Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:50 PM, happyriding wrote: > I'm confused again. I was thinking that wide chainstays require high > Q cranks. But if the drop out width is standard, is it just the way > the chain stay splays out near the BB that determines Q? Can a frame > builder make a bike with low Q yet still accept 50mm tires? My 65 mm (actual, measured with a digital caliper)-tire'd Monocog has a Q of 150. I could get 70 mm tire in that frame. Forget what cranks, but they take that early design splined bb. > If so, > why does Rivendell make all their bikes with high Q? > My two customs have Qs of 130; the Sam Hill has a 160 with a modern splay-armed triple with at least 1 cm of clearance between arms and stays. -- Patrick Moore Albuquerque, NM For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com (505) 227-0523 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:23 AM, happyriding wrote: > > Also, has anyone had a problem adjusting to the huge Q of a Rivendell > bike? That is something I hadn't really considered. > > "Huge Q"? The Qs on my two remaining custom Rivs (130 and 126 spaced, respectively ) are both 130 mm. That on my Sugino XD'd tripled Sam Hill is 160. Explain "huge". -- Patrick Moore Albuquerque, NM For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com (505) 227-0523 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:23 AM, happyriding wrote: > > > How is Q a property of the crank? Wouldn't the bottom bracket that is > necessary to allow the crank to clear the chain stays determine the > Q? Or do some cranks only fit on certain narrower bottom brackets? > I'm not quite clear on what, exactly, you are asking, but if you mean to ask, "How does the crank determine Q more than the bb spindle length," the answer is, "Dunno, but it certainly, most certainly do." I had Phil make me a massively long 145 mm spindled bb assembly so that I could use a beloved 175 mm Cyclotourist crankset on a wide-stayed mountain bike. Q was 160. That's a 145 mm spindle, folks. OTOH, the 108 or 113 spindle and Sugino XD or whatever the hell it is stock triple on the newly acquired Sam Hill triple has a Q of about 160; note that: 145, 113, 160. Difference? Not the spindles, obviously, but the "flare" of the arms. The Cyclotourists don't flare at all; the XDs flare like any modern crank. So: today's lesson: it's the crank arm flare, folks, that largely determines Q, not the spindle length. > > Also, has anyone had a problem adjusting to the huge Q of a Rivendell > bike? That is something I hadn't really considered. > > -- Patrick Moore Albuquerque, NM For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com (505) 227-0523 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Happyriding, You can build a frame to take wider tires and have a smaller Q than say a Bombadil, but it would likely be a full custom frame designed with modifications to the stays. No one has made a copy of the Stumpjumper design, but even they couldn't handle much less than 147mm wide crank.. I doubt even a custom wide tire bike is going to take a narrow crank like the Grand Cru without some major design compromises. The Riv design is not the only way to design the BB/stays, but if you're going to make bikes you gotta decide one something, and the Riv one works well for their intended parts. I think if we all had a frame at home to play with made of play dough, you'd quickly realize designing frames isn't as easy as it looks. Compromise probably rules. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
on 4/30/10 10:50 PM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > I'm confused again. I was thinking that wide chainstays require high > Q cranks. But if the drop out width is standard, is it just the way > the chain stay splays out near the BB that determines Q? Can a frame > builder make a bike with low Q yet still accept 50mm tires? If so, > why does Rivendell make all their bikes with high Q? The Q factor or tread is the measurement between crank arms when mounted - http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_q.html#qfactor (and do follow the link through to the old GP B'stone article) I really don't think it's accurate to say that Rivendell bicycles have high Q. When you begin designing bikes to clear wide tires, you have to make the tread/Q wider. There's no way around that (other than using ovalized chainstays or crimping them). The Bombadil and Hunqapillare are designed to handle larger tires. Since RBW bicycles are built with steel chainstays, they would require less room for cranks to clear, and could use narrower Q cranks thank ones made with aluminum, for example. Most "modern" mtbs I've ridden have way wider tread/Q than any Rivendell I've ridden. - Jim -- Jim Edgar cyclofi...@earthlink.net Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com Current Classics - Cross Bikes Singlespeed - Working Bikes Gallery updates now appear here - http://cyclofiend.blogspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
