brake failure

Mike

In article <C4udnRjfw8vj4KDVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@earthlink.com>, cyclintom@yahoo. says...
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:rsednQT974QbdaHVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> > Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>
> >> When did you developed the ability to tell the difference between 15
> >> ft/lbs and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?
> >
> > the day i got a fisherman's spring balance. you know, the type you weigh
> > your bike with.
> >
> > btw, your unflagged snippage renders the context somewhat misconstructed.
>
> Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply attack him
> under any circumstances and you will make up anything in order to attack
> him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying to discuss anything with
> you because you simply want an adversarial relationship on this group.
>
Tom, you have just discovered what I discovered a few weeks ago. But note that he will attack anyone on anything to
achieve this aim - Jobst is just convenient at present.

Tom Kunich

"Mike" <m.fee@iirrll..ccrrii..nnzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.22a8b8d72a22bdff989830@news.fx.net.nz...
> In article <C4udnRjfw8vj4KDVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> cyclintom@yahoo. says...
>>
>> Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply attack
>> him
>> under any circumstances and you will make up anything in order to attack
>> him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying to discuss anything
>> with
>> you because you simply want an adversarial relationship on this group.
>
> Tom, you have just discovered what I discovered a few weeks ago. But note
> that he will attack anyone on anything to
> achieve this aim - Jobst is just convenient at present.

Well, it isn't as if Jobs doesn't deserve a swift kick now and again but at
least it should be something for which he's guilty.

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada

On Tue, 27 May 2008 20:54:03 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.
com> wrote:

>"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>news:0oSdncOi6pfYLaHVnZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org, although we have to wonder how he ever
>> graduated, wrote:
>>
>>> As was mentioned, caliper arms act in bending against
>>> elastomeric brake pads, causing elasticity in brake response.
>>
>> actually jobst, you know how the rear brake system is more elastic than
>> the front? well, that's 100% because of cable/cable run elasticity. the
>> pads cancel out of that equation.
>
>Jim. if you don't understand what Jobst is talking about why are you making
>such stupid statements? Remove a flexible cable that stretches x. Replace it
>with a stiffer cable that doesn't flex and now the pads compress. How do you
>tell the difference?
>
>> typical ill-considered presumptive jobstian nonsense. the pads, because
>> of low force per area, won't deflect much. a nice long cable run otoh
>> most definitely will. as will calipers, levers, and even frames where the
>> brakes are cantilever.
>
>Have you ever bothered to actually LOOK at the braking system on a bicycle?
>The entire mechanism is flexible because it's being made as light as
>possible.
>
>> again, check lever displacement per unit force comparison between front
>> and rear. with caliper brakes, that easily determined differential is
>> simply cable elasticity.
>
>When did you developed the ability to tell the difference between 15 ft/lbs
>and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?

Not hard to tell if a cable is stretching (or cable sheath
compressing).Particularly on a "V" brake.
Measure the distance between the tops of the brake "caliper" arms with
the brake handle pulled just past firm contact, then squeeze the
handle hard and see if the measurement changes. If the handles get
closer to the bar without that measurement changing it IS the cables -
not the brake "caliper" arms or pads, or anything else.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

jim beam

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:rsednQT974QbdaHVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>
>>> When did you developed the ability to tell the difference between 15
>>> ft/lbs and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?
>>
>> the day i got a fisherman's spring balance. you know, the type you
>> weigh your bike with.
>>
>> btw, your unflagged snippage renders the context somewhat misconstructed.
>
> Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply attack
> him under any circumstances and you will make up anything in order to
> attack him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying to discuss
> anything with you because you simply want an adversarial relationship on
> this group.
>

here's /your/ bottom line - you're focused on form, not content. jobst
is incorrect when he attributes braking elasticity solely to
"elastomeric brake pads".

if you want be fooled by the artfully formed, but fundamentally flawed
content this typical of jobstian posts, then i guess that's your
problem. but before you vocalize your distaste for my pointing out his
errors, bear in mind that /my/ interest is factual content - and i
choose a presentation style in mock irony ridicule of the very form
jobst uses himself when he bullies anyone who dares point out his
errors. bullying that has kept many experts off this forum for as log
as r.b.t has existed.

