, none of these is less than 10 years old. Hardly what I would call recent past.

>3 of The Worst
>(1) Tires that you glue onto the rim I still remember my Dad's bemused expression when I used to
> tell him that I had to glue my tires onto the bicycle rim. His bemusement to this was only
> exceeded when I explained what was required to fix a puncture. It is a firm testament to his
> fatherhood that he retained an external sense of composure - I'm just glad that he never rolled
> around the floor clutching his sides in fits of laughter, though at times I'm sure he may have
> suspected that he raised an idiot for a son.

For long time this was the only way to get a good tire. Also, these are not recent either.

>(2) Latex tubes for clincher rims Ho, Ho, Ho - that's the sound of the tire manufacturers laughing
> all the way to the bank - pure unadulterated Snake Oil of the highest form.

You do get light weight, so it is not completely snake oil.

>(3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
> raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
> with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.

From a manufacturers stand point this is one of the best ideas of the recent past. They only have to
stock on size fork and they get to sell you lots of stems till you get the sizing just right.

---------------
Alex

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"R15757" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> To say that suspension has made terrain accessible is a fallacy.

I guess that depends on how you define "accessible." If you like constantly stopping and starting,
and/or shouldering your bike half the time, more power to you.

> Twenty years ago the mass marketed mountain bike was brand new, and hardly anybody had accumulated
> enough skill to ride the things on terrain that
today's
> riders call rough.

I was there, and that's not true. A lot of the original mountain bikers were MX enthusiasts who rode
stuff on Schwinn beach cruisers that still makes most mountain bikers cringe.

> But now you can find the occasional expert trail rider on a rigid fork who rides the same trails
> as his suspended riding partners with similar skill level, only he must ride the rocky and rutted
> sections a bit slower. And then he rides the smooth uphill sections quite a bit faster, so maybe
> it all evens out, or, since most of the time is gained or lost on the uphills, maybe the rigid
> fork guy has an advantage.

Not in my experience, in 15 years of mountain biking. If this were true, pros would still be riding
rigid forks. They switched to suspension long before sponsorship dictated what they rode -- when
they still had day jobs, bought all their own stuff, and slept in their cars.

> It depends on where you want to take your advantage. The fully suspended bike's advantage is in
> downhill speed, generally.

Not in my experience either. Suspension forks help on bumpy climbs because they let you roll over
stuff that would stop you with a rigid fork, and make it easier to roll over stuff that *might* stop
you. When you're riding hard, there's little energy left over for body english. Best to let the bike
do some of that for you.

> The claim that full suspension is advantageous for
> comfort on long rides is debatable to say the least.

Huh? For me, the advantage is mostly comfort. I can get down most of the trails without suspension
that I ride with, but it's a lot slower and not much fun. I was one of the last rigid fork holdouts
in my hometown, but finally switched when suspension became too good to ignore.

> Also, look at the classic trials bike. You think those guys might be able to negotiate some
> technical trails? Their suspension is in the tires, arms, and legs.

I think most of those guys choose the same suspension the rest of us do for 30 miles of bumpy
singletrack.

Matt O.

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:47:36 -0400, ajames54 <[email protected]> wrote:
>but there is still and inch and a half of motion downward... just because "most bike shops" do
>things foolishly does not detract

How is it foolish to make the bike comfortable for the people who are most likely to buy it?

>from the fact that a quill stem has more potential adjustment than an Aheadset style system.
>
>I don't deny that these extenders seam like a reasonable solution to the problem they address...
>however the problem itself originates from a change in design that achieved nothing of note..

Threadless sets are just as flexible. I have probably a 4 inch range with my stem; I can flip it
(big change), and I can move spacers above or below it (small change). It only takes a minute or two
to do any such adjustment -- and I do it with a 5mm allen wrench. The headset doesn't come out of
adjustment when I do it, either.

The stem that came on the bike gave me the aforementioned inch and a half of adjustability.
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Jon]

I don't know what bike shops you frequent but all the ones in my neck of the woods build bikes with
a great deal of adjustability built into the headset.

Switch shops, not headsets.

