Questions about Campy freewheel hubs

[Tom Nakashima]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Shimano hubs have their axle bearings at the outer end, unlike
> Campagnolo, where the right bearing is inboard and subjects the axle
> to "overhang" bending moment that arises from chain pull plus some
> rider weight. I say some rider weight because the greatest chain pull
> occurs when climbing or sprinting while standing with most rider
> weight on the front wheel. Chain pull is often greater than rider
> weight bearing on one end of the axle.
>
> Jobst Brandt

So this explains that a lighter cyclist could put more load on the rear
axle when climbing than a heavier rider riding on level roads?

One other question, when I torque the bike from side to side as
I sometimes do when standing while climbing steep hills, does that
put more of a load on the rear axle if any?
-tom

 

[Jay Beattie]

On Apr 20, 2:26 am, "* * Chas" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 19, 11:54 am, bfd <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Apr 19, 6:40 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]> wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff. Why agonize over a 130mm
> > Record FW rear-wheel with after-market axles that may or may not
> > break. Get an Ultegra rear for $40 (or whatever) a cassette and call
> > it good. And who really wants to friction shift anymore? So it can
> > be done, big deal. It's not like some spiritual act, unless you think
> > sitting down on a climb to feel around for your next gear gets you
> > closer to God. I don't think it does -- not any more than pulling my
> > foot out of a toe strap in a finishing sprint -- or having my hands
> > slip off Benotto bar tape (even multi-color, interwoven Benotto
> > tape). Some of these old conventions are better off dead --
> > particularly in the PNW where the "dust caps" on Record hubs would do
> > nothing to keep out the gallons of water I ride through regularly (but
> > not today, which is beautiful, so I am going to loop home through the
> > hills and be happy I have STI and lots of gears on my commuter).
>
> > And really, if you are going to go retro -- go full boat 120mm five
> > speed retro with 42/52 rings. Then when you are sitting down on that
> > climb, feeling around for your last gear, you can have that fun
> > realization (as the pitch increases to 15%) that you are already in
> > it. That is when you remember that your body is retro, too. -- Jay
> > Beattie.
>
> I really don't get all the plastic bike stuff. Why agonize over a carbon
> fiber reinforced epoxy frame with all those after market components that
> may or may not break without warning. Get a 12 lb. carbon fiber fixie and
> call it good. And who really wants to shift anymore? So it can be done,
> big deal. It's not like some spiritual act, for 50 years or more REAL men
> raced on single speeds and they didn't need 30 gears to pull unpaved
> alpine passes in the snow......
>
> Tullio Tullio... where art thou Tullio.

Tullio would say go modern (remember, he created modern in the '50s).

I am not hyping plastic bikes or bleeding edge technology -- and I
have no axe to grind with retro, although I do not see the fun in
building a bike that will collect dust in my garage. I don't have
that much space or disposable income, plus I did retro when it was
modern, so it is not like I am discovering past. I still have two
pairs of Record HF hubs on my track wheels -- one pair on old tied and
soldered Gold Labels. Can't get much more retro unless you go wood.

Again, I could see building a true period bike for riding in the
Fourth of July parade (responding to "still me's" comment about
vintage planes and cars), but a 130mm Record rear with a seven or
eight speed freewheel is not period. I am not going to point and
laugh at that set up, but it is just does not seem very cost effective
or practical or period. It is kind of like the worst of all worlds
with those crappy Record seals, a freewheel and the same old 130mm
tension issues (worse, assuming no addition of left side spacers), and
a long stressed axle without the support given by a freehub body. --
Jay.

 

[[email protected]]

Tom Nakashima writes:

>> Shimano hubs have their axle bearings at the outer end, unlike
>> Campagnolo, where the right bearing is inboard and subjects the
>> axle to "overhang" bending moment that arises from chain pull plus
>> some rider weight. I say some rider weight because the greatest
>> chain pull occurs when climbing or sprinting while standing with
>> most rider weight on the front wheel. Chain pull is often greater
>> than rider weight bearing on one end of the axle.

