Spare parts?

Doug said:

Is this sort of thing common? If so, shouldn't the availabilty of
spares be investgated before buying a bike? Is there deliberate
built-in obsolescence with bikes these days?

Designs change unfortunately and parts become obsolete. Yes it's common
though four years seems like a short time frame, I suspect your bike
had obsolete parts when you got it. Perhaps you should have
investigated the availability of spares its your call. Dunno about
built in obsolesence these days, I haven't bought a new bike for 9
years and the parts on that bike are still available.

Doug said:

I have a four year old hybrid by a well known British manufacturer. The
rear rim was a bit worn so I went to the dealer who sold me the bike
for a replacement. He offered me a 32 spoke wheel in place of the
original 36, or a hollow axled wheel in place of the solid, which would
require a completely new set of gears and shifters. For reasons too
complicated to go into here I wanted neither, just a normal, standard
replacement for the original. No such luck! Neither the manufacturer or
the dealer was willing to give me such a replacement.

They are hard to find. There was a paradigm shift about ten years ago
(+/- 5 years depending on which segment of the market) when wheels
moved from having a 'gears and freewheel' as a replaceable unit to
combining the freewheel with the hub (freehub)and having just the gears
as a replaceable unit (casssette). This made good engineering and good
financial sense. They are also much easier to change when they wear
out.

Quoted message said:

Is this sort of thing common? If so, shouldn't the availabilty of
spares be investgated before buying a bike? Is there deliberate
built-in obsolescence with bikes these days?

All designs evolve. Bikes have moved from 6 gears (earliest cassette
hubs IIRC) to ten gears now. These designs are incompatible at the
sprocket spacing level, but the freehub part of the hub can be swapped
to upgrade a wheel. As cassettes get to have more gears, they seem to
last for less time.

Quoted message said:

My story has a happy ending. After a considerable shopping around I
found a suitable wheel and managed to remove the screw on sprockets
from the old wheel, with a large ring spanner combined with a massive
adjustable wrench, which left me with a healthy respect for the amazing
strength of spoked wheels. After all that violent abuse the original
wheel ran as true as ever.

Spoked wheels are very strong. There are appropriate freewheel removers
that make removal of the freewheel much easier.

...d

Doug said:

I have a four year old hybrid by a well known British manufacturer.
The rear rim was a bit worn so I went to the dealer who sold me the
bike for a replacement. He offered me a 32 spoke wheel in place of the
original 36, or a hollow axled wheel in place of the solid, which
would require a completely new set of gears and shifters. For reasons
too complicated to go into here I wanted neither, just a normal,
standard replacement for the original. No such luck! Neither the
manufacturer or the dealer was willing to give me such a replacement.

Is this sort of thing common? If so, shouldn't the availabilty of
spares be investgated before buying a bike? Is there deliberate
built-in obsolescence with bikes these days?

Your problem was more with the shop than the wheel because any decent shop
could have ordered a replacement (or parts to build one). Some new bikes
are still sold with freewheel hubs and spares can still be found. In fact
a /good/ shop would have offered to just replace the rim: easier than
building a wheel from scratch.

Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Quoted message said:

My story has a happy ending. After a considerable shopping around I
found a suitable wheel and managed to remove the screw on sprockets
from the old wheel, with a large ring spanner combined with a massive
adjustable wrench, which left me with a healthy respect for the
amazing strength of spoked wheels. After all that violent abuse the
original wheel ran as true as ever.

'Spose that's one way to stress relieve it ;-)

~PB

in message <[email hidden]>,

Doug (') said:

I have a four year old hybrid by a well known British manufacturer. The
rear rim was a bit worn so I went to the dealer who sold me the bike
for a replacement. He offered me a 32 spoke wheel in place of the
original 36, or a hollow axled wheel in place of the solid, which would
require a completely new set of gears and shifters. For reasons too
complicated to go into here I wanted neither, just a normal, standard
replacement for the original. No such luck! Neither the manufacturer or
the dealer was willing to give me such a replacement.

Thing is, if the original had a screw-on free-wheel, it wasn't 'standard'
or 'normal' and hasn't been for some years. They're still around on the
cheapest, lowest quality bikes, but they've been obsolete for a long
time now.

Quoted message said:

My story has a happy ending. After a considerable shopping around I
found a suitable wheel and managed to remove the screw on sprockets
from the old wheel, with a large ring spanner combined with a massive
adjustable wrench, which left me with a healthy respect for the amazing
strength of spoked wheels.