Jon

"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 20:11:22 +0000, Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> > This is simply not true. Most quill stems have about 2" of adjustment, which is the same as most
> > threadless setups (three (1/4") spacers, plus flipping the stem over).
> >
> > *Some* quill stems like the Nitto Technomic have lots of range, but most bikes *do not* come
> > with those.
>
> And most bikes with threadless do not come with 3 spacers, either, nor with enough steerer to
> add spacers. For most bikes sold with threadless, the only way to raise the bars is to buy
> another stem.
>
> > It's sure a lot cheaper to stock just one size of every fork. And not deal with stuck quill
> > stems anymore... or headset wrenches...
>
> But the threadless forks are not cheaper. Cheaper for the dealer, maybe, but not the customer.
>
> --
>
> David L. Johnson
>
> __o | The lottery is a tax on those who fail to understand _`\(,_ | mathematics. (_)/ (_) |

 

[A Muzi]

> Al Frost:
>>- Rear suspension for MTBs - I bet most are sold just 'cause they look "cool"

Jose Rizal wrote:
> No, most are sold because it allows more comfort on terrain which would knock hardtail riders off
> their bikes. It's a machine for a special purpose.

Jose, are you saying that you believe "most" of the 2 million or so XMart $129 full suspension bikes
have actually left the pavement at least once? Or just that "most" of their owners bought them
because they were "knocked off their bikes" with the previous XMart $89 hardtail model they formerly
used for offroad downhill riding?

It's for looks.
--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Q.]

<snip>
> Jose, are you saying that you believe "most" of the 2 million or so XMart $129 full suspension
> bikes have actually left the pavement at least once? Or just that "most" of their owners bought
> them because they were "knocked off their bikes" with the previous XMart $89 hardtail model they
> formerly used for offroad downhill riding?
>
> It's for looks.

You're right, the "full suspension" bikes Pacific Cycle make under various brand names are just for
looks. What do you expect from S Mart?!? I got one of their "shocks" sitting here as a paper weight.
You can get them from eBay for about $5 if you really want to get ripped off.

Go into a decent LBS if you want to argue bikes, not S Mart.

http://underworld.fortunecity.com/playstation/190/shopsmrt.wav
C.Q.C.

 

[Mike S.]

"Jon" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:4W1mb.162391$6C4.141574@pd7tw1no...
> I don't know what bike shops you frequent but all the ones in my neck of
the
> woods build bikes with a great deal of adjustability built into the
headset.
>
> Switch shops, not headsets.
>
> Jon

I was going to say something to that effect. Most bikes I've seen at the Supergo across the street
have 2-3 10mm spacers under the stems. Between the rise and the spacers, there's a lot of room (to
go down anyway).

Mike

 

[A Muzi]

(Pete Cresswell) wrote:

> RE/
>
>>3 of The Worst
>
>
> 4) Maybe not "worst", but skewers. What good does a skewer do that a bolt with a
> 5mm-Allen-key-friendly nut wouldn't do?

Well, you certainly don't _have_ to use them. There are "slow-release" skewers with an allen head
and no cam . They are cheap, lightweight and present a nice clean appearance.

A traditional skewer, as long as the cam is oiled and it's locked properly, clamps much more firmly
than a nutted axle.

If your bike has verticals and no disc, clamping securely can be overrated. Or at least pointless.

So I can see where one might not care for them and also not need them. Just like neon handlebar tape
you can change them easily for something you dislike less.

Others of us like the convenience. Your allen bolt skewer couldn't replace the cam skewer on my
fixed bike.

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

 

[David Reuteler]

A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:
: Others of us like the convenience. Your allen bolt skewer couldn't replace the cam skewer on my
: fixed bike.

on the rear of your fixed gear? that holds through sprints?
--
david reuteler [email protected]

 

[Ted Bennett]

David Reuteler <[email protected]> wrote:

> A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> : Others of us like the convenience. Your allen bolt skewer couldn't replace the cam skewer on my
> : fixed bike.
>
> on the rear of your fixed gear? that holds through sprints?

Sure, works fine for me. A good skewer, properly adjusted is plenty strong for a fix or a tandem.
You don't see them on real track bikes, that is, on a track. Not allowed.

--
Ted Bennett Portland OR

 

[Onefred]

Carbon Fiber: Before, I couldn't careless about it, but I've grown to really appreciate
it. It doesn't hurt that it's more affordable, too. Great stuff.

Dave

 

[Simon Brooke]

"wwp" <[email protected]> writes:

> > Spent 8 years in a bike shop owned one for more than 4... I've seen many a frozen stem... only a
> > few of which were any real difficulty at all.

> So, how did you free up those frozen stems? What is the secret? I've loosened the bolt a few turns
> and knocked the wedge down and whacked the stem a few times with a hammer and wood with no
> movement at all.

