| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 21 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 27:44:12 |
| Calls: | 139 |
| Files: | 91 |
| Messages: | 42,665 |
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote:
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head >>>>> than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads.
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads >>>> than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them >>>> which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about, >>> why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming >>> the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local >> bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head >>>>>>> than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads.
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads >>>>>> than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them >>>>>> which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about, >>>>> why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming >>>>> the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local >>>> bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano >>> and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's >>> are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the
Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the >> rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not >>> go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense >>> as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing >>> that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were
perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them >>> to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have
prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels >>> they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete >>> lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what >> ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head >>>>>>>> than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them >>>>>>> which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about, >>>>>> why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming >>>>>> the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local >>>>> bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano >>>> and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's >>>> are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the
Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the >>> rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not >>>> go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense >>>> as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing >>>> that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were
perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them >>>> to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at >>>> them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have
prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels >>>> they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete >>>> lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers >>>> because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting >>>> now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what >>> ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to
copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that
feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of >MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while itÆs cheap for Electronic itÆs not a cheap groupset >ú370 for shifters and mechÆs plus callipers so need >chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer >bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, itÆs really not seen bar older
road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews donÆt see >it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who
are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head >>>>>>>>> than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them >>>>>>>> which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about, >>>>>>> why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming >>>>>>> the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local >>>>>> bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano >>>>> and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the >>>>> Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's >>>>> are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the
Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the >>>> rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not >>>>> go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense >>>>> as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing >>>>> that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the >>>>> Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were >>>>> perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them >>>>> to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at >>>>> them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have
prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels >>>>> they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete >>>>> lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers >>>>> because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting >>>>> now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group >>> companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to >>> copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that
feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of >> MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while its cheap for Electronic its not a cheap groupset
£370 for shifters and mechs plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer >> bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, its really not seen bar older
road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews dont see >> it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who
are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes.
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull
(all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've
slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off
the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are
Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar
end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull
and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic
brakes I wouldn't use them.
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why
wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head >>>>>>>>>> than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them >>>>>>>>> which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about, >>>>>>>> why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano >>>>>> and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the >>>>>> Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's >>>>>> are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the
Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense >>>>>> as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the >>>>>> Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were >>>>>> perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them >>>>>> to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at >>>>>> them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels >>>>>> they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete >>>>>> lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers >>>>>> because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting >>>>>> now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group >>>> companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to >>>> copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and >>>> rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that
feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of >>> MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset >>> ú370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer >>> bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older >>> road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see >>> it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who >>> are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes.
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull
(all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've
slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off
the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown
headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are
Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar
end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull
and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic
brakes I wouldn't use them.
they shine in filthy conditions as itÆs easier to hold a bike at the ragged >edge of traction than lock up.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible
folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
This said your use-case is unlikely to be demanding on brakes, so very much >good enough will do,
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why
wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable headI have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them >>>>>>>>>> which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the >>>>>>> Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the
crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the
Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the >>>>>>> Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were >>>>>>> perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at >>>>>>> them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers >>>>>>> because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting >>>>>>> now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group >>>>> companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to >>>>> copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and >>>>> rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that >>>> feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
£370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer >>>> bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older >>>> road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who >>>> are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes.
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull
(all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've
slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off
the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown
headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are
Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar
end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull
and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic
brakes I wouldn't use them.
they shine in filthy conditions as its easier to hold a bike at the ragged >> edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain
quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible >> folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
Oh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement
over my BB7s.
This said your use-case is unlikely to be demanding on brakes, so very much >> good enough will do,
True, I don't do a lot of braking.
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
Not awkward, but impossible on Catrikes and most other tadpole trikes. There's no front forks. I've seen home-made trikes with front forks
and they are ugly and ridiculous.
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why
wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable headI have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech. >>>>>>>>>>
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the >>>>>>>> Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the >>>>>>>> crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the
Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the >>>>>>>> Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were >>>>>>>> perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to >>>>>> copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and >>>>>> rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that >>>>> feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
ú370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer
bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older >>>>> road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who >>>>> are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes.
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull
(all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've
slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off
the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown >>>> headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are
Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar
end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull
and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic >>>> brakes I wouldn't use them.
they shine in filthy conditions as it?s easier to hold a bike at the ragged >>> edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain
quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible >>> folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
Oh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement
over my BB7s.