I'm confused again. I was thinking that wide chainstays require high Q cranks. But if the drop out width is standard, is it just the way the chain stay splays out near the BB that determines Q? Can a frame builder make a bike with low Q yet still accept 50mm tires? If so, why does Rivendell make all their bikes with high Q? Thanks. On Apr 30, 11:01 pm, CycloFiend wrote: > on 4/30/10 8:08 AM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > I was thinking that as the chainstays got wider, the cassette moved > > outboard more, but that isn't true is it? The cassette must be in the > > same place no matter how wide the chainstays are? So that meas every > > crank has an ideal distance from the BB shell that perfectly lines up > > its chain rings with the cassette? So for bikes with wide chain > > stays, you need a crank where the crank arms are further away from the > > rings so that the crank arms clear the chainstays, but the rings still > > line up with the cassette? > > Yep. Pretty much. > > The idea is to design a bike which allows you to place the chainrings and > rear sprockets in similar relationship to the centerline of the bicycle. > > AASHTA -http://sheldonbrown.com/chainline.html > > It's not so much that the chainstays were widened - the rear spacing doesn't > really change as it's specific to the gearing. > > http://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-spacing.html > > A few things have led to wider crank arm "splay" - shorter chainstays, which > move the wider part of the rear triangle closer to the bottom bracket; > larger diamter (i.e aluminum) and/or square tubing found on mtb designs; > suspension designs which favor oversized or square tubing. > > - J > > -- > Jim Edgar > cyclofi...@earthlink.net > > Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries -http://www.cyclofiend.com > Current Classics - Cross Bikes > Singlespeed - Working Bikes > > "You must be the change you want to see in the world." > Mahatma Gandhi > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
on 4/30/10 8:08 AM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > I was thinking that as the chainstays got wider, the cassette moved > outboard more, but that isn't true is it? The cassette must be in the > same place no matter how wide the chainstays are? So that meas every > crank has an ideal distance from the BB shell that perfectly lines up > its chain rings with the cassette? So for bikes with wide chain > stays, you need a crank where the crank arms are further away from the > rings so that the crank arms clear the chainstays, but the rings still > line up with the cassette? Yep. Pretty much. The idea is to design a bike which allows you to place the chainrings and rear sprockets in similar relationship to the centerline of the bicycle. AASHTA - http://sheldonbrown.com/chainline.html It's not so much that the chainstays were widened - the rear spacing doesn't really change as it's specific to the gearing. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-spacing.html A few things have led to wider crank arm "splay" - shorter chainstays, which move the wider part of the rear triangle closer to the bottom bracket; larger diamter (i.e aluminum) and/or square tubing found on mtb designs; suspension designs which favor oversized or square tubing. - J -- Jim Edgar cyclofi...@earthlink.net Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com Current Classics - Cross Bikes Singlespeed - Working Bikes "You must be the change you want to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
> I've always been fond of the original Stumpjumpers chainstay > design.http://www.trek4fun.com/images/my_bikes/1983_stumpjumper_sport/1983_s... > No chainring rub issues there. Thanks for the link. Been a long time since I saw one of those. I wonder if there was a functional issue that stopped others from copying or if design stayed away for aesthetic or financial reasons. On Apr 30, 7:07 am, Garth wrote: > It really depends on the terrain one rides weather a HSG would work > for an individual. A 24/44/48 and a 13-32 7sp FW or even a 12-32 8sp > cassette is very versatile. I believe Robert Beckman still prefers > this drivetrain on his Sakkit Touring bikes. . . which are designed > for on and off road. > > Bombadil design aside . a frame could be/has been made to take big > tires and still use HSG and lower Q cranks, at least in 26" size. > I've always been fond of the original Stumpjumpers chainstay > design.http://www.trek4fun.com/images/my_bikes/1983_stumpjumper_sport/1983_s... > No chainring rub issues there. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
It really depends on the terrain one rides weather a HSG would work for an individual. A 24/44/48 and a 13-32 7sp FW or even a 12-32 8sp cassette is very versatile. I believe Robert Beckman still prefers this drivetrain on his Sakkit Touring bikes. . . which are designed for on and off road. Bombadil design aside . a frame could be/has been made to take big tires and still use HSG and lower Q cranks, at least in 26" size. I've always been fond of the original Stumpjumpers chainstay design. http://www.trek4fun.com/images/my_bikes/1983_stumpjumper_sport/1983_stumpjumper_sport_3.jpg No chainring rub issues there. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Hi, Thanks for responding. I was thinking that as the chainstays got wider, the cassette moved outboard more, but that isn't true is it? The cassette must be in the same place no matter how wide the chainstays are? So that meas every crank has an ideal distance from the BB shell that perfectly lines up its chain rings with the cassette? So for bikes with wide chain stays, you need a crank where the crank arms are further away from the rings so that the crank arms clear the chainstays, but the rings still line up with the cassette? Thanks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 14:31 -0700, Garth wrote: > I still like half-step plus granny 7 speed drivetrains. Too bad I > can't use it on the Bombadil though. Given the intended purpose of the Bombadil, would a HSG make any functional sense? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