That's /why/ screw-on free-wheels are obsolete. The hubs are a lot weaker
than cassette hubs, and the free-wheel tightens in use, making it
exceptionally difficult to remove. This isn't 'built in obsolescence';
it's a very poor design being replaced by darwinian pressures.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
; ... of course nothing said here will be taken notice of by
; the W3C. The official place to be ignored is on www-style or
; www-html. -- George Lund

Pete Biggs said:

Doug said:

I have a four year old hybrid by a well known British manufacturer.
The rear rim was a bit worn so I went to the dealer who sold me the
bike for a replacement. He offered me a 32 spoke wheel in place of the
original 36, or a hollow axled wheel in place of the solid, which
would require a completely new set of gears and shifters. For reasons
too complicated to go into here I wanted neither, just a normal,
standard replacement for the original. No such luck! Neither the
manufacturer or the dealer was willing to give me such a replacement.

Is this sort of thing common? If so, shouldn't the availabilty of
spares be investgated before buying a bike? Is there deliberate
built-in obsolescence with bikes these days?

Your problem was more with the shop than the wheel because any decent shop
could have ordered a replacement (or parts to build one). Some new bikes
are still sold with freewheel hubs and spares can still be found. In fact
a /good/ shop would have offered to just replace the rim: easier than
building a wheel from scratch.

Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as strong.
Also, where the axle fits into the frame looks substantial. No doubt it
is OK for everage use but I am using the bike to carry a heavy load.

Doug.

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as strong.
Also, where the axle fits into the frame looks substantial. No doubt it
is OK for everage use but I am using the bike to carry a heavy load.

Beware common sense - it isn't necessarily helpful.

A thick tube like a hollow axle is pretty much as strong as the solid
cylinder.

I bet the load your bike is carrying is less than the load on our tandem
hubs - and they've got hollow axles.

Of course a non-freewheel hub is a lot stronger too - and the hollow-axled
wheel offered to you by your LBS could well have been one of those. Do you
know any more about what sort it was?

Re your actual problem - the bike shop was selling you what they had, not
what's available. You can get replacement wheels of the sort you had pretty
easily.

Also don't try the manufacturer for spares - with a few exception, they
won't be helpful.

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as strong.
Also, where the axle fits into the frame looks substantial. No doubt it
is OK for everage use but I am using the bike to carry a heavy load.

Beware common sense - it isn't necessarily helpful.

A thick tube like a hollow axle is pretty much as strong as the solid
cylinder.

I bet the load your bike is carrying is less than the load on our tandem
hubs - and they've got hollow axles.

Are tandem axles the same diameter as singles? The load on my rear
wheel is about 100kg. I am paranoid about breaking down because I can't
walk very far. However, I have now joined ETA bike rescue, just in
case.

Quoted message said:

Of course a non-freewheel hub is a lot stronger too - and the hollow-axled
wheel offered to you by your LBS could well have been one of those. Do you
know any more about what sort it was?

They said the freewheel hub was stronger!

Quoted message said:

Re your actual problem - the bike shop was selling you what they had, not
what's available. You can get replacement wheels of the sort you had pretty
easily.

Also don't try the manufacturer for spares - with a few exception, they
won't be helpful.

A useful lesson learned.

Doug.

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I bet the load your bike is carrying is less than the load on our tandem
hubs - and they've got hollow axles.

Are tandem axles the same diameter as singles? The load on my rear
wheel is about 100kg.

Mostly, yes. We used a standard rear hub on the MTB tandem without any axle
problems.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Of course a non-freewheel hub is a lot stronger too - and the
hollow-axled
wheel offered to you by your LBS could well have been one of those. Do
you
know any more about what sort it was?

They said the freewheel hub was stronger!

Are we talking at cross purposes here? A freewheel hub is one which takes a
separate freewheel, which screws on. A freehub has the ratchet mechanism
built in. Here's a usefil article about them from the usual source:

http://sheldonbrown.com/free-k7.html

And another one

http://sheldonbrown.com/k7.html

explains why the freehub variety is stronger.

If you're really loading your back wheel as much as you say, I'd recommend
you invest in a decent back wheel. Probably one with a shimano hub, deore or
above. 36 spokes, and a decent rim. Most importantly, get it properly
handbuilt by a decent builder.

(hmm - how wide is your frame across the dropouts? recommendation above
assumes 135mm)

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

If you're really loading your back wheel as much as you say, I'd
recommend you invest in a decent back wheel. Probably one with a shimano
hub, deore or above. 36 spokes, and a decent rim. Most importantly, get
it properly handbuilt by a decent builder.

Quite. Being a lardy git (110 kg) I went through rear wheels and axles
at an alarming rate when I had a screw-on block; every time I hit a
decent-ish pothole (of which there are plenty hereabouts) I ended up
with either a bent axle, broken spokes, or both. After getting fed up
inserting new axles only to find the spokes beyond repair or vice versa,
I Saw The Light (ie, started to read u.r.c) and bought a handbuilt more
or less as Clive suggests above with a cassette. In the 5 years I've
had it, it's barely gone out of true more than a couple of mm between
yearly services, and had a grand total of one broken spoke.

