Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
17-04.-2008, 09:33 AM
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Adam Kadlubek wrote:
> [...] > recumbent is 61/46/34 12-13-14-15-16-17-18-20 > What crank is that? I could use lower gearing on my RANS Rocket. > **I'd _love_ to get 10 speed grip twist shifters... > I would like 9-speed thumb shifters with both indexed and friction modes. > my perfect setup with 10 speeds would be something like > 13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23-27-34, on a bent I would probably hurt for > some low(er) gears, but regular bikes would probably see me use a > single front. > > Yes - I cross my chains, sue me  > I cross-chain on my recumbents all the time, except those with mid-drives, where cross-chaining in the conventional sense can not occur. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
17-04.-2008, 09:55 PM
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
On 17 Kwi, 02:33, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote: > What crank is that? I could use lower gearing on my RANS Rocket. Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. > I cross-chain on my recumbents all the time, except those with > mid-drives, where cross-chaining in the conventional sense can not occur. Well - crossing the chain on a bent does not really mean anything, maybe except on Cruzbike-alikes. -- Adam Kadlubek |
|
|
|
18-04.-2008, 09:22 AM
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Adam Kadlubek wrote:
> On 17 Kwi, 02:33, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> > wrote: > >> What crank is that? I could use lower gearing on my RANS Rocket. > > Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, > 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. > Cool. A 39/28 is a bit high for a 15% grade. >> I cross-chain on my recumbents all the time, except those with >> mid-drives, where cross-chaining in the conventional sense can not occur. > > Well - crossing the chain on a bent does not really mean anything, > maybe except on Cruzbike-alikes. > Shhhh, don't let the upright riders hear that. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
19-04.-2008, 02:56 AM
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
In article <fu8pjd$jfp$2@registered.motzarella.org>,
Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote: > Adam Kadlubek wrote: > > On 17 Kwi, 02:33, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> > > wrote: > > > >> What crank is that? I could use lower gearing on my RANS Rocket. > > > > Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, > > 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. > > > Cool. A 39/28 is a bit high for a 15% grade. > > >> I cross-chain on my recumbents all the time, except those with > >> mid-drives, where cross-chaining in the conventional sense can not occur. > > > > Well - crossing the chain on a bent does not really mean anything, > > maybe except on Cruzbike-alikes. > > > Shhhh, don't let the upright riders hear that. Silly boy. -- Michael Press |
|
|
|
19-04.-2008, 01:35 PM
|
#5 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Adam Kadlubek wrote:
> > Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, > 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks. Chalo |
|
|
|
19-04.-2008, 09:31 PM
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Chalo Colina wrote:
> Adam Kadlubek wrote: >> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, >> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. > > Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of > an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks. > And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks". Do not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works well on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so far indicates the opposite. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
19-04.-2008, 10:03 PM
|
#7 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
"Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fucond$l9d$1@registered.motzarella.org... > Chalo Colina wrote: >> Adam Kadlubek wrote: >>> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, >>> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. >> >> Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of >> an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks. >> > And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks". Do > not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works well > on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so far > indicates the opposite. Heck, some people are pushing small cranks for uprights too - Mike Burrows for example. cheers, clive |
|
|
|
20-04.-2008, 01:20 AM
|
#8 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Tom Sherman wrote:
> > ChaloColina wrote: >> > > Adam Kadlubek wrote: > >> > >> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, > >> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. > > > Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of > > an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks. > > And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks". > Do not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works > well on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so > far indicates the opposite. That sounds like another shortcoming of tried-and-rejected bike layout. For what it's worth, I use 127mm cranks on my fixed-gear 'bent. That's to make up for the naturally short gearing: http://chalo.org Chalo |
|
|
|
20-04.-2008, 08:26 AM
|