A calliper with dual pistons is certainly an upgrade as the BB7/5 are
single pistons with non moving block for the other pad.
And they do exist and do give a bit more power. IÆd be surprised if there >wasnÆt some engineering performance left within cable disks and similar >systems, unlikely to be huge admittedly.
Looks like hub brakes where and are used still.This said your use-case is unlikely to be demanding on brakes, so very much >>> good enough will do,
True, I don't do a lot of braking.
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
Not awkward, but impossible on Catrikes and most other tadpole trikes.
There's no front forks. I've seen home-made trikes with front forks
and they are ugly and ridiculous.
Roger Merriman
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 12:14:25 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> >>>>>> wrote:Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why >>>>> they shine in filthy conditions as it?s easier to hold a bike at the ragged
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote:This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the >>>>>>>>>> crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the >>>>>>>>> Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the >>>>>>>>>> Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were >>>>>>>>>> perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part. >>>>>>>>>>
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to
copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that >>>>>>> feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
ú370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer
bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older
road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who
are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes. >>>>>>
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull >>>>>> (all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've
slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off >>>>>> the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown >>>>>> headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are >>>>>> Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar >>>>>> end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull >>>>>> and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic >>>>>> brakes I wouldn't use them.
edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain
quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible
folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
Oh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement
over my BB7s.
A calliper with dual pistons is certainly an upgrade as the BB7/5 are
single pistons with non moving block for the other pad.
And they do exist and do give a bit more power. I?d be surprised if there >>> wasn?t some engineering performance left within cable disks and similar
systems, unlikely to be huge admittedly.
Like I said, my BB7s are easily capable of lifting my rear wheel off
the ground, slamming the chainrings into the ground, and propelling me
headfirst out of the seat. Why would I want any more braking power?
All bike brakes are ie capable of emergency stop, particularly on flat
ground all bikes IÆve ever owned from Hydraulic disks to various rim brakes >and so on are more than capable of an emergency stop.
ThatÆs not where you notice powerful brakes, or if your brakes are rather >subpar.
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 12:14:25 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why >>>> they shine in filthy conditions as it?s easier to hold a bike at the ragged
wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable headI have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech. >>>>>>>>>>>
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the >>>>>>>>> Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the >>>>>>>>> crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the >>>>>>>> Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the >>>>>>>>> Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were >>>>>>>>> perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to
copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and >>>>>>> rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that >>>>>> feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
£370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer
bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older >>>>>> road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who >>>>>> are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes.
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull
(all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've
slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off
the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown >>>>> headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are >>>>> Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar >>>>> end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull
and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic >>>>> brakes I wouldn't use them.
edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain
quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible >>>> folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
Oh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement
over my BB7s.
A calliper with dual pistons is certainly an upgrade as the BB7/5 are
single pistons with non moving block for the other pad.
And they do exist and do give a bit more power. Id be surprised if there >> wasnt some engineering performance left within cable disks and similar
systems, unlikely to be huge admittedly.
Like I said, my BB7s are easily capable of lifting my rear wheel off
the ground, slamming the chainrings into the ground, and propelling me headfirst out of the seat. Why would I want any more braking power?
Looks like hub brakes where and are used still.This said your use-case is unlikely to be demanding on brakes, so very much
good enough will do,
True, I don't do a lot of braking.
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
Not awkward, but impossible on Catrikes and most other tadpole trikes.
There's no front forks. I've seen home-made trikes with front forks
and they are ugly and ridiculous.
Roger Merriman
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 17:36:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 12:14:25 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> >>>>>>> wrote:Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why >>>>>> they shine in filthy conditions as it?s easier to hold a bike at the ragged
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote:This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the >>>>>>>>>>> crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the >>>>>>>>>> Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were
perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part. >>>>>>>>>>>
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to
copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that
feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
£370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer
bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older
road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who
are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes. >>>>>>>
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull >>>>>>> (all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've >>>>>>> slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off >>>>>>> the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown >>>>>>> headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are >>>>>>> Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar >>>>>>> end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull >>>>>>> and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic >>>>>>> brakes I wouldn't use them.
edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain
quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible
folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
Oh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement >>>>> over my BB7s.