> So this explains that a lighter cyclist could put more load on the
> rear axle when climbing than a heavier rider riding on level roads?

> One other question, when I torque the bike from side to side as I
> sometimes do when standing while climbing steep hills, does that put
> more of a load on the rear axle if any?

The lean angle of the bicycle while sitting is insignificant and would
only affect that vertical load by the (1-cos) cosine of the angle, but
is isn't significant because when standing, there is less weight on
the rear wheel than when sitting so the chain pull remains the primary
culprit by a large margin.

Lean angles are not what they seem to be anyway, because when you
sight down through the front wheel, you'll notice that the tire
contact moves from side-to-side about the width of the front hub, and
angle of less than 6°.

Jobst Brandt

 

[* * Chas]

"Donald Gillies" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Jay Beattie <[email protected]> writes:
>
> >I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff. Why agonize over a 130mm
> >Record FW rear-wheel with after-market axles that may or may not
> >break. Get an Ultegra rear for $40 (or whatever) a cassette and call
> >it good. And who really wants to friction shift anymore?
>
> I personally think 2x7 = 14 gears is plenty for most applications, so
> I ride with 126mm rear hubs. And as for sneering at a 14-24 x 42-52,
> how about my 13-21 x 42x52 on San Diego hills? And yes, last month I
> passed ALL THE CARBON WEENIES on my 22 lbs 1977 Carlton on TORREY
> PINES ROAD, which is about an 8-10% grade, in my 54-inch low gear !!

That's great, good for you.

Most of my road bikes have 126mm rear hubs and 45x49 chainrings plus 6
sprocket 13-26T or 13-28T FWs for half step gearing.

I'm getting too long in the tooth to push those high gears on the hills so
I have 2 road bikes with tripples with 35 inch low gears for when I know
I'm going to do some climbing.

> An indexed shifting system of any quality would cost more than an
> entire retro bike. And, indexed shifting in many cases just
> compensates for rider weaknesses - I think that since about 1975 ITS
> THE ENGINE NOT REALLY THE DRIVETRAIN THAT MATTERS.

The manly art of derailleur shifting.... It's a god-like experience.
;-)

> So, I use friction shifting, and benefit from being able to shift 5x
> gears if I need to, and benefit from the lower maintenance and higher
> robustness. Yes, I do have to anticipate shifts a little more than an
> indexed shifting dude, but if you grew up on friction the benefits of
> indexed shifting are truly overrated.

Years ago I learned to shift both derailleurs at the same time with my
right hand, never any problems with 1/2 step gearing.

When I'm honking out of the saddle, I'm commited to using the gear I'm in.
Over shifting can lead to a nasty experience. I've had gears jam on my
MTBs when index shifting while honking.

Index shifting is wonderful for off-road riding and if you have more than
7 sprockets on the rear of a road bike. I don't see any need for index
front derailleurs as it usually requires trimming anyway.

> - Don Gillies
> San Diego, CA

Chas.

Chas.

 

[* * Chas]