Tom Kunich

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:FcKdnV-aepmWkqPVnZ2dnUVZ_qXinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>
> here's /your/ bottom line - you're focused on form, not content. jobst is
> incorrect when he attributes braking elasticity solely to "elastomeric
> brake pads".

Hmm, and all this time I thought that he attributed it to elastic outer
cable covers AND elastomeric pads. By the way, me too.

Jobst has many negatives in his corner for sure, but he has an overwhelming
positive - he actually knows what he's talking about.

Tim McNamara

In article <C4udnRjfw8vj4KDVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:rsednQT974QbdaHVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> > Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>
> >> When did you developed the ability to tell the difference between
> >> 15 ft/lbs and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?
> >
> > the day i got a fisherman's spring balance. you know, the type you
> > weigh your bike with.
> >
> > btw, your unflagged snippage renders the context somewhat
> > misconstructed.
>
> Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply
> attack him under any circumstances and you will make up anything in
> order to attack him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying to
> discuss anything with you because you simply want an adversarial
> relationship on this group.

That sums it up.

Tim McNamara

In article <MPG.22a8b8d72a22bdff989830@news.fx.net.nz>,
Mike <m.fee@iirrll..ccrrii..nnzz> wrote:

> In article <C4udnRjfw8vj4KDVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> cyclintom@yahoo. says...
> > "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> > news:rsednQT974QbdaHVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> > > Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >>
> > >> When did you developed the ability to tell the difference
> > >> between 15 ft/lbs and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?
> > >
> > > the day i got a fisherman's spring balance. you know, the type
> > > you weigh your bike with.
> > >
> > > btw, your unflagged snippage renders the context somewhat
> > > misconstructed.
> >
> > Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply
> > attack him under any circumstances and you will make up anything in
> > order to attack him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying
> > to discuss anything with you because you simply want an adversarial
> > relationship on this group.
> >
> Tom, you have just discovered what I discovered a few weeks ago. But
> note that he will attack anyone on anything to achieve this aim -
> Jobst is just convenient at present.

jim beam has a particular and frankly bizarre obsession with Jobst.

jim beam

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:FcKdnV-aepmWkqPVnZ2dnUVZ_qXinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>
>> here's /your/ bottom line - you're focused on form, not content.
>> jobst is incorrect when he attributes braking elasticity solely to
>> "elastomeric brake pads".
>
> Hmm, and all this time I thought that he attributed it to elastic outer
> cable covers AND elastomeric pads. By the way, me too.

then you didn't read what i said!!! identical calipers, pads, levers,
different cables, front and rear. the rear lever /always/ get more
displacement, and that is /entirely/ due to the greater elasticity of
the longer cable. jobst says observed elasticity is only "elastomeric
brake pads". it's not, and the above proves it! sheesh.


>
> Jobst has many negatives in his corner for sure, but he has an
> overwhelming positive - he actually knows what he's talking about.

jobst's talent is writing for the peanut gallery in terms that they
believe, regardless of actual accuracy. you've just proved to be a case
in point.

jim beam

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <MPG.22a8b8d72a22bdff989830@news.fx.net.nz>,
> Mike <m.fee@iirrll..ccrrii..nnzz> wrote:
>
>> In article <C4udnRjfw8vj4KDVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
>> cyclintom@yahoo. says...
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:rsednQT974QbdaHVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>> When did you developed the ability to tell the difference
>>>>> between 15 ft/lbs and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?
>>>> the day i got a fisherman's spring balance. you know, the type
>>>> you weigh your bike with.
>>>>
>>>> btw, your unflagged snippage renders the context somewhat
>>>> misconstructed.
>>> Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply
>>> attack him under any circumstances and you will make up anything in
>>> order to attack him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying
>>> to discuss anything with you because you simply want an adversarial
>>> relationship on this group.
>>>
>> Tom, you have just discovered what I discovered a few weeks ago. But
>> note that he will attack anyone on anything to achieve this aim -
>> Jobst is just convenient at present.
>
> jim beam has a particular and frankly bizarre obsession with Jobst.