A calliper with dual pistons is certainly an upgrade as the BB7/5 are
single pistons with non moving block for the other pad.
And they do exist and do give a bit more power. I?d be surprised if there >>>> wasn?t some engineering performance left within cable disks and similar >>>> systems, unlikely to be huge admittedly.
Like I said, my BB7s are easily capable of lifting my rear wheel off
the ground, slamming the chainrings into the ground, and propelling me
headfirst out of the seat. Why would I want any more braking power?
All bike brakes are ie capable of emergency stop, particularly on flat
ground all bikes I’ve ever owned from Hydraulic disks to various rim brakes
and so on are more than capable of an emergency stop.
That’s not where you notice powerful brakes, or if your brakes are rather >> subpar.
Ok, so where would I notice my brakes lack of power and rather subpar?
On 8/6/2024 8:14 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:For a time, I owned a low recumbent tadpole trike, a custom build that
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Looks like hub brakes where and are used still.
wrote:
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
Not awkward, but impossible on Catrikes and most other tadpole trikes.
There's no front forks. I've seen home-made trikes with front forks
and they are ugly and ridiculous.
had belonged to a friend who passed away. It had two front drum brakes.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/1801438406/in/dateposted-public/
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:19:10 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 8:14 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:For a time, I owned a low recumbent tadpole trike, a custom build that
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Looks like hub brakes where and are used still.
wrote:
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
Not awkward, but impossible on Catrikes and most other tadpole trikes. >>>> There's no front forks. I've seen home-made trikes with front forks
and they are ugly and ridiculous.
had belonged to a friend who passed away. It had two front drum brakes.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/1801438406/in/dateposted-public/
Hideous thing.. No front forks, but still ugly and ridiculous.
On 8/6/2024 8:14 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:For a time, I owned a low recumbent tadpole trike, a custom build that
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>Looks like hub brakes where and are used still.
wrote:
and I believe that rim brakes are awkward to fit to
trikes.
Not awkward, but impossible on Catrikes and most other tadpole trikes.
There's no front forks. I've seen home-made trikes with front forks
and they are ugly and ridiculous.
had belonged to a friend who passed away. It had two front drum brakes.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/16972296@N08/1801438406/in/dateposted-public/
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 17:36:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 12:14:25 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> >>>>>>> wrote:Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why >>>>>> they shine in filthy conditions as it?s easier to hold a bike at the ragged
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote:This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the >>>>>>>>>>> crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the >>>>>>>>>> Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were
perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part. >>>>>>>>>>>
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to
copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that
feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
£370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer
bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older
road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who
are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes. >>>>>>>
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull >>>>>>> (all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've >>>>>>> slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off >>>>>>> the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown >>>>>>> headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are >>>>>>> Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar >>>>>>> end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull >>>>>>> and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic >>>>>>> brakes I wouldn't use them.
edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain
quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possible
folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs.
Oh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement >>>>> over my BB7s.
A calliper with dual pistons is certainly an upgrade as the BB7/5 are
single pistons with non moving block for the other pad.
And they do exist and do give a bit more power. I?d be surprised if there >>>> wasn?t some engineering performance left within cable disks and similar >>>> systems, unlikely to be huge admittedly.
Like I said, my BB7s are easily capable of lifting my rear wheel off
the ground, slamming the chainrings into the ground, and propelling me
headfirst out of the seat. Why would I want any more braking power?
All bike brakes are ie capable of emergency stop, particularly on flat
ground all bikes Ive ever owned from Hydraulic disks to various rim brakes >> and so on are more than capable of an emergency stop.
Thats not where you notice powerful brakes, or if your brakes are rather >> subpar.
Ok, so where would I notice my brakes lack of power and rather subpar?
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 17:36:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>No idea frankly or if itÆs even possible to be hard on the brakes on a
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Aug 2024 12:14:25 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:30:45 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> >>>>>> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:59:29 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:Cable disks are more grabby ie more on/off than Hydraulic. Which is why >>>>>>> they shine in filthy conditions as it?s easier to hold a bike at the ragged
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat Aug 3 07:38:20 2024 Roger Merriman wrote:
Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote:This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head
than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads.
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads
than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the >>>>>>>>>>>> crank bumps your ankle?
None of these are MTB Groupsets and to be honest I tend to the >>>>>>>>>>> Tiagra/GRX/Deore/SLX mix and the old commute bike has Cues or at least the
rear mech/cassette and shifter.