"Tom Nakashima" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Donald Gillies" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Jay Beattie <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >>I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff. Why agonize over a 130mm
> >>Record FW rear-wheel with after-market axles that may or may not
> >>break. Get an Ultegra rear for $40 (or whatever) a cassette and call
> >>it good. And who really wants to friction shift anymore?
>
> Actually if you want to use the "friction" mode you can on the Shimano
> index DT shifters. At least you can on mine...and I have. Bit I find it
> easier to use the index IMHO to not have to worry about the sweetspot.
>
> >
> > I personally think 2x7 = 14 gears is plenty for most applications, so
> > I ride with 126mm rear hubs. And as for sneering at a 14-24 x 42-52,
> > how about my 13-21 x 42x52 on San Diego hills? And yes, last month I
> > passed ALL THE CARBON WEENIES on my 22 lbs 1977 Carlton on TORREY
> > PINES ROAD, which is about an 8-10% grade, in my 54-inch low gear !!
>
> Does it really matter who's fastest up the hill?
>
> >
> > An indexed shifting system of any quality would cost more than an
> > entire retro bike. And, indexed shifting in many cases just
> > compensates for rider weaknesses - I think that since about 1975 ITS
> > THE ENGINE NOT REALLY THE DRIVETRAIN THAT MATTERS.
>
> I wouldn't consider indexed shifting a rider's weakness, just a personal
> preference.
>
> > So, I use friction shifting, and benefit from being able to shift 5x
> > gears if I need to, and benefit from the lower maintenance and higher
> > robustness. Yes, I do have to anticipate shifts a little more than an
> > indexed shifting dude, but if you grew up on friction the benefits of
> > indexed shifting are truly overrated.
>
> Fixedgear riders in general find any type of shifting overrated.
>
> > With my ultegra 6700 indexed gears I would throw the chain off the
> > front chainrings once per week, because indexed systems CANNOT shift
> > both the front and back gears at the same time! LIABILITY ! That's
> > one of the many disadvantages of indexing that most people never talk
> > about ...
> > - Don Gillies
> > San Diego, CA
>
> Don, you're telling us how good a shifter you are with friction
shifters.
> Yet you're saying that you throw the chain off the front once per
> week on your ultegra 6700???
> 52 weeks in a year....
> I mean how many times do you have
> to do this to understand that you can't shift both the front and back
gear
> at the same time?
> -tom

I double shift with friction shifters all the time using 1/2 step gearing.
I shift both derailleurs with my right hand using DT levers. I have
Simplex retrofriction levers on a number of bikes. They make it easy.

Chas.

 

[* * Chas]

"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Apr 20, 2:26 am, "* * Chas" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > On Apr 19, 11:54 am, bfd <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Apr 19, 6:40 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]>
<snip>
> >
> > Tullio Tullio... where art thou Tullio.
>
> Tullio would say go modern (remember, he created modern in the '50s).
>

No, Tullio would say " Uma gonna make u a deal - BUY MY STUFF!" ;-)

> I am not hyping plastic bikes or bleeding edge technology -- and I
> have no axe to grind with retro, although I do not see the fun in
> building a bike that will collect dust in my garage. I don't have
> that much space or disposable income, plus I did retro when it was
> modern, so it is not like I am discovering past. I still have two
> pairs of Record HF hubs on my track wheels -- one pair on old tied and
> soldered Gold Labels. Can't get much more retro unless you go wood.
>
> Again, I could see building a true period bike for riding in the
> Fourth of July parade (responding to "still me's" comment about
> vintage planes and cars), but a 130mm Record rear with a seven or
> eight speed freewheel is not period. I am not going to point and
> laugh at that set up, but it is just does not seem very cost effective
> or practical or period. It is kind of like the worst of all worlds
> with those crappy Record seals, a freewheel and the same old 130mm
> tension issues (worse, assuming no addition of left side spacers), and
> a long stressed axle without the support given by a freehub body. --
> Jay.
>
I'm not knocking Composite bikes or modern components (maybe taking a few
pot shots at those faddist who have to have the latest new toys).

I'm pretty familiar with bikes from the 1960s through the early 1980s. I
ask questions in this NG about features and technologies that came out
after my time working in the industry. Most of the members have been very
helpful.

Over the years I've seen a lot of bikes that I liked or lusted over. In my
supernumerary position I have a little more disposable income and I've
been collecting older bikes from the early 1970s through the mid 1990s. I
enjoy getting a frame, doing a treasure hunt to find just the right
components then assembling them. It's a hobby.

