Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Garth]

  Why yes, I don't need or want many cogs myself which is why I have stuck 
with 6 and 7 sp. freewheels.  Combined with 2 or 3 rings I'm good.  BTW, 
you mentioned your gear selection Patrick, which can *also *be done with 
half-step gearing +/- a granny, which I really like. It has the 5-6" gear 
progressions *if  *you wanted to do that, but this is not a rule of course, 
you can cross and shift the cogs any way you like. You don't have follow 
any pattern, be creative !   I for one do prefer to shift with both hands 
and less cogs and more actual use of all them and the rings. 

  But really, I just like to ride , w , where the folly of 
rightness and wrongness falls upon its own sword and what's left is 
"everything else" , and this "everything else" that is Life Itself in which 
the only death is death itself, and the only living is Life itself. 



On Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 1:21:07 PM UTC-4, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> Frankly, in my case, I don't need more than, say, 5 cogs total, even for 
> the sort of climbing I do. Gears of 85", 75", 70", 65", and 60" would let 
> me ride comfortably, on pavement, on all but 1 ride in 10; and adding a 
> granny ring as you h, there are no rules saying you must do any set 
> patternave would take care of that. Drop each gear by 5" and it would be 
> fine for my dirt riding. After all, I get around Albuquerque just fine on 
> my 3 fixies.
>
> But a creeping perfectionism, philosophical and "aesthetic" as much as 
> practical has led me to adopt 10 cogs on my 1 derailleur bike (the 
> Matthews) so that I can get those tiny little 1-tooth jumps all the way 
> from 86" down to 44" on the big (42 t) ring (there is a 24 t bailout ring, 
> too). Why? Because 10 cogs are possible, and therefore it's fun in a sort 
> of anxious way to fretfully calculate just how perfectly adapted to my 
> riding I can get all 10 of them. It passes the time and it's less dangerous 
> than drinking or chasing women.
>
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 10:46 AM, George Schick  > wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> All of this is to bring into question just why most of us really need all 
>> of those gears.  Sure, there are those who live in mountainous regions who 
>> couldn't get by without triple chainrings, especially off-road mountain 
>> bikers.  And what the highest and lowest gears are is a matter of age and 
>> personal preference.  But the 9,10, & 11 tooth cassettes - really?  Seems 
>> like another one of those things that the industry transposed to the 
>> consumer population.  Racers would need that kind of set up since they have 
>> to match their speed with the rest of pack (and SIS shifting for the 
>> constant and rapid speed adjustments).  But the rest of us - I just don't 
>> see it.
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Patrick Moore]

Frankly, in my case, I don't need more than, say, 5 cogs total, even for
the sort of climbing I do. Gears of 85", 75", 70", 65", and 60" would let
me ride comfortably, on pavement, on all but 1 ride in 10; and adding a
granny ring as you have would take care of that. Drop each gear by 5" and
it would be fine for my dirt riding. After all, I get around Albuquerque
just fine on my 3 fixies.

But a creeping perfectionism, philosophical and "aesthetic" as much as
practical has led me to adopt 10 cogs on my 1 derailleur bike (the
Matthews) so that I can get those tiny little 1-tooth jumps all the way
from 86" down to 44" on the big (42 t) ring (there is a 24 t bailout ring,
too). Why? Because 10 cogs are possible, and therefore it's fun in a sort
of anxious way to fretfully calculate just how perfectly adapted to my
riding I can get all 10 of them. It passes the time and it's less dangerous
than drinking or chasing women.

On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 10:46 AM, George Schick  wrote:

> [...]
>
> All of this is to bring into question just why most of us really need all
> of those gears.  Sure, there are those who live in mountainous regions who
> couldn't get by without triple chainrings, especially off-road mountain
> bikers.  And what the highest and lowest gears are is a matter of age and
> personal preference.  But the 9,10, & 11 tooth cassettes - really?  Seems
> like another one of those things that the industry transposed to the
> consumer population.  Racers would need that kind of set up since they have
> to match their speed with the rest of pack (and SIS shifting for the
> constant and rapid speed adjustments).  But the rest of us - I just don't
> see it.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[George Schick]

I agree that it's probably a doctored up photo and just a prank. 
 Everything about it - from wheel dish to this electronic shifting business 
- would seem an unlikely if not impossible concoction.

Having said that, and turning back to the subject of shifting for a moment, 
I just completed a restoration, and somewhat of a reconfiguration, of an 
old late-70's bike and it's now set up with a five-speed rear (13-23) and 
the Sugino high-low (40/26) that Riv sells.  Now, unlike many of y'all on 
this blog, I live in an area that's relatively flat with the exception of 
some short "steep" climbs up the approaches to pedestrian bridges over 
expressways or railroad tracks and longer steep climbs (maybe 7%-8% grades) 
from river levels to the top of ridges, so a ten-speed set up like this 
more than suits may needs.  I'm an old fart, ignore cadence for the most 
part, and ride in a 70" gear most of the time .  If I'm on the bigger ring 
and need to climb one of those bridge approaches I shift it into a 53" gear 
and stand on the pedals all the way up.  If I'm riding along on the flats 
and catching a stiff tail wind, I can use the largest 82" gear and be just 
fine.  When I encounter one of those occasional climbs up the river banks I 
can shift down the the 26T, go into as low as a 30" gear, and spin my way 
up.

All of this is to bring into question just why most of us really need all 
of those gears.  Sure, there are those who live in mountainous regions who 
couldn't get by without triple chainrings, especially off-road mountain 
bikers.  And what the highest and lowest gears are is a matter of age and 
personal preference.  But the 9,10, & 11 tooth cassettes - really?  Seems 
like another one of those things that the industry transposed to the 
consumer population.  Racers would need that kind of set up since they have 
to match their speed with the rest of pack (and SIS shifting for the 
constant and rapid speed adjustments).  But the rest of us - I just don't 
see it.

On Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 10:02:08 AM UTC-5, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> Proof, if more proof is required than just the funny-ness of it: Ask 
> yourself: what sort of dish, and what sort of rear OL spacing, would this 
> require? And the Q factor!
>
> Regarding razors: 
> http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-blades-11056
>
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Patrick Moore  > wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>> But that "21 speed cassette" is obviously a prank.
>>
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Patrick Moore]

Proof, if more proof is required than just the funny-ness of it: Ask
yourself: what sort of dish, and what sort of rear OL spacing, would this
require? And the Q factor!

Regarding razors:
http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-blades-11056

On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

> ...
>
> But that "21 speed cassette" is obviously a prank.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Patrick Moore]

Actually, with computer controlled electric shifter, there's no reason why
you can't get almost 30 serial, incremental gear steps simply by pushing a
single button and letting the electrics double shift 3 rings and 11 cogs as
required.

I agree that a good part of the fun of riding -- of pedaling! -- is (1)
dealing with the continually different torque and cadence requirements when
you shift less, and (2) shifting by friction.

But that said, in response to Garth's comment, I have to say that I *do* like
min- or pseudo- or crypto- corncobs ("corncogs"!) in the middle of my
cassettes; I don't shift all that much, but when I do shift, I want *just* the
right gear, and find it frustrating, annoying, and discouraging to find
myself in just another too-high or too-low gear after bothering to shift.

One of the Two Big Reasons I like riding fixed so much is having to vary
cadence and torque to the terrain and conditions. The other is the smug
feeling of doing more with less.

But that "21 speed cassette" is obviously a prank.

On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 3:39 AM, Ron Mc  wrote:

> This could only work with a very accurate electronic shifter, and quite
> possibly a fully automatic one.  It's is for people who ride in a total
> cadence world.  Maybe it's something about stiff bikes that makes one
> desire this.
> But my hilly bike world is a lot more dynamic, and I think more fun
> My 2x9 wide compact double (which functions more like a 1x9 with bail-out)
> is closer to mindless shifting than even I want to get.
> I very much enjoy shifting my half step triples - even with those, my
> algorithm is pretty much automatic, and the fun improves every time I make
> a two-hand shift.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Ron Mc]

Hey bro, 
*3x5 Lenton 
*,
 
*3x7 International 
*
My riding mentality is conservation of momentum rather than conservation of 
cadence.  I Always pass Everybody on climbs.  I'm going out later this 
morning to make my 24-mi 1200' climb neighborhood loop and tease the groups 
that come out from town to ride my hills.  Compared to most, I shift gears 
infrequently, and shift my mind and body more often.  
My friend Sandy (from our Sunday morning uptown to downtown sprint) has 
been making long greenway rides with me, and the first thing she learned 
was attacking the bluff climbs.  Two days days ago, our second 33-mi ride 
together, we both finished with the last 5 miles the fastest of the ride - 
I was proud of her.  

On Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 4:45:16 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> How big are the steps when you say on the big ring? 
>
>
> On 08/19/2017 05:39 AM, Ron Mc wrote: 
> > This could only work with a very accurate electronic shifter, and 
> > quite possibly a fully automatic one.  It's is for people who ride in 
> > a total cadence world.  Maybe it's something about stiff bikes that 
> > makes one desire this. 
> > But my hilly bike world is a lot more dynamic, and I think more fun 
> > My 2x9 wide compact double (which functions more like a 1x9 with 
> > bail-out) is closer to mindless shifting than even I want to get. 
> > 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Steve Palincsar]

How big are the steps when you say on the big ring?


On 08/19/2017 05:39 AM, Ron Mc wrote:
This could only work with a very accurate electronic shifter, and 
quite possibly a fully automatic one.  It's is for people who ride in 
a total cadence world.  Maybe it's something about stiff bikes that 
makes one desire this.

But my hilly bike world is a lot more dynamic, and I think more fun
My 2x9 wide compact double (which functions more like a 1x9 with 
bail-out) is closer to mindless shifting than even I want to get.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Ron Mc]

This could only work with a very accurate electronic shifter, and quite 
possibly a fully automatic one.  It's is for people who ride in a total 
cadence world.  Maybe it's something about stiff bikes that makes one 
desire this.  
But my hilly bike world is a lot more dynamic, and I think more fun 
My 2x9 wide compact double (which functions more like a 1x9 with bail-out) 
is closer to mindless shifting than even I want to get.  
I very much enjoy shifting my half step triples - even with those, my 
algorithm is pretty much automatic, and the fun improves every time I make 
a two-hand shift.  


On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 7:17:39 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:
>
> It would need a special chain for that, thin and will break easily when 
> shifting in addition to the shifters.  What kind of shifters would work 
> except friction and be able to dial it in perfectly.
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Wayne Naha  > wrote:
>
>> Supposedly, this is a spy shot of a SRAM 21 speed cassette.  I thought it 
>> good for a laugh, I mean, it can't be serious.  Kinda reminds of those 
>> razors with five blades.
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> -- 
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] 21 speed rear?

[Lee Legrand]

It would need a special chain for that, thin and will break easily when
shifting in addition to the shifters.  What kind of shifters would work
except friction and be able to dial it in perfectly.

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Wayne Naha  wrote:

> Supposedly, this is a spy shot of a SRAM 21 speed cassette.  I thought it
> good for a laugh, I mean, it can't be serious.  Kinda reminds of those
> razors with five blades.
>
>
>
> 
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.