![]() |
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 |
|
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I recently picked up a Trek 2000 Alpha SL bike used, and I've been
fixing it up. I don't know the year, but from what I was told I'm guessing late 1990s. It's got Shimano RSX components. So, the first thing broken was the left/front shifter (it's a three speed brifter.) Would shift up but not down. Cleaned it up with WD-40 and it did start working, though it sounds like there's still grit in there. However, it could barely shift the gear -- I have to really crank down on it. The right shifter/rear derailleur is much easier. The derailleur itself seems fine, the cables are fine (and the routing is correct), so I found a replacement brifter, and put it in. Same problem. Upon closer investigation, to move the front derailleur from the loosest position by pulling the cable manually away from the frame between the two braze-ons on the bottom tube requires a lot more effort than my other bike. Removing the derailleur, it seems fine, but it requires a _lot_ of effort to move it. It's not stuck -- it slides freely, and it requires just as much effort to `compress' it as it does to keep it from uncompressing. It's like they put a big honking spring in there, far larger than I'd think was needed. I've certainly never heard of a spring failing in such a way to *increase* the tension, so I'm quite confused by this -- it's like it was designed this way, but it just doesn't seem right. To be fair, I don't have a lot of experience fixing bikes -- I sort of know what I'm doing, and have books to refer to, but don't have the experience to tell me what sort of tension to expect here -- but it seems way too high, like 2-3x as high as it ought to be. Looks like it's a FD-A417 Chainstay angle 63-66 degrees. Looking carefully at the spring while it's moved, it looks like the entire spring is working and is clean and not rusted and such. Thoughts? -- Doug McLaren, dougmc@frenzied.us `The chief obstacle to the progress of the human race is the human race.' - Don Marquis. |
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On May 16, 11:31*am, "Doug McLaren" <dougmc
+usenet-20080...@frenzied.us> wrote: > I recently picked up a Trek 2000 Alpha SL bike used, and I've been > fixing it up. *I don't know the year, but from what I was told I'm > guessing late 1990s. > > It's got Shimano RSX components. > > So, the first thing broken was the left/front shifter (it's a three > speed brifter.) *Would shift up but not down. *Cleaned it up with > WD-40 and it did start working, though it sounds like there's still > grit in there. > > However, it could barely shift the gear -- I have to really crank down > on it. *The right shifter/rear derailleur is much easier. *The > derailleur itself seems fine, the cables are fine (and the routing is > correct), so I found a replacement brifter, and put it in. *Same > problem. > > Upon closer investigation, to move the front derailleur from the > loosest position by pulling the cable manually away from the frame > between the two braze-ons on the bottom tube requires a lot more > effort than my other bike. > > Removing the derailleur, it seems fine, but it requires a _lot_ of > effort to move it. *It's not stuck -- it slides freely, and it > requires just as much effort to `compress' it as it does to keep it > from uncompressing. *It's like they put a big honking spring in there, > far larger than I'd think was needed. *I've certainly never heard of a > spring failing in such a way to *increase* the tension, so I'm quite > confused by this -- it's like it was designed this way, but it just > doesn't seem right. > > To be fair, I don't have a lot of experience fixing bikes