I do ride all of them regularly. Most of my bikes have some cosmetic
issues like a little rust or light scratches. I don't ride bikes that are
too pretty, I end up just look at them. Since I build these for riding
pleasure they tend to be frankenbikes with mixed brands of top of the line
period components. For example I have 3 Colnagos, there's very few if any
Campy parts on them.

I've recently acquired several classic frames in mint condition from the
mid to late 1980s. I'm going to build them up with all Campy period
components. Super Record was still correct for both of these bikes. I'll
probably only ride these on special occasions but I will ride them.

It's a really great to ride a bike that I've assembled, especially the
frames that I built myself.

I wasn't able to ride for a number of years because of some physical
issues. It's a joy to be back in the saddle again. So enjoy being a
hammerhead and I'll enjoy being a retro-grouch.

Chas.

 

[* * Chas]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Tom Nakashima writes:

>> Shimano hubs have their axle bearings at the outer end, unlike
>> Campagnolo, where the right bearing is inboard and subjects the
>> axle to "overhang" bending moment that arises from chain pull plus
>> some rider weight. I say some rider weight because the greatest
>> chain pull occurs when climbing or sprinting while standing with
>> most rider weight on the front wheel. Chain pull is often greater
>> than rider weight bearing on one end of the axle.

> So this explains that a lighter cyclist could put more load on the
> rear axle when climbing than a heavier rider riding on level roads?

> One other question, when I torque the bike from side to side as I
> sometimes do when standing while climbing steep hills, does that put
> more of a load on the rear axle if any?

The lean angle of the bicycle while sitting is insignificant and would
only affect that vertical load by the (1-cos) cosine of the angle, but
is isn't significant because when standing, there is less weight on
the rear wheel than when sitting so the chain pull remains the primary
culprit by a large margin.

Lean angles are not what they seem to be anyway, because when you
sight down through the front wheel, you'll notice that the tire
contact moves from side-to-side about the width of the front hub, and
angle of less than 6°.

Jobst Brandt

You are forgetting about the effect of inertia from throwing the bike side
to side.

Chas.

 

[* * Chas]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Apr 19, 12:54 pm, bfd <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Apr 19, 6:40 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> I was talking about Chas' blaanket statement of-"If you are strong or
> heavy, then a freewheel-style hub may not be the
> > best thing to get as you will break axles. If that is the case, then
> > find get yourself a good cassette hub. Good Luck!

Peter,

Not me, someone else's blanket statement.

I AM strong and I AM heavy and If I ever broke an axle it was on an old
Normandy or other cheap Bike Boom hub.

I bent a few Campy and Shimano axles on FW hubs riding off road in the
mountains of Southern CO and Northern NM. We rode hard and did a lot of
jumping and pseudo-cyclocross stuff.

I only bent the axles on my cyclocross sewup wheels not my 700c clincher
wheels with 700c x 35 tires. I fixed the problem by switching to track
rear axles. The larger tires must have absorbed some of the shock.

Chas.

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
Jay Beattie <[email protected]> wrote:

> I did retro when it was modern

LOL!

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dans le message de news:[email protected],
> * * Chas <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
> > I really don't get all the plastic bike stuff. Why agonize over a
> > carbon fiber reinforced epoxy frame
>
> Perhaps you would be more accurate in saying a carbon-fibre structure held
> together in a polymer matrix ? Unless you didn't mean anything denigrating
> by using the term "plastic". I'm not sure that you can properly use the
> term "plastic", but in this forum, I am sure someone will show me I'm wrong.

But you know you are right, and you are. Recent discussion. The
matrix is plastic until the polymer cross links, whereupon it
becomes a two-phase material: a brittle fibre in an elastic
matrix. Bone, bamboo, fiberglass, "carbonfibre" are examples. In
fact the matrix must not be plastic in the technical sense in
order that the material be suitable for mechanical structures.

In the USA objects made from cross linked polymers are often
called plastic. That is all.

--
Michael Press

 

[Dane Buson]

still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2007 17:54:14 -0700, Jay Beattie <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff.
>
> Why restore and drive classic cars? Why do people fly vintage
> aeroplanes?