A simple reason triple are great for touring is redundancy in gears. Use Mike Sherman's gear chart, and you'll get a good idea what a high range double will be like shifting. http://home.earthlink.net/~mike.sherman/shift As stated ,low Q cranks will be a problem on many touring bikes. Use a longer axle and your chainline will be poor. It's best to pick a crank for your frame that is as close to the original intent as possible. Try fitting a Grand Cru crank on a Bomabadil .. you won't! . not without a unusable chainline. I still like half-step plus granny 7 speed drivetrains. Too bad I can't use it on the Bombadil though. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
The length of spindle you use should be driven entirely by chain line. Velo Orange says that the Gran Cru will be 'about 139mm' in Q- factor. That means that when you pick the right spindle length for chainline, the Q-factor will be about 139mm. They also throw in that is 'the narrowest ever'. So, anybody who wants to run that crankset should make sure their frameset is among the narrowest ever, so they can choose the right spindle for chainline. If you put the narrowest ever crankset on a wide chainstay frame, like the Bombadil, your crankarms will hit the chainstays. You'll probably have to use a spindle that is 8mm longer on both ends to clear the stays. Doing that will foul up your chainline, probably badly. You might not even be able to use the largest cog or two in the small ring. You are correct to point out that if people choose to use whatever spindle with whatever crankset, that the Q-factor is not an intrinsic property of the crankset at all. It is a property of the combination of spindle and crankset. When crank manufacturers or retailers state Q- factor, they are assuming you are going to use the right spindle length for chainline, which is what you should do if you can. On Apr 29, 10:23 am, happyriding wrote: > On Apr 22, 11:25 am, William wrote: > > > Another thing to keep in mind if you have your eye on that crank. Pay > > very close attention to how the Q-factor of the crankset goes with the > > chainstay width of the frame you are setting up. > > How is Q a property of the crank? Wouldn't the bottom bracket that is > necessary to allow the crank to clear the chain stays determine the > Q? Or do some cranks only fit on certain narrower bottom brackets? > > Also, has anyone had a problem adjusting to the huge Q of a Rivendell > bike? That is something I hadn't really considered. > > > I don't know what > > bike you are building, but I will report that my 155mm Q-factor > > Ritchey (113mm spindle) barely fit on a Bombadil. There is no hope > > that a 130-something crankset would fit without a massively long > > spindle, which would change it into a 155mm Q-factor crankset and > > would foul up your chainline and front shifting. That 46/30 Gran Cru > > would be sweet on an old school Rando/Brevet bike (basically a road > > bike). No chance would that crankset work on a Bomba/Hunqa. Even a > > Hillborne/Hilsen would be questionable. Roadeo should work. > > Ok, thanks. Good to know. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
> How is Q a property of the crank? Wouldn't the bottom bracket that is > necessary to allow the crank to clear the chain stays determine the > Q? Or do some cranks only fit on certain narrower bottom brackets? It is a function of both BB length and Crank design. Many modern curving crank designs fit further out on the BB than say, a TA Cyclotourist or the White Industries VBC. On Apr 29, 12:23 pm, happyriding wrote: > On Apr 22, 11:25 am, William wrote: > > > Another thing to keep in mind if you have your eye on that crank. Pay > > very close attention to how the Q-factor of the crankset goes with the > > chainstay width of the frame you are setting up. > > How is Q a property of the crank? Wouldn't the bottom bracket that is > necessary to allow the crank to clear the chain stays determine the > Q? Or do some cranks only fit on certain narrower bottom brackets? > > Also, has anyone had a problem adjusting to the huge Q of a Rivendell > bike? That is something I hadn't really considered. > > > I don't know what > > bike you are building, but I will report that my 155mm Q-factor > > Ritchey (113mm spindle) barely fit on a Bombadil. There is no hope > > that a 130-something crankset would fit without a massively long > > spindle, which would change it into a 155mm Q-factor crankset and > > would foul up your chainline and front shifting. That 46/30 Gran Cru > > would be sweet on an old school Rando/Brevet bike (basically a road > > bike). No chance would that crankset work on a Bomba/Hunqa. Even a > > Hillborne/Hilsen would be questionable. Roadeo should work. > > Ok, thanks. Good to know. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Did you lower the front derailleur when you made the change? The ring shape between a 50 and a 46 isn't that much different but it is important to drop the front derailleur down as close as possible without hitting the chainstay. Michael On Apr 22, 9:13 pm, amoll68 wrote: > I'm not sure why, exactly, but it might have something to do with the > FSA designed for a 50-34, and I *think* the radius of the 46-30 is > just different enough to cause problems for me. I had to trim the > derailleur after nearly every shift, and in my favorite gear I > couldn't quite trim it just right - had a very slight rub. With the > wider cage, I can shift 4 cogs before I need to trim, and I can always > trim away any rubbing. Worked for me . . . > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 22, 11:25 am, William wrote: > Another thing to keep in mind if you have your eye on that crank. Pay > very close attention to how the Q-factor of the crankset goes with the > chainstay width of the frame you are setting up. > How is Q a property of the crank? Wouldn't the bottom bracket that is necessary to allow the crank to clear the chain stays determine the Q? Or do some cranks only fit on certain narrower bottom brackets? Also, has anyone had a problem adjusting to the huge Q of a Rivendell bike? That is something I hadn't really considered. > I don't know what > bike you are building, but I will report that my 155mm Q-factor > Ritchey (113mm spindle) barely fit on a Bombadil. There is no hope > that a 130-something crankset would fit without a massively long > spindle, which would change it into a 155mm Q-factor crankset and > would foul up your chainline and front shifting. That 46/30 Gran Cru > would be sweet on an old school Rando/Brevet bike (basically a road > bike). No chance would that crankset work on a Bomba/Hunqa. Even a > Hillborne/Hilsen would be questionable. Roadeo should work. > Ok, thanks. Good to know. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
I'm not sure why, exactly, but it might have something to do with the FSA designed for a 50-34, and I *think* the radius of the 46-30 is just different enough to cause problems for me. I had to trim the derailleur after nearly every shift, and in my favorite gear I couldn't quite trim it just right - had a very slight rub. With the wider cage, I can shift 4 cogs before I need to trim, and I can always trim away any rubbing. Worked for me . . . R/ Alex > Hi Alex, > > So why does a 9 speed, 12-36 cassette need a wider front derailleur > cage than, say, a 10 speed 13-29? I would think the overall width of > the cassette would be pretty similar, and therefore you would get the > same chain angles. > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Another thing to keep in mind if you have your eye on that crank. Pay very close attention to how the Q-factor of the crankset goes with the chainstay width of the frame you are setting up. I don't know what bike you are building, but I will report that my 155mm Q-factor Ritchey (113mm spindle) barely fit on a Bombadil. There is no hope that a 130-something crankset would fit without a massively long spindle, which would change it into a 155mm Q-factor crankset and would foul up your chainline and front shifting. That 46/30 Gran Cru would be sweet on an old school Rando/Brevet bike (basically a road bike). No chance would that crankset work on a Bomba/Hunqa. Even a Hillborne/Hilsen would be questionable. Roadeo should work. On Apr 21, 9:33 pm, happyriding wrote: > On Apr 21, 5:41 pm, William wrote: > > > ...and the 46/30 is predicted to be $175, not $125. Still a bargain > > Whoops. That's the page I was looking at. Somehow I read $125 (..and > I did that several times!). > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 22:17 -0700, doug peterson wrote: > Steve's got a good idea with the 20 lbs of rocks. Everyone is > surprised at how their high performance road bike changes character > when it's required to carry its own weight in payload. Then think > about doubling that. That's touring. 20 lb of gear is also touring -- and believe me, it's a lot more fun hauling 20 lb of gear up a mountain than 40 lb! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
happyriding: I've never tried a wide range double for touring but that won't stop me from giving an opinion. Even with the 12-36 9 speed (probably an excellent choice; I use a 13-32 8 speed & another lower can't hurt), I would want a smaller ring than 30 for touring. There are too many unknowns such as gradient, length of climb, weather, wind, road surface, how long you're riding that day (some days get longer than planned) when touring to say "I'll never need a gear lower than xx". My granny is 24 x 32 and that's barely walking speed but it gets used on occasion. The other issue is front shifting. 10-12 teeth differences shift well, don't need a lot of attention, and don't often don't require another shift at the back. That's why you find touring triples with 24-36-48, 24-34-44, etc. ring combos. Yes, you get lots of duplicates. No, you won't have "27 speeds". But you can have a 20" low & a 100" high with reliable shifting & not a lot of double shifts. BTW, you will need the 20" low a lot more than the 100" high when carrying a load. Steve's got a good idea with the 20 lbs of rocks. Everyone is surprised at how their high performance road bike changes character when it's required to carry its own weight in payload. Then think about doubling that. That's touring. dougP On Apr 21, 4:11 pm, happyriding wrote: > Good point about constantly needing the in between gears. The problem > is I don't know where that is for a touring bike. I only have a road > bike, which is set up with a 53x39 and 13-29, which works well for me > in all types of terrain. > > I was thinking about the possibility of coupling the pending Velo > Orange Gran Cru crank ($125), which is a 46x30 double, with a > Rivendell/Shimano 12-36 9 speed cassette. That would result in a > lower top end than a 53x13 (110.1 v. 103.5). > > Any comments on whether that is practical? Are doubles just not used > for touring bikes? > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 21, 5:41 pm, William wrote: > ...and the 46/30 is predicted to be $175, not $125. Still a bargain > Whoops. That's the page I was looking at. Somehow I read $125 (..and I did that several times!). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 21, 9:14 pm, amoll68 wrote: > > WRT the 46-30 and the 12-36 rear: it might work okay, might even work > well. I have a feeling the trick may be finding the right front > derailleur, and I'm thinking something from the 70's or 80's with a > wide cage. I first tried a modern FSA compact for my Hilsen setup, and > never could get it dialed in right (rubbing problems, and some > shifting problems.) The old Simplex SLJ doesn't appear to have the > correct radius for the 46T ring, but it works great! > > Trial and error can be fun - especially when you create that winning > combo, but it can also be frustrating and expensive. Good luck! > > Alex > Hi Alex, So why does a 9 speed, 12-36 cassette need a wider front derailleur cage than, say, a 10 speed 13-29? I would think the overall width of the cassette would be pretty similar, and therefore you would get the same chain angles. Thanks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Hap, Loaded touring bike: you're probably gonna want that triple AND a big cassette in the rear - unless you don't mind resting or walking (Kent Petersen's "24 inch gear") when you totally bonk on that big climb. On my AHH country bike/sport tourer with a light load: I LOVE my TA 46-30, Simplex SLJ up front, 12-27 Ultergra/Dura Ace rear. I live and ride in the Cascade Foothills, and can think of only one occasion where I've used the lowest gear. I occasionally use my second lowest gear, but spend most of my time in the big ring on the rolling hills. It's by far my favorite gearing setup, and I've tried (and have) a lot of different setups. However, I don't think this would be ideal for a long tour with a heavy load. WRT the 46-30 and the 12-36 rear: it might work okay, might even work well. I have a feeling the trick may be finding the right front derailleur, and I'm thinking something from the 70's or 80's with a wide cage. I first tried a modern FSA compact for my Hilsen setup, and never could get it dialed in right (rubbing problems, and some shifting problems.) The old Simplex SLJ doesn't appear to have the correct radius for the 46T ring, but it works great! Trial and error can be fun - especially when you create that winning combo, but it can also be frustrating and expensive. Good luck! Alex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 18:11 -0600, rswat...@me.com wrote: > > > > On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:41, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > > On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 07:26 -0700, MichaelH wrote: > >> To answer two questions at once. Indexed shifting a triple is more > >> trouble than its worth. It will need more adjustments and offer > >> less > >> trim finesse. So, skip the indexing and the ramped rings. > > > > I certainly agree with skipping the indexing for front shifting, but > > if > > you have ramped and pinned chain rings, they don't hurt in any way. > > They might. I once got a pinned large ring by mistake and whenever I > was in the small ring, the pins on the big ring would snag the chain, > making lots of irritating noises. I foolishly tried to drill the pins > out, but just ended up destroying the ring. I have quite a few bikes with bar end shifting and ramped and pinned chain rings, and in my experience, they shift better than unramped, unpinned chain rings. And I've never experienced pins snagging chains or making annoying noises. As always, YMMV... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:41, Steve Palincsar wrote: On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 07:26 -0700, MichaelH wrote: To answer two questions at once. Indexed shifting a triple is more trouble than its worth. It will need more adjustments and offer less trim finesse. So, skip the indexing and the ramped rings. I certainly agree with skipping the indexing for front shifting, but if you have ramped and pinned chain rings, they don't hurt in any way. They might. I once got a pinned large ring by mistake and whenever I was in the small ring, the pins on the big ring would snag the chain, making lots of irritating noises. I foolishly tried to drill the pins out, but just ended up destroying the ring. Ryan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
...and the 46/30 is predicted to be $175, not $125. Still a bargain http://velo-orange.blogspot.com/2010/02/grand-cru-crank.html On Apr 21, 4:14 pm, happyriding wrote: > On Apr 21, 5:11 pm, happyriding wrote: > > > Good point about constantly needing the in between gears. The problem > > is I don't know where that is for a touring bike. I only have a road > > bike, which is set up with a 53x39 and 13-29, which works well for me > > in all types of terrain. > > > I was thinking about the possibility of coupling the pending Velo > > Orange Gran Cru crank ($125), which is a 46x30 double > > I forgot to mention, the Gran Cru has matching ramps and pins. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 16:11 -0700, happyriding wrote: > Good point about constantly needing the in between gears. The problem > is I don't know where that is for a touring bike. I only have a road > bike, which is set up with a 53x39 and 13-29, which works well for me > in all types of terrain. So try loading up your road bike with 20 lb of rocks in a bag and see how that affects your overall gearing. I'd guess you'll need a gear probably 2 shifts lower for any given incline over what you'd need unloaded. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 21, 5:11 pm, happyriding wrote: > Good point about constantly needing the in between gears. The problem > is I don't know where that is for a touring bike. I only have a road > bike, which is set up with a 53x39 and 13-29, which works well for me > in all types of terrain. > > I was thinking about the possibility of coupling the pending Velo > Orange Gran Cru crank ($125), which is a 46x30 double > I forgot to mention, the Gran Cru has matching ramps and pins. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Good point about constantly needing the in between gears. The problem is I don't know where that is for a touring bike. I only have a road bike, which is set up with a 53x39 and 13-29, which works well for me in all types of terrain. I was thinking about the possibility of coupling the pending Velo Orange Gran Cru crank ($125), which is a 46x30 double, with a Rivendell/Shimano 12-36 9 speed cassette. That would result in a lower top end than a 53x13 (110.1 v. 103.5). Any comments on whether that is practical? Are doubles just not used for touring bikes? Thanks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 07:26 -0700, MichaelH wrote: > To answer two questions at once. Indexed shifting a triple is more > trouble than its worth. It will need more adjustments and offer less > trim finesse. So, skip the indexing and the ramped rings. I certainly agree with skipping the indexing for front shifting, but if you have ramped and pinned chain rings, they don't hurt in any way. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
+2 on the gear calulator Sheldon's calculator is a great way to compare the pros and cons of Triple vs Compact for me it comes down to whether the low gear will get me up the hills I need to climb in Hilly West Seattle? I just switched from a 50/34 11/34 to a 46/36/26 11/32 to get 3 extra low gears FWIW Ryan On Apr 21, 9:32 am, doug peterson wrote: > happyriding: > > +1 for spending time with Sheldon's calculator. Great tool. > > Make a note of which gears you are actually using. With 20+ > combinations, most of us only really use a portion of what's there. > Especially note the highest gear you're comfortable with. You may > find out you've got a cog or 2 at the top end you never use with the > big ring. With 8-9-10 cogs, a double can be perfectly reasonable. > The important thing to understand is what you need for your riding, > and set it up to match. > > My touring bike has a triple with wide range gearing, because I never > know what I'll get myself into. My knock around town bike has an old > 7 speed and a couple of orphan rings because it really doesn't > matter. > > dougP > > On Apr 21, 8:46 am, CycloFiend wrote: > > > > > > > on 4/21/10 4:48 AM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > I have another question. Is a 40x30 double a reasonable alternative > > > to a 46x36x26 triple? > > > AASHTA - > > If you haven't done so, I'd pay a visit to Sheldon's Gear Calculator. > > >http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/ > > > You can play all kinds of "what ifs" there. If you haven't worked with the > > units of Gain Ratio or Gear-Inches, it's helpful to enter in some known > > setups for reference first. > > > -- > > Jim Edgar > > cyclofi...@earthlink.net > > > Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries -http://www.cyclofiend.com > > Current Classics - Cross Bikes > > Singlespeed - Working Bikes > > > "Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do > > it." > > Mahatma Gandhi > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
happyriding: +1 for spending time with Sheldon's calculator. Great tool. Make a note of which gears you are actually using. With 20+ combinations, most of us only really use a portion of what's there. Especially note the highest gear you're comfortable with. You may find out you've got a cog or 2 at the top end you never use with the big ring. With 8-9-10 cogs, a double can be perfectly reasonable. The important thing to understand is what you need for your riding, and set it up to match. My touring bike has a triple with wide range gearing, because I never know what I'll get myself into. My knock around town bike has an old 7 speed and a couple of orphan rings because it really doesn't matter. dougP On Apr 21, 8:46 am, CycloFiend wrote: > on 4/21/10 4:48 AM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > I have another question. Is a 40x30 double a reasonable alternative > > to a 46x36x26 triple? > > AASHTA - > If you haven't done so, I'd pay a visit to Sheldon's Gear Calculator. > > http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/ > > You can play all kinds of "what ifs" there. If you haven't worked with the > units of Gain Ratio or Gear-Inches, it's helpful to enter in some known > setups for reference first. > > -- > Jim Edgar > cyclofi...@earthlink.net > > Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries -http://www.cyclofiend.com > Current Classics - Cross Bikes > Singlespeed - Working Bikes > > "Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do > it." > Mahatma Gandhi > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