R.

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pete Biggs said:

Doug said:

I have a four year old hybrid by a well known British manufacturer.
The rear rim was a bit worn so I went to the dealer who sold me the
bike for a replacement. He offered me a 32 spoke wheel in place of the
original 36, or a hollow axled wheel in place of the solid, which
would require a completely new set of gears and shifters. For reasons
too complicated to go into here I wanted neither, just a normal,
standard replacement for the original. No such luck! Neither the
manufacturer or the dealer was willing to give me such a replacement.

Is this sort of thing common? If so, shouldn't the availabilty of
spares be investgated before buying a bike? Is there deliberate
built-in obsolescence with bikes these days?

Your problem was more with the shop than the wheel because any decent
shop
could have ordered a replacement (or parts to build one). Some new bikes
are still sold with freewheel hubs and spares can still be found. In
fact
a /good/ shop would have offered to just replace the rim: easier than
building a wheel from scratch.

Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as strong.
Also, where the axle fits into the frame looks substantial. No doubt it
is OK for everage use but I am using the bike to carry a heavy load.

Not by a lot. Hence everything that needs to be lightweight and strong being
made of tubes - race and rally roll cages, spaceframe chassis, and bike
frames...

In message <[email hidden]>

Richard said:

Clive George said:

If you're really loading your back wheel as much as you say, I'd
recommend you invest in a decent back wheel. Probably one with a shimano
hub, deore or above. 36 spokes, and a decent rim. Most importantly, get
it properly handbuilt by a decent builder.

Quite. Being a lardy git (110 kg) I went through rear wheels and axles
at an alarming rate when I had a screw-on block; every time I hit a
decent-ish pothole (of which there are plenty hereabouts) I ended up
with either a bent axle, broken spokes, or both. After getting fed up
inserting new axles only to find the spokes beyond repair or vice versa,
I Saw The Light (ie, started to read u.r.c) and bought a handbuilt more
or less as Clive suggests above with a cassette. In the 5 years I've
had it, it's barely gone out of true more than a couple of mm between
yearly services, and had a grand total of one broken spoke.

Depends on the hub. Mavic 501 hubs with freewheel and oversize hollow
axle are pretty indistructable

Quoted message said:

R.

--
Gwyn

in message <[email hidden]>,

Doug (') said:

Pete Biggs said:

Doug said:

I have a four year old hybrid by a well known British manufacturer.
The rear rim was a bit worn so I went to the dealer who sold me the
bike for a replacement. He offered me a 32 spoke wheel in place of
the original 36, or a hollow axled wheel in place of the solid,
which would require a completely new set of gears and shifters.

Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as strong.

Common sense is, as usual, wrong. Hollow axles are usually stronger. That
(again) is why solid axles are now obsolete except on the very cheapest
bikes.

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

;; Life would be much easier if I had the source code.

in message <[email hidden]>,

Doug (') said:

Clive George said:

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

> Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.

Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as
strong. Also, where the axle fits into the frame looks substantial.
No doubt it is OK for everage use but I am using the bike to carry a
heavy load.

Beware common sense - it isn't necessarily helpful.

A thick tube like a hollow axle is pretty much as strong as the solid
cylinder.

Usually stronger, because the solid ones are made of the cheapest
possible materials.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Of course a non-freewheel hub is a lot stronger too - and the
hollow-axled wheel offered to you by your LBS could well have been one
of those. Do you know any more about what sort it was?

They said the freewheel hub was stronger!

They were right. The hollow axle will be stronger, too.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
.::;===r==\
/ /___||___\____
//==\- ||- | /__\( MS Windows IS an operating environment.
//____\__||___|_// \|: C++ IS an object oriented programming language.
\__/ ~~~~~~~~~ \__/ Citroen 2cv6 IS a four door family saloon.

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

Doug (') said:

Clive George said:

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

>> Hollow axle would have been ok if right type & length.
>
> Common sense suggests that if there is less metal it is not as
> strong. Also, where the axle fits into the frame looks substantial.
> No doubt it is OK for everage use but I am using the bike to carry a
> heavy load.

Beware common sense - it isn't necessarily helpful.

A thick tube like a hollow axle is pretty much as strong as the solid
cylinder.

Usually stronger, because the solid ones are made of the cheapest
possible materials.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Of course a non-freewheel hub is a lot stronger too - and the
hollow-axled wheel offered to you by your LBS could well have been one
of those. Do you know any more about what sort it was?

They said the freewheel hub was stronger!

They were right. The hollow axle will be stronger, too.

How can this be? Take a hollow axle, insert in it a tight fitting metal
rod and surely it becomes stronger?

Doug.