<tongue location="cheek">
I don't know. They have too much money and are trying to get rid of it?
It would be much more time effective for them to buy a boat IMO.
</tongue>

> It's not because they haven't made "improvements" in both
> technologies.

Well, one thing about the classic cars is they are less locked down and
require less equipment (generally) to work on.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that
would also stop you from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn

 

[Dane Buson]

Tom Nakashima <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Donald Gillies" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Jay Beattie <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>>I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff. Why agonize over a 130mm
>>>Record FW rear-wheel with after-market axles that may or may not
>>>break. Get an Ultegra rear for $40 (or whatever) a cassette and call
>>>it good. And who really wants to friction shift anymore?
>
> Actually if you want to use the "friction" mode you can on the Shimano
> index DT shifters. At least you can on mine...and I have. Bit I find it
> easier to use the index IMHO to not have to worry about the sweetspot.

I've found it's nice especially when I need to borrow a wheel with a
different number of speeds in the rear cluster. I popped off my broken
nine speed wheel, filched the eight speed from my wifes bike, changed to
friction and rode away.

I did get in trouble later when she wanted to ride it later that week
admittedly...

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
The primary purpose of the DATA statement is to give names to constants;
instead of referring to pi as 3.141592653589793 at every appearance, the
variable PI can be given that value with a DATA statement and used instead
of the longer form of the constant. This also simplifies modifying the
program, should the value of pi change.
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers

 

[A Muzi]

>> On 19 Apr 2007 17:54:14 -0700, Jay Beattie <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff.

> still me <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Why restore and drive classic cars? Why do people fly vintage
>> aeroplanes?

Dane Buson wrote:
> <tongue location="cheek">
> I don't know. They have too much money and are trying to get rid of it?
> It would be much more time effective for them to buy a boat IMO.
> </tongue>

> still me <[email protected]> wrote:
>> It's not because they haven't made "improvements" in both
>> technologies.

Dane Buson wrote:
> Well, one thing about the classic cars is they are less locked down and
> require less equipment (generally) to work on.

Ha! You have absolutely no experience on that subject.
-former MGB, Fiat, AMC, BMW etc owner/adversary/victim/driver/survivor
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Apr 21, 9:42 am, A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On 19 Apr 2007 17:54:14 -0700, Jay Beattie <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>> I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff.
> > still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Why restore and drive classic cars? Why do people fly vintage
> >> aeroplanes?
> Dane Buson wrote:
> > <tongue location="cheek">
> > I don't know. They have too much money and are trying to get rid of it?
> > It would be much more time effective for them to buy a boat IMO.
> > </tongue>
> > still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> It's not because they haven't made "improvements" in both
> >> technologies.
> Dane Buson wrote:
> > Well, one thing about the classic cars is they are less locked down and
> > require less equipment (generally) to work on.
>
> Ha! You have absolutely no experience on that subject.
> -former MGB, Fiat, AMC, BMW etc owner/adversary/victim/driver/survivor
> --

If you can survive MGs and Fiat Group cars, you can survive anything!
(I also survived Peugeots and Renaults....)

 

[* * Chas]

"Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 19 Apr 2007 17:54:14 -0700, Jay Beattie <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff.
> >
> > Why restore and drive classic cars? Why do people fly vintage
> > aeroplanes?
>
> <tongue location="cheek">
> I don't know. They have too much money and are trying to get rid of it?
> It would be much more time effective for them to buy a boat IMO.
> </tongue>
>
<snip>

Definitions of sailing:

1. A wood or fiberglass lined hole in the water where you through your
money away.

2. standing in the shower with your clothes on thowing out $100 bills....



Chas.

> Dane Buson - [email protected]
> UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that
> would also stop you from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn
(Our company recently switched from AIX to MickeySoft - what a nightmare!)