on 4/21/10 4:48 AM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > I have another question. Is a 40x30 double a reasonable alternative > to a 46x36x26 triple? AASHTA - If you haven't done so, I'd pay a visit to Sheldon's Gear Calculator. http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/ You can play all kinds of "what ifs" there. If you haven't worked with the units of Gain Ratio or Gear-Inches, it's helpful to enter in some known setups for reference first. -- Jim Edgar cyclofi...@earthlink.net Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com Current Classics - Cross Bikes Singlespeed - Working Bikes "Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." Mahatma Gandhi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 21, 10:07 am, happyriding wrote: > Whoops. Make that a 46x30 double. as long as you have a low enough gear, it will be reasonable. be aware that if you're looking at a compact with a ring smaller than a 33, it can get spendy. but the nice bit about a lower gearing compacts (46x30; 44x28; etc.) is that you can stay in the big ring for all but really long or really steep climbs. you could always just run a 48 or 46x34 110bcd compact with a wide range cassette to get a low enough gear. but it kind of depends on where your sweet spot is and what kind of riding you're doing. you might end up shifting a lot between rings with this set up. gearing is definitely not one-size-fits-all. i have bikes set up with a 50x34 (11-25), a 48x34 (11-30) and a 44x28 (13-26). all very different bikes for different kinds of riding. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
To answer two questions at once. Indexed shifting a triple is more trouble than its worth. It will need more adjustments and offer less trim finesse. So, skip the indexing and the ramped rings. I run friction shifters and good, but no name LBS silver unpinned rings( 48/34/26) on a DaVinci triple crank and it shifts fine. The only time I ever have a problem is when I have waited too long to drop into the granny. About the gearing. I am considering switching one of bikes (Rambouillet) from a triple to a 44/30 double with an 11x28, 9 spd cassette. This will give the same top gear as my 48x12 and only one gear less on the bottom 30x28 instead of 26x27. One downside I can see to this is that the 11 will probably wear out pretty quickly. If that does happen I think I will move the cassette to a bike with a triple and lock out the 11. Also, the jumps - 12-14-16 - are a little bigger than the 12x27 spacing - 12,13,14,15,17. The only objection I have to triples is the extra work cleaning them. I ride a lot of dirt roads and tired of pulling the whole thing apart (especially the XD with the hidden bolt) to clean the middle ring. Michael On Apr 21, 7:48 am, happyriding wrote: > Hi, > > On Apr 21, 12:43 am, Jeremy Till wrote: > > > The shimano bar end shifters can switch between friction and indexing > > in the rear shifter; the front shifter is only friction. > > Ah hah. Thanks. > > I have another question. Is a 40x30 double a reasonable alternative > to a 46x36x26 triple? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Apr 21, 5:48 am, happyriding wrote: > Hi, > > On Apr 21, 12:43 am, Jeremy Till wrote: > > > The shimano bar end shifters can switch between friction and indexing > > in the rear shifter; the front shifter is only friction. > > Ah hah. Thanks. > > I have another question. Is a 40x30 double a reasonable alternative > to a 46x36x26 triple? > Whoops. Make that a 46x30 double. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 22:40 -0700, happyriding wrote: > Thanks for the replies. Richard, thanks for the velo orange link. > I've read Peter White's article before, but I'm going to read it > again. > > I was under the impression that bar end shifters had two modes: index > and friction. If the bar end shifters are in index mode for the front > derailleur, Front is friction. > do you need ramps and pins for smooth shifting? No -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Hi, On Apr 21, 12:43 am, Jeremy Till wrote: > The shimano bar end shifters can switch between friction and indexing > in the rear shifter; the front shifter is only friction. > Ah hah. Thanks. I have another question. Is a 40x30 double a reasonable alternative to a 46x36x26 triple? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
The shimano bar end shifters can switch between friction and indexing in the rear shifter; the front shifter is only friction. On Apr 20, 10:40 pm, happyriding wrote: > Thanks for the replies. Richard, thanks for the velo orange link. > I've read Peter White's article before, but I'm going to read it > again. > > I was under the impression that bar end shifters had two modes: index > and friction. If the bar end shifters are in index mode for the front > derailleur, do you need ramps and pins for smooth shifting? Or do > most people with triples run the front derailleur in friction mode? > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Thanks for the replies. Richard, thanks for the velo orange link. I've read Peter White's article before, but I'm going to read it again. I was under the impression that bar end shifters had two modes: index and friction. If the bar end shifters are in index mode for the front derailleur, do you need ramps and pins for smooth shifting? Or do most people with triples run the front derailleur in friction mode? Thanks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