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing
that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were
perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have >>>>>>>>>>>> prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete
lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers
because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Their woes have nothing to do with any perceived cables woes, they for what
ever reason seem to have lost their way.
Roger Merriman
My feeling is that electronic shifting will be the end of the major group
companies. electronic shifting and hydraulic discs is EASY for anyone to
copy. It was VERY expensive to tool up for high end manual shifting and
rim brakes. Campy was making a small fortune making aluminum wheels for rim brakes.
Is a fair difference between cheap hydraulic and mid end stuff, be that
feel or even performance ie brute torque, though that is admittedly more of
MTB and DH ish end than road or even Gravel bikes.
But to be honest, while it?s cheap for Electronic it?s not a cheap groupset
ú370 for shifters and mech?s plus callipers so need
chain/cassette/chainrings/bottom brake etc.
So cost wise about the same as GRX/Tiagra which while cable are much safer
bet!
But Campagnolo kinda needs to find focus, it?s really not seen bar older
road bikes, while their Gravel Groupset did get some good reviews don?t see
it in the flesh on bikes.
You see Shimano who are fairly steady and quite conservative or SRAM who
are by some margin more progressive with their technology.
Or on the more budget end MicroShift.
Roger Merriman
I'm not the least bit interested in converting to hydraulic brakes. >>>>>>>>
My Avid BB7 road brakes stop so well that I set them so a full pull >>>>>>>> (all the way to the grips) will not lock up the wheels until I've >>>>>>>> slowed down to about 5 MPH. I prefer not to lift the back wheel off >>>>>>>> the ground, slam the chainrings into the ground, and risk being thrown >>>>>>>> headfirst out of the seat. The Catrike original equipment brakes are >>>>>>>> Avid BB7 MTN which are long pull, but I wanted to use Cane Creek bar >>>>>>>> end TT brake levers which require the BB7 road calipers' short pull >>>>>>>> and work on my preferred handlebar configuration.
Price is not a factor. If somebody gave a pair of compatible hydraulic >>>>>>>> brakes I wouldn't use them.
edge of traction than lock up.
I don't ride in filty conditions, although I do get caught in rain >>>>>> quite often. Keeping the disks and the pads clean goes a long way
towards keeping them from grabbing.
The reasons why companies choose cable vs disks will be costs and possibleOh, I know how old the design is, but I can't imagine any improvement >>>>>> over my BB7s.
folding, cable disks such as the BB7 are 20 ish years old designs. >>>>>>
A calliper with dual pistons is certainly an upgrade as the BB7/5 are >>>>> single pistons with non moving block for the other pad.
And they do exist and do give a bit more power. I?d be surprised if there >>>>> wasn?t some engineering performance left within cable disks and similar >>>>> systems, unlikely to be huge admittedly.
Like I said, my BB7s are easily capable of lifting my rear wheel off
the ground, slamming the chainrings into the ground, and propelling me >>>> headfirst out of the seat. Why would I want any more braking power?
All bike brakes are ie capable of emergency stop, particularly on flat
ground all bikes I?ve ever owned from Hydraulic disks to various rim brakes >>> and so on are more than capable of an emergency stop.
That?s not where you notice powerful brakes, or if your brakes are rather >>> subpar.
Ok, so where would I notice my brakes lack of power and rather subpar?
Trike but certainly on a flat good surface all really your going to get is >ôyup brakes workö
As you noted youÆre not hard on brakes which isnÆt a performative just
fact.
To be honest most of the time same is true on the commute bike, I have >relatively few places that I need to stop and itÆs flat etc so hardly
braking hard or working the brakes hard, or even warming them up really, >unlike Monday out with some folks for a spin and coming down one hill could >hear the brakes start to warm up, no danger of fading or discolouring the >rotors but they where warmed up.
Roger Merriman
On 8/6/2024 7:11 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
As you noted youÆre not hard on brakes which isnÆt a performative just
fact.
To be honest most of the time same is true on the commute bike, I have
relatively few places that I need to stop and itÆs flat etc so hardly
braking hard or working the brakes hard, or even warming them up really...
That's an important point. Almost no bicyclists are really hard on
brakes - which, in my view, makes the current fashion for disc brakes
pretty silly.