 

[* * Chas]

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Apr 21, 9:42 am, A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> On 19 Apr 2007 17:54:14 -0700, Jay Beattie
<[email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff.
> > > still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> Why restore and drive classic cars? Why do people fly vintage
> > >> aeroplanes?
> > Dane Buson wrote:
> > > <tongue location="cheek">
> > > I don't know. They have too much money and are trying to get rid of
it?
> > > It would be much more time effective for them to buy a boat IMO.
> > > </tongue>
> > > still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> It's not because they haven't made "improvements" in both
> > >> technologies.
> > Dane Buson wrote:
> > > Well, one thing about the classic cars is they are less locked down
and
> > > require less equipment (generally) to work on.
> >
> > Ha! You have absolutely no experience on that subject.
> > -former MGB, Fiat, AMC, BMW etc owner/adversary/victim/driver/survivor
> > --
>
> If you can survive MGs and Fiat Group cars, you can survive anything!
> (I also survived Peugeots and Renaults....)
>

This is starting to sound like an AA meeting..... Autoholics Anonymous.
;-)

Chas.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Apr 21, 11:49 am, "* * Chas" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Ozark Bicycle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...> On Apr 21, 9:42 am, A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> On 19 Apr 2007 17:54:14 -0700, Jay Beattie
>
> <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>> I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff.
> > > > still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> Why restore and drive classic cars? Why do people fly vintage
> > > >> aeroplanes?
> > > Dane Buson wrote:
> > > > <tongue location="cheek">
> > > > I don't know. They have too much money and are trying to get rid of
> it?
> > > > It would be much more time effective for them to buy a boat IMO.
> > > > </tongue>
> > > > still me <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> It's not because they haven't made "improvements" in both
> > > >> technologies.
> > > Dane Buson wrote:
> > > > Well, one thing about the classic cars is they are less locked down
> and
> > > > require less equipment (generally) to work on.
>
> > > Ha! You have absolutely no experience on that subject.
> > > -former MGB, Fiat, AMC, BMW etc owner/adversary/victim/driver/survivor
> > > --
>
> > If you can survive MGs and Fiat Group cars, you can survive anything!
> > (I also survived Peugeots and Renaults....)
>
> This is starting to sound like an AA meeting..... Autoholics Anonymous.
> ;-)
>

Suffering on the rack......& pinion! ;-))

 

[Jay Beattie]

On Apr 20, 10:06 am, [email protected] (Donald Gillies) wrote:
> Jay Beattie <[email protected]> writes:
> >I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff. Why agonize over a 130mm
> >Record FW rear-wheel with after-market axles that may or may not
> >break. Get an Ultegra rear for $40 (or whatever) a cassette and call
> >it good. And who really wants to friction shift anymore?
>
> I personally think 2x7 = 14 gears is plenty for most applications, so
> I ride with 126mm rear hubs. And as for sneering at a 14-24 x 42-52,
> how about my 13-21 x 42x52 on San Diego hills? And yes, last month I
> passed ALL THE CARBON WEENIES on my 22 lbs 1977 Carlton on TORREY
> PINES ROAD, which is about an 8-10% grade, in my 54-inch low gear !!

Man, I'm talking about the real good old days -- 42/52 and 13-19 (or
21) five speed. Seven speed was styling. Now that I am old, though,
a 39/21 will not cut it for some of the steep stuff around here -- and
I just have to accept the fact that I can either get lower gears or
plastic knees.
>
> An indexed shifting system of any quality would cost more than an
> entire retro bike. And, indexed shifting in many cases just
> compensates for rider weaknesses - I think that since about 1975 ITS
> THE ENGINE NOT REALLY THE DRIVETRAIN THAT MATTERS.

What rider weakness? Sure, friction shifting is a skill, particularly
back in the day when you had to really think ahead in a race. But it
is now a skill like shaving with a straight razor -- one you do not
need and one that does not yeild a better result.