I just re-assembled a bike with STI for someone who had it shipped (that's a disclaimer so no one thinks I really know anything about the stuff). In checking that everything worked, the front shifts 1 ring for each push of the lever. The lever must be released and return to rest before shifting to the next ring. There seems to be some sort of ratchet mechanism in there. So the short answer is yes, STI indexes on the front. The bike in question is a few years old Specialized aluminum racy road bike, triple front & 8 speed rear. dougP On Apr 20, 7:46 pm, Shaun Meehan wrote: > I think some of the early Shimano brifters had indexed front shifting > too. Didn't they? RX100... > > Shaun Meehan > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:35 PM, cyclotourist wrote: > > MTBs index the front. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
I think some of the early Shimano brifters had indexed front shifting too. Didn't they? RX100... Shaun Meehan On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:35 PM, cyclotourist wrote: > MTBs index the front. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
MTBs index the front. Strangely, I tried a unpinned chainring, and couldn't get it to shift. It was the middle ring of a triple. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:29 PM, Horace wrote: > I don't think so, since the front is never indexed. > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:52 PM, amoll68 wrote: > >> Not 100% sure about this, but didn't ramps/pins come about because of >> indexed shifting? >> >> I've got a few bikes with old TA rings (thin), and they shift great in >> friction mode. >> >> Alex >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > -- Cheers, David Redlands, CA "Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym." ~Bill Nye, scientist guy -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
Re: [RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
I don't think so, since the front is never indexed. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:52 PM, amoll68 wrote: > Not 100% sure about this, but didn't ramps/pins come about because of > indexed shifting? > > I've got a few bikes with old TA rings (thin), and they shift great in > friction mode. > > Alex > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Not 100% sure about this, but didn't ramps/pins come about because of indexed shifting? I've got a few bikes with old TA rings (thin), and they shift great in friction mode. Alex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
My Atlantis came with ramps & pins on the Sugino. They are good rings & lasted me over 20k miles but I replaced with generic flat rings because they were half the price. The 24 to 36 shift takes a bit more thought with the flat rings but no big deal. With friction it's pretty EZ to over-shift slightly to assure chain pick up. No real difference from middle to big. The ramps & pins don't hurt anything if you're looking at a set-up that already has them. dougP On Apr 20, 12:14 pm, CycloFiend wrote: > on 4/20/10 3:06 AM, happyriding at happyrid...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > What's an alternative to the Sugino XD2 that has ramps and pins (all > > silver finish of course). > > Just a point that the ramps/pins are a function of the chainrings, not the > crank. > > > How big a difference is there with no ramps and pins? > > With friction/manual shifting, little to none. > > I'm running a 38/48 on the Hilsen right now with unpinned (pinless?) rings > on the Sugino , and don't notice a spec o' difference versus the same sized > ones which were on my Ritchey crankset. > > - J > > -- > Jim Edgar > cyclofi...@earthlink.net > > Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries -http://www.cyclofiend.com > Current Classics - Cross Bikes > Singlespeed - Working Bikes > > Send In Your Photos! - Here's how:http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines > > "The bike between her legs was like some hyper-evolved alien tail she'd > somehow extruded, as though over patient centuries; a sweet and intricate > bone-machine, grown Lexan-armored tires, near-frictionless bearings, and gas > filled shocks." > > William Gibson - "Virtual Light" > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Having just made the transition from my 2007 Salsa Casseroll Triple featuring stock / full Shimano STI 105 shifting to my Atlantis with bar end shifters / Campy FD / Deore XT RD / Sugino XD2 triple I can say I actually like the friction shifting better but find no appreciable difference in ramps pin etc. On Apr 20, 7:33 am, Richard wrote: > Here's a Sugino crank to consider. > > http://www.velo-orange.com/suoldlotr.html > > I believe the pins and ramps are not a big deal if the front > derailleur is friction, not STI or similar. The following is from > Peter White's web site, and might also be useful. > > http://peterwhitecycles.com/chainrings.asp > > On Apr 20, 5:06 am, happyriding wrote: > > > Hi, > > > What's an alternative to the Sugino XD2 that has ramps and pins (all > > silver finish of course). > > > How big a difference is there with no ramps and pins? > > > Thanks. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
[RBW] Re: cranks: ramps and pins v. none
Here's a Sugino crank to consider. http://www.velo-orange.com/suoldlotr.html I believe the pins and ramps are not a big deal if the front derailleur is friction, not STI or similar. The following is from Peter White's web site, and might also be useful. http://peterwhitecycles.com/chainrings.asp On Apr 20, 5:06 am, happyriding wrote: > Hi, > > What's an alternative to the Sugino XD2 that has ramps and pins (all > silver finish of course). > > How big a difference is there with no ramps and pins? > > Thanks. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