#9 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote: >> ChaloColina wrote: >>> Adam Kadlubek wrote: >>>> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities, >>>> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together. >>> Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of >>> an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks. >> And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks". >> Do not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works >> well on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so >> far indicates the opposite. > > That sounds like another shortcoming of tried-and-rejected bike > layout. > Pun intended? Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent compared to an upright be a shortcoming? > For what it's worth, I use 127mm cranks on my fixed-gear 'bent. > That's to make up for the naturally short gearing: > > http://chalo.org > I liked the picture of the big wheel with the fluffy kitty in the seat better. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
20-04.-2008, 06:38 PM
|
#10 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent > compared to an upright be a shortcoming? It's not the absolute crank length, it's the (implied) relative inability to deal with varying loads and speeds by cranking slower or faster. If A.K. has to use closely spaced gears to cope with short cranks, and short cranks to cope with feet-forward riding position, that seems like a shortcoming. Everyone from little kids on their first bikes to Olympic champions on incredibly exotic track machines seems to be able to pedal slower to go slower, faster to go faster. > >http://chalo.org > > I liked the picture of the big wheel with the fluffy kitty in the seat > better. A bit down the page, you'll find a picture of Mama Chicken along with another of my bikes. Here's a direct link: http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg You'll have to content yourself with that for the time being. Chalo |
|
|
|
20-04.-2008, 09:11 PM
|
#11 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote: >> Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent >> compared to an upright be a shortcoming? > > It's not the absolute crank length, it's the (implied) relative > inability to deal with varying loads and speeds by cranking slower or > faster. > > If A.K. has to use closely spaced gears to cope with short cranks, and > short cranks to cope with feet-forward riding position, that seems > like a shortcoming. Everyone from little kids on their first bikes > to Olympic champions on incredibly exotic track machines seems to be > able to pedal slower to go slower, faster to go faster. > The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while pedaling. Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper technique. >>> http://chalo.org >> I liked the picture of the big wheel with the fluffy kitty in the seat >> better. > > A bit down the page, you'll find a picture of Mama Chicken along with > another of my bikes. Here's a direct link: > > http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg > Is the sidewinder name due to the wheels not being on a single track, with alternate single sided mounting? The bike does look a bit too large for Mama Chicken to ride, however. > You'll have to content yourself with that for the time being. > [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed cassettes these days. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
21-04.-2008, 02:51 AM
|
#12 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message > news:fufbtc$c3q$1@registered.motzarella.org... >> Chalo Colina wrote: >>> Tom Sherman wrote: >>>> Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent >>>> compared to an upright be a shortcoming? >>> It's not the absolute crank length, it's the (implied) relative >>> inability to deal with varying loads and speeds by cranking slower or >>> faster. >>> >>> If A.K. has to use closely spaced gears to cope with short cranks, and >>> short cranks to cope with feet-forward riding position, that seems >>> like a shortcoming. Everyone from little kids on their first bikes >>> to Olympic champions on incredibly exotic track machines seems to be >>> able to pedal slower to go slower, faster to go faster. >>> >> The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at >> the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while >> pedaling. >> >> Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but >> doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper >> technique. > > Just gear down some and spin more for heaven's sakes. This is not rocket > science. > [...] > It is if one is riding a RANS Rocket. One can not gear down effectively if the bike lacks low enough gears. "We could be rocket scientist" - WISIL motto. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
21-04.-2008, 03:11 AM
|
#13 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Tom Sherman wrote:
> > The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at > the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while > pedaling. > > Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but > doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper > technique. I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever seen (toy and rental three-wheelers). What's up with that? There's no 'bent equivalent of a beach cruiser, when in some regards 'bents are just the utmost expression of the beach-cruiser design ethic. Is it an ergonomic problem, or just a quirk of the tiny specialty market for feet-forward bikes? Why aren't there any single-speed 'bent two- wheelers? > >http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg > > Is the sidewinder name due to the wheels not being on a single track, > with alternate single sided mounting? Yes. When you ride it, it feels like a bike that has been slightly bent in a crash and wants to pull to one side. But when you ride behind it, it's obvious that the plane of the frame is not oriented in the direction of travel. > The bike does look a bit too large for Mama Chicken to ride, however. I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle. > [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with > varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed > cassettes these days. They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the reason they do it. Chalo |