>
> So, I use friction shifting, and benefit from being able to shift 5x
> gears if I need to, and benefit from the lower maintenance and higher
> robustness. Yes, I do have to anticipate shifts a little more than an
> indexed shifting dude, but if you grew up on friction the benefits of
> indexed shifting are truly overrated.

I grew up on friction, and the benefits of STI are not overrated for
me because I climb out of the saddle and always hated to sit and
shift. It ruined my rhythm. I shift a lot more now, too, which keeps
me more fresh climbing. It made a huge difference when I was racing,
particularly on the hilly circuit races around her like Mt. Tabor
where you basically sprint over the top out of the saddle while
downshifting for the down hill. I rode that friction and STI, and it
made a huge difference.
>
> With my ultegra 6700 indexed gears I would throw the chain off the
> front chainrings once per week, because indexed systems CANNOT shift
> both the front and back gears at the same time! LIABILITY ! That's
> one of the many disadvantages of indexing that most people never talk
> about ...

Do you shift front and real at the same time? I don't think I did that
even when I had friction shifters, but I might have on the Cat's Hill
or something -- I just don't recall. Anyway, its not part of my
ordinary repetoire. I do agree that Shimano FDs don't have much trim,
which is a benefit of Campagnolo.

Hey, if friction floats your boat -- go for it. But I do not miss it
at all. I think STI/Ergo shifters are huge improvement, not
withstanding durability issues (which everyone likes to debate). --
Jay Beattie.

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 21, 7:12 pm, Jay Beattie <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 20, 10:06 am, [email protected] (Donald Gillies) wrote:
> > Jay Beattie <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > I personally think 2x7 = 14 gears is plenty for most applications, so
> > I ride with 126mm rear hubs. And as for sneering at a 14-24 x 42-52,
> > how about my 13-21 x 42x52 on San Diego hills? And yes, last month I
> > passed ALL THE CARBON WEENIES on my 22 lbs 1977 Carlton on TORREY
> > PINES ROAD, which is about an 8-10% grade, in my 54-inch low gear !!
>
> Man, I'm talking about the real good old days -- 42/52 and 13-19 (or
> 21) five speed. Seven speed was styling. Now that I am old, though,
> a 39/21 will not cut it for some of the steep stuff around here -- and
> I just have to accept the fact that I can either get lower gears or
> plastic knees.

Dude, plastic knees are such disposable trendy fashion. I mean,
there are posers out there with carbon and titanium knees, but if
you really want stylish joints that will stand the test of time,
you need lugged steel knees.

I never get this thing (which Donald exhibited, but not to single
him out) about saying it's the engine that matters (which is
surely true) and simultaneously talking about passing the
carbon weenies on a hill. It's the engine that matters, not their
frame material anyway, and passing people proves little unless
you're actually in a race. When I pass people or get passed
I rarely notice their frame material, unless it's an unusual
or classic bike. I'm usually checking out their calf muscles
rather than the bike, anyway.

Ben

 

[* * Chas]