(i) brute force
(ii) ignorance
(iii) plenty of releasing fluid.

Seriously, you're doing the right thing, except you need to use releasing fluid (aka penetrating
oil). Use a heavy rubber or wooden faced mallet, rest the bottom of the head tube on a solid wooden
bench, give the releasing fluid twenty minutes to work its way in, and then just welly it with the
mallet until it starts to move. Start by using reasonable force; if that doesn't work, use
unreasonable force (and more releasing fluid).

Warning: I wouldn't re-use an alloy stem that's been wellied.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

do not sail on uphill water
- Bill Lee

 

[Simon Brooke]

[email protected] (R15757) writes:

> Simon wrote:
>
> << <snip>
>
> > > Worst
> > >
> > > - Rear suspension for MTBs - I bet most are sold just 'cause they look "cool"
>
> > Oh, I would put that close to 'best'. It makes a huge difference to cycling hill-country tracks
> > and getting places which, twenty years ago, just wouldn't be practicable on a bike... <snip>>>
>
> To say that suspension has made terrain accessible is a fallacy.

No, it's not.

> Twenty years ago the mass marketed mountain bike was brand new, and hardly anybody had accumulated
> enough skill to ride the things on terrain that today's riders call rough. But now you can find
> the occasional expert trail rider on a rigid fork who rides the same trails as his suspended
> riding partners with similar skill level, only he must ride the rocky and rutted sections a bit
> slower. And then he rides the smooth uphill sections quite a bit faster, so maybe it all evens out

This is so wrong for so many reasons. Firstly, the rider is me. I have both types of bikes. I have
my level of skill, for what it is (but it's the result of riding bokes for forty years, and in very
rough terrain for twenty). And I ride my local trails. I can ride my full suspension bike over
ground - the identical same ground - where I have to get off and carry the rigid. As you correctly
point out, I go faster on the suspension bike on rough ground. As you correctly point out, I go
faster on the suspension bike on downhills. But you wrongly assume I go slower on the suspension
bike on uphills. I don't.

I agree there are some woefully over-heavy downhill-specialist bikes out there. But a lightweight
full suspension bike will take you places that a rigid bike could never take you, and will make not
a smidgin of difference to your uphill speed. And by the time you've been in the saddle on hill
country tracks for six hours, you will definitely be noticing the difference.

> the lock-out is an admission of guilt

If you stay in the saddle and spin, you never need to touch the lockout lever.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

do not sail on uphill water
- Bill Lee

 

[Simon Brooke]

A Muzi <[email protected]> writes:

> > Al Frost:
>
> >> - Rear suspension for MTBs - I bet most are sold just 'cause they look "cool"
>
> Jose Rizal wrote:
> > No, most are sold because it allows more comfort on terrain which would knock hardtail riders
> > off their bikes. It's a machine for a special purpose.
>
> Jose, are you saying that you believe "most" of the 2 million or so XMart $129 full suspension
> bikes have actually left the pavement at least once? Or just that "most" of their owners bought
> them because they were "knocked off their bikes" with the previous XMart $89 hardtail model they
> formerly used for offroad downhill riding?
>
> It's for looks.

I would agree that the majority of the people who buy full suspension bikes - particularly cheap
ones - are never going to use them in situations where the suspension makes a critical difference,
and are probably never going to use them in situations where the cost/benefit makes any sort of
sense (whether you measure that cost in pounds sterling or in pounds avoir du pois). Never the less
full suspension is not 'just for looks'. For those of us who ride a significant proportion of our
miles off road it makes a real difference. It's not a difference which justifies a lot of weight -
a heavy bike is no use at all off road (unless you're going to use a ski-lift to get to the top
which seems to me to completely miss the point) but it is for me a difference which justifies quite
a lot of money.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

do not sail on uphill water
- Bill Lee

 

[Zaf]

[email protected] (Rik O'Shea) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Best & worst of cycling products

Biopace chain rings should be on the list. I'm not which one though.....

 

[Qui Si Parla Ca]

rokoshea-<< Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from
the past few years. >><BR><BR>

Must be the end of cylcing season for Rik...

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[David Damerell]

Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>(ii) Much better clips for bar bags.

And panniers, too - no more of those rubber bands with clips on the end.

>(iv) Flashing LED rear lights. They may not be strictly legal here in the UK yet, but they are so
> much more noticable that they are definitely my choice.

Right now they're just as legal as steady LED rears; ie, not at all.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!