Mountain bikers dealing with abrasive mud, every day commuters like our >former friend Jay Beattie, people riding monstrously heavy things like
cargo bikes, etc. can probably justify discs as a practical matter.
Almost all others have always done fine with rim brakes. That includes
me, crossing both the Appalachians and the Rockies with full camping
loads. Also, the ridiculously steep hills in Devon.
People riding flat Florida rail-trails
can probably stop adequately by
dragging their feet on the ground.
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
áI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
áI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
áI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility. Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and
we'll all believe you.
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 16:01:04 +0200, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de>
wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility. Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and
we'll all believe you.
I suspect that I'm better qualified to estimate my stopping distance
than anyone who has not applied the dual front caliper brakes on a
Catrike. At any rate, I'm not particularly interested in whether or
not anyone believes me. I'm still thinking it's about 20 feet. You're
free to believe whatever you want.
On 8/7/2024 10:01 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
ááI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility.á Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and
we'll all believe you.
Right. He's tried to brag by pulling numbers out of his imagination,
hoping to make his equipment choices sound impressive.
Also, "Remember I have two front wheels" indicates near total ignorance
of the physics involved. Assuming a flat Florida bike path, a machine
with even six front wheels could not decelerate faster than allowed by
the coefficient of friction.
On 8/7/2024 10:06 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I'm not particularly interested in whether or
not anyone believes me.
We'll keep in mind that your numbers are random and not to be believed.
On 8/7/2024 10:38 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 10:27:13 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 8/7/2024 10:01 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
ááI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM >>>>> tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork, >>>>> which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note >>>>> the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility.á Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and >>>> we'll all believe you.
Right. He's tried to brag by pulling numbers out of his imagination,
hoping to make his equipment choices sound impressive.
Also, "Remember I have two front wheels" indicates near total ignorance
of the physics involved. Assuming a flat Florida bike path, a machine
with even six front wheels could not decelerate faster than allowed by
the coefficient of friction.
You're free to believe whatever you want, too, Krygowski. It's not as
though I have any respect your analysis.
It's physics. You know, science. But I'm not surprised you have no
respect for it.
Am 07.08.2024 um 16:06 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 16:01:04 +0200, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de>
wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
áI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility. Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and
we'll all believe you.
I suspect that I'm better qualified to estimate my stopping distance
than anyone who has not applied the dual front caliper brakes on a
Catrike. At any rate, I'm not particularly interested in whether or
not anyone believes me. I'm still thinking it's about 20 feet. You're
free to believe whatever you want.
I' happy to believe anybody's claim that their bicycle brakes better
than a racing car, especially if they guess their braking distance
rather than measuring it.
I am also willing to believe any fisherman who claims they have caught a >200lbs fish of a species that normally only grow to 100 lbs, just
because believing them avoids any meaningless discussions.
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 16:01:04 +0200, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de>
wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility. Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and >>we'll all believe you.
I suspect that I'm better qualified to estimate my stopping distance
than anyone who has not applied the dual front caliper brakes on a
Catrike. At any rate, I'm not particularly interested in whether or
not anyone believes me. I'm still thinking it's about 20 feet. You're
free to believe whatever you want.
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> writes:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 16:01:04 +0200, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de>
wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
áI have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes for really
good credibility. Make that 40ft braking distance instead of 20ft and >>>we'll all believe you.
I suspect that I'm better qualified to estimate my stopping distance
than anyone who has not applied the dual front caliper brakes on a
Catrike. At any rate, I'm not particularly interested in whether or
not anyone believes me. I'm still thinking it's about 20 feet. You're
free to believe whatever you want.
I'll believe what seems at least possible. 48 ft/s^2 deceleration without >some sort of aerodynamic effect is not.
30 m/hr = 44 ft/s, so 20 feet would zip by in less than half a second -- >seems like a maneuver out of Formula 1, or maybe Star Wars.
Am 07.08.2024 um 16:06 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 16:01:04 +0200, Rolf Mantel
<news@hartig-mantel.de>
wrote:
Am 07.08.2024 um 15:27 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration
(which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works
out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a
coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge
samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably
not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk
brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was
pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about."
I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Just throwing some random numbers into a discussion makes
for really
good credibility. Make that 40ft braking distance
instead of 20ft and
we'll all believe you.
I suspect that I'm better qualified to estimate my
stopping distance
than anyone who has not applied the dual front caliper
brakes on a
Catrike. At any rate, I'm not particularly interested in
whether or
not anyone believes me. I'm still thinking it's about 20
feet. You're
free to believe whatever you want.