|
|
|
21-04.-2008, 04:08 AM
|
#14 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote: >> The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at >> the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while >> pedaling. >> >> Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but >> doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper >> technique. > > I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of > single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever > seen (toy and rental three-wheelers). Are not upright bicycles in the same relative price range (1/5 to 1/10 of a LBS quality bicycle) also generally awful? > What's up with that? There's > no 'bent equivalent of a beach cruiser, when in some regards 'bents > are just the utmost expression of the beach-cruiser design ethic. Is > it an ergonomic problem, or just a quirk of the tiny specialty market > for feet-forward bikes? Why aren't there any single-speed 'bent two- > wheelers? > The upright rider can get rolling or climb steep slopes in a relatively high gear by doing a major weight shift to each pedal at a very low cadence. On a recumbent, too high gearing brings the rider back to the "leg press" scenario. Also, most recumbent riders are middle aged and relatively affluent persons who found upright road bicycles too uncomfortable. A beach cruiser is not a replacement for a road bike, whether upright or recumbent. >>> http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg >> Is the sidewinder name due to the wheels not being on a single track, >> with alternate single sided mounting? > > Yes. When you ride it, it feels like a bike that has been slightly > bent in a crash and wants to pull to one side. But when you ride > behind it, it's obvious that the plane of the frame is not oriented in > the direction of travel. > >> The bike does look a bit too large for Mama Chicken to ride, however. > > I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle. > The chicken can always use her wings to help balance. >> [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with >> varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed >> cassettes these days. > > They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan > diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible > benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the > reason they do it. > Yep, being seen with a wide range cassette (and/or a triple crank) at the coffee shop would be social death. Almost as bad as riding a recumbent to the Fabrizio Mazzoleni crowd. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
21-04.-2008, 02:18 PM
|
#15 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??
Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Chalo Colina wrote: > > > > I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of > > single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever > > seen (toy and rental three-wheelers). > > Are not upright bicyclesin the same relative price range (1/5 to 1/10 > of a LBS quality bicycle) also generally awful? Most cheap _bikes_, yes. But most cheap coaster-brake cruisers are fine. I expect you could get noticeable refinements in a one-speed cruiser up to about $1000, but you can get 90% of that much bike for 10% as much money (if you can ride one-size geometry). There just isn't that much there to get wrong. > Also, most recumbent riders are middle aged and relatively affluent > persons who found upright road bicycles too uncomfortable. A beach > cruiser is not a replacement for a road bike, whether upright or recumbent. I see what you are saying, but the next logical step from a laid-back, upright, cushy-seated cruiser bike is something similar but with a chair. > > I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle. > > The chicken can always use her wings to help balance. Wings are better for balancing than for holding handlebars. I see chickens "balance the unicycle" when I hold them in my hand. > >> [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with > >> varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed > >> cassettes these days. > > > They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan > > diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible > > benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the > > reason they do it. > > Yep, being seen with a wide range cassette (and/or a triple crank) at > the coffee shop would be social death. Almost as bad as riding a > recumbent to the Fabrizio Mazzoleni crowd. I managed to miss a recumbent event today (to which all local custom builders were invited) because my birthday and related activity took precedence. I was looking forward to rubbing elbows with the bearded tribe and airing out some foolish contraptions. Unfortunately my Big Wheel has been down for repairs after a drunken lout in New Orleans wiped out the Charles Eames shell chair with a well-placed body slam. The replacement (a long-sought eBay find) ships this way tomorrow, just a bit too late for the show. Where _is_ Fab these days? Working his way towards becoming Flabbio, perhaps. I've missed his style guidance for the faithful and dismissive contempt for the fallen. Chalo |
|
|
Linear Mode