"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Apr 20, 10:06 am, [email protected] (Donald Gillies) wrote:
> > Jay Beattie <[email protected]> writes:
> > >I really don't get all the retro-bike stuff. Why agonize over a
130mm
> > >Record FW rear-wheel with after-market axles that may or may not
> > >break. Get an Ultegra rear for $40 (or whatever) a cassette and call
> > >it good. And who really wants to friction shift anymore?
> >
> > I personally think 2x7 = 14 gears is plenty for most applications, so
> > I ride with 126mm rear hubs. And as for sneering at a 14-24 x 42-52,
> > how about my 13-21 x 42x52 on San Diego hills? And yes, last month I
> > passed ALL THE CARBON WEENIES on my 22 lbs 1977 Carlton on TORREY
> > PINES ROAD, which is about an 8-10% grade, in my 54-inch low gear !!
>
> Man, I'm talking about the real good old days -- 42/52 and 13-19 (or
> 21) five speed. Seven speed was styling. Now that I am old, though,
> a 39/21 will not cut it for some of the steep stuff around here -- and
> I just have to accept the fact that I can either get lower gears or
> plastic knees.
> >
> > An indexed shifting system of any quality would cost more than an
> > entire retro bike. And, indexed shifting in many cases just
> > compensates for rider weaknesses - I think that since about 1975 ITS
> > THE ENGINE NOT REALLY THE DRIVETRAIN THAT MATTERS.
>
> What rider weakness? Sure, friction shifting is a skill, particularly
> back in the day when you had to really think ahead in a race. But it
> is now a skill like shaving with a straight razor -- one you do not
> need and one that does not yeild a better result.
>
> >
> > So, I use friction shifting, and benefit from being able to shift 5x
> > gears if I need to, and benefit from the lower maintenance and higher
> > robustness. Yes, I do have to anticipate shifts a little more than an
> > indexed shifting dude, but if you grew up on friction the benefits of
> > indexed shifting are truly overrated.
>
> I grew up on friction, and the benefits of STI are not overrated for
> me because I climb out of the saddle and always hated to sit and
> shift. It ruined my rhythm. I shift a lot more now, too, which keeps
> me more fresh climbing. It made a huge difference when I was racing,
> particularly on the hilly circuit races around her like Mt. Tabor
> where you basically sprint over the top out of the saddle while
> downshifting for the down hill. I rode that friction and STI, and it
> made a huge difference.
> >
> > With my ultegra 6700 indexed gears I would throw the chain off the
> > front chainrings once per week, because indexed systems CANNOT shift
> > both the front and back gears at the same time! LIABILITY ! That's
> > one of the many disadvantages of indexing that most people never talk
> > about ...
>
> Do you shift front and real at the same time? I don't think I did that
> even when I had friction shifters, but I might have on the Cat's Hill
> or something -- I just don't recall. Anyway, its not part of my
> ordinary repetoire. I do agree that Shimano FDs don't have much trim,
> which is a benefit of Campagnolo.
>
> Hey, if friction floats your boat -- go for it. But I do not miss it
> at all. I think STI/Ergo shifters are huge improvement, not
> withstanding durability issues (which everyone likes to debate). --
> Jay Beattie.
>

Mt. Tabor in Portland, OR, Vermont, North Carolina or Israel?

I live at ~200' above sea level (~60m). The hills directly behind my home
go up to ~1500' (~450m) in about 3 miles - less as the crow flies. I
haven't done much serious climbing in years. My goal for this year is to
make it non stop up several of the roads to the top (Skyline Dr. in the
East Bay). I'll probably do it on a MTB with an STI rear derailleurs and
granny gears.

I switched to STI on my MTB in the early 1990s. It was such an improvement
over a friction thumb shift lever for the rear derailleur.

For years I've ridden with half step gearing on my road bikes. I find it
easy to double shift front and rear derailleurs at the same time with down
tube friction shifters using my right hand.

I built my first 7 speed road bike last summer. It has a 12-26T cassette
with a 48/38/28 triple in the front. I have a mid range STI rear
derailleur with Suntour downtube index shift levers. I modified a 7 speed
cassette to work on a 6 speed freehub so the sprockets are close together.
I imagine friction shifting would be a PIA with that setup.

I used to ride at a cadence of 90 RPM . I'm back up to about 65-70 now.
I'm starting to appreciate the potential of a close ratio 8, 9 or 10 speed
cassette for maintaining cadence. I would definitely use index shifting if
I ever went that way.

For what I've spent on retro stuff over the past year I could have bought
a top end carbon, aluminum or Ti bike... but I'd feel stupid riding one of
them, like one of the "Microsoft Bikers" on their full dress hawgs hanging
out down in Pioneer Square.

Besides, the retros give me an excuse for being old and slow. ;-)

Chas.