timmy the retard seems to have a frankly bizarre obsession with saying
that.

where's your buddy frank then timmy? don't you two generally get
together to suck each others organs at moments of intellectual poverty
like this?

jim beam

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <C4udnRjfw8vj4KDVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:rsednQT974QbdaHVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> When did you developed the ability to tell the difference between
>>>> 15 ft/lbs and 17 ft/lbs of force manually?
>>> the day i got a fisherman's spring balance. you know, the type you
>>> weigh your bike with.
>>>
>>> btw, your unflagged snippage renders the context somewhat
>>> misconstructed.
>> Here's the bottom line - you don't like Jobst and you will simply
>> attack him under any circumstances and you will make up anything in
>> order to attack him. There doesn't seem to be any point in trying to
>> discuss anything with you because you simply want an adversarial
>> relationship on this group.
>
> That sums it up.


have you done any gaussian distributions lately timmy? how about bother
to check factual accuracy on any r.b.t contributions? your own even?
oh, wait, you never bother with content. my bad.

A Muzi

>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>> here's /your/ bottom line - you're focused on form, not content.
>>> jobst is incorrect when he attributes braking elasticity solely to
>>> "elastomeric brake pads".

> Tom Kunich wrote:
>> Hmm, and all this time I thought that he attributed it to elastic
>> outer cable covers AND elastomeric pads. By the way, me too.

jim beam wrote:
> then you didn't read what i said!!! identical calipers, pads, levers,
> different cables, front and rear. the rear lever /always/ get more
> displacement, and that is /entirely/ due to the greater elasticity of
> the longer cable. jobst says observed elasticity is only "elastomeric
> brake pads". it's not, and the above proves it! sheesh.

Are you saying the extra spiral-wound casing and fittings on a rear are
not a factor but longer steel stranded wire is a factor?? Stop and think
that over.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Tom Kunich

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:9cWdnQLiw4PEsqPVnZ2dnUVZ_srinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>
> then you didn't read what i said!!! identical calipers, pads, levers,
> different cables, front and rear. the rear lever /always/ get more
> displacement, and that is /entirely/ due to the greater elasticity of the
> longer cable. jobst says observed elasticity is only "elastomeric brake
> pads". it's not, and the above proves it! sheesh.

Invention again?

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

someone wrote:

>> I don't see how cable stretch can be determined from hand lever
>> motion.

> If "nothing" else changes in either set-up or riding conditions
> other than a switch from cable A to cable B, then what other reasons
> are there for not getting wheel lock prior to bottoming out with one
> cable when it turns out to be consistently possible with another?

Without some background and measurements, this is the same old story
that lets riders bel;ieve in cable stretch. I have not seen it in
many years of bicycling, only keep hearing claims.

> An amazing amount of cable housing seating occurring during the
> first half mile of the 2nd ride that for some reason just didn't
> happen during the 3 miles of the 1st ride?

Amazing story!

Jobst Brandt

jim beam

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> someone wrote:
>
>>> I don't see how cable stretch can be determined from hand lever
>>> motion.
>
>> If "nothing" else changes in either set-up or riding conditions
>> other than a switch from cable A to cable B, then what other reasons
>> are there for not getting wheel lock prior to bottoming out with one
>> cable when it turns out to be consistently possible with another?
>
> Without some background and measurements, this is the same old story
> that lets riders bel;ieve in cable stretch.

jobst, this is not faith, it's fact: it's _impossible_ to load anything
without some degree of deformation. the question then is, to what
extent does it happen?


> I have not seen it in
> many years of bicycling,

then you're not looking!


> only keep hearing claims.

interesting how you're happy to expound theories about eliminating metal
fatigue in a material with no endurance limit, contrary to established
fact, yet here, where mechanical principles are much more basic, you
seem to have comprehension problems.


>
>> An amazing amount of cable housing seating occurring during the
>> first half mile of the 2nd ride that for some reason just didn't
>> happen during the 3 miles of the 1st ride?
>
> Amazing story!

it's perfectly reasonable jobst - the only thing that's amazing is your
lack of desire [or ability] to think!