Doug said:

Simon Brooke said:

They were right. The hollow axle will be stronger, too.

How can this be? Take a hollow axle, insert in it a tight fitting metal
rod and surely it becomes stronger?

Theoretically, yes. However, hollow axles are generally made with
higher-quality steel, which offsets the small weakening effect of
removing a rod from the centre. The centre doesn't actually add much to
the strength of the axle anyway under a bending force.

At least, that is the commonly-stated explanation for the somewhat
counterintuitive but apparently reliably-observed phenomenon that
hollow axles are stronger. It's not something I have direct experience
of.

James

Clive George said:

"[[[Doug]]]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I bet the load your bike is carrying is less than the load on our tandem
hubs - and they've got hollow axles.

Are tandem axles the same diameter as singles? The load on my rear
wheel is about 100kg.

Mostly, yes. We used a standard rear hub on the MTB tandem without any axle
problems.

Mostly? MTB stuff is probably stronger anyway but I don't like the high
rolling resistance.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Of course a non-freewheel hub is a lot stronger too - and the
hollow-axled
wheel offered to you by your LBS could well have been one of those. Do
you
know any more about what sort it was?

They said the freewheel hub was stronger!

Are we talking at cross purposes here? A freewheel hub is one which takesa
separate freewheel, which screws on. A freehub has the ratchet mechanism
built in. Here's a usefil article about them from the usual source:

I meant the built in variety.

Quoted message said:

http://sheldonbrown.com/free-k7.html

And another one

http://sheldonbrown.com/k7.html

explains why the freehub variety is stronger.

Got it! I didn't realise the bearings were on the outside of the
ratchet mechanism, though I am still doubtful about hollow axles.

Quoted message said:

If you're really loading your back wheel as much as you say, I'd recommend
you invest in a decent back wheel. Probably one with a shimano hub, deoreor
above. 36 spokes, and a decent rim. Most importantly, get it properly
handbuilt by a decent builder.

When my old cassette wears out I will replace it with the freehub
variety and gearing, or buy another bike.

Quoted message said:

Up until now I have had very good service from my £270 bike, the only
problem being a collapsing bottom bracket bearing. I don't really want
to lash out on more expensive stuff if I can help it. For the record I
have four bikes, hybrid, Brompton, 50+ year old rod brake bike for
local shopping and a Raleigh girl's bike with very slim tyres which I
use in 'arrestable' situations. It is also very light.

Quoted message said:

(hmm - how wide is your frame across the dropouts? recommendation above
assumes 135mm)

Yes 135mm.

Thanks,

Doug.

Doug said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

They were right. The hollow axle will be stronger, too.

How can this be? Take a hollow axle, insert in it a tight fitting metal
rod and surely it becomes stronger?

If you bend a bar or a tube you'll find that most of the stress is
near the outer skin of the structure whether it's compressive or
tensile stress. Have a look at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bending

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

Chris Eilbeck said:

Doug said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

They were right. The hollow axle will be stronger, too.

How can this be? Take a hollow axle, insert in it a tight fitting metal
rod and surely it becomes stronger?

If you bend a bar or a tube you'll find that most of the stress is
near the outer skin of the structure whether it's compressive or
tensile stress. Have a look at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bending

Before I give up and go away in utter disgrace, the above says:

"This equation is valid only when the stress at the extreme fiber (i.e.
the portion of the beam furthest from the neutral axis) is below the
yield stress of the material it is constructed from. At higher loadings
the stress distribution becomes non-linear, and ductile materials will
eventually enter a plastic hinge state where the magnitude of the
stress is equal to the yield stress everywhere in the beam, with a
discontinuity at the neutral axis where the stress changes from tensile
to compressive. This plastic hinge state is typically used as a limit
state in the design of steel structures."

In parting may I venture a little conspiracy theory here. Because some
cyclists are more concerned with image than substance, they like to
imitate either dedicated racers or off-roaders and use quick-release
hubs instead of the more solid variety. Of course, the former does have
the advantage that few or no tools need to be carried, just a puncture
outfit.

Doug.

Doug said:

In parting may I venture a little conspiracy theory here. Because some
cyclists are more concerned with image than substance, they like to
imitate either dedicated racers or off-roaders and use quick-release
hubs instead of the more solid variety.

Not quite. Given a mechanism that is up to the task (ie q/r fastening)
and the extra convenience (I had to fix a puncture on Saturday on the
road), and the ubiquitous distribution of wheels with anything above
minimum quality hubs with q/r, the market dictates that anyone wanting
solid
axles has to really go the extra mile to get them.

Quoted message said:

Of course, the former does have
the advantage that few or no tools need to be carried, just a puncture
outfit.

The man hits the nail on the head (rather than getting the point in his
wheel ;-)

...d