I' happy to believe anybody's claim that their bicycle
brakes better than a racing car, especially if they guess
their braking distance rather than measuring it.
I am also willing to believe any fisherman who claims they
have caught a 200lbs fish of a species that normally only
grow to 100 lbs, just because believing them avoids any
meaningless discussions.
On 8/6/2024 7:11 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
As you noted you’re not hard on brakes which isn’t a performative just >> fact.
To be honest most of the time same is true on the commute bike, I have
relatively few places that I need to stop and it’s flat etc so hardly
braking hard or working the brakes hard, or even warming them up really...
That's an important point. Almost no bicyclists are really hard on
brakes - which, in my view, makes the current fashion for disc brakes
pretty silly.
Mountain bikers dealing with abrasive mud, every day commuters like our former friend Jay Beattie, people riding monstrously heavy things like
cargo bikes, etc. can probably justify discs as a practical matter.
Almost all others have always done fine with rim brakes. That includes
me, crossing both the Appalachians and the Rockies with full camping
loads. Also, the ridiculously steep hills in Devon.
People riding flat Florida rail-trails can probably stop adequately by dragging their feet on the ground.
On 8/7/2024 8:27 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:07:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2024 7:31 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I have no
trouble braking from 30 MPH down to a near stop in about
twenty feet,
and remember with me, the bike, and my gear I'm stopping
over 250 LBS.
That's fascinating. Assuming constant deceleration (which is
actually charitable), my calculations show that works out to
a deceleration of over 48 ft/s^2. That's 1.5 times the
acceleration of gravity, which would require a coefficient
of friction equal to a minimum of 1.5.
To summarize all that in less technical terms: Bullshit.
I wondered about that as well.
The motorcycle industry has wider data sets with huge samples:
http://www.louispeck.com/motorcycle-braking
Even given the lower CG of a tricycle, 1.5g is probably not
going to happen.
Remember that I have two front wheels, both with disk brakes and 40MM
tires. I admit that my estimation of the distance was pure guesswork,
which is why I tempered the statement with an "about." I'll take note
the next time I ride that segment.
Since the practical limit for peak braking force is usually
tire contact area not disc performance per se, in the
motorcycle world twin discs are considered best for
sustained heat dissipation ( higher speeds, heavier
vehicles) and not peak brake force.
You're right that two front tires are more significant than
two front discs.
On Tue Nov 21 13:55:36 2023 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 11/20/2023 12:46 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 4:43:31?PM UTC-8, Graeme FK wrote:
As others have pointed out, CA have always used a smaller cable head >>>>> than Shimano, predating Shimano in the gear lever market by several decades.
It sounds as if you cables fitted have Shimano-dimension heads.
I have Chinese replacement inner cables that have smaller diameter heads >>>> than Campagnolo. Unfortunately, some of them have mold marks on them
which make these slightly larger than the Campy ends.
This makes no sense. If the "mold marks" are a problem you know about,
why not simply file or grind them off when you see them, before jamming
the cables into place?
15 seconds with a Dremel vs. hours of bitching on r.b.tech.
Or buy the proper stuff, which presumably will work correctly from local
bike shops possibly a few dollars more?
Roger Merriman
Roger, is that the way you build your MTB's? You go and buy 100% Shimano
and even the cranks and BB's are Shimano even though we know that the
Dura Ace and Ultegra cranks failed at imappropriate times? And the 105's
are built so that the left side "knuckle" at the center of the crank bumps your ankle?
I know that you mix your parts to try and satisfy yourself and you do not
go down to a dealer and by easily obtainable parts for twice the expense
as copies that are just as good. Don't play this game that Campy is doing that somehow a Campy copy inner shift wire isn't just as good as the
Campy version. I looked in my collectiuon and 85% of the copies were
perfect and only 15% had slight mold marks on them that would cause them
to stick if you didn't know what to look for and simply take a swipe at
them with a fine file.
The point was that 1. FROM THE FACTORY Campy parts do not all have prethreaded shift cable inners and 2. although they MAKE the extra reels
they do not sell them because it is more profitable to sell the complete lever replacements.
I disapprove of actions like that and apparently so does the pro-racers because I can't think of any team that is using Campy electric shifting
now. The moral is - don't make enemies for a 10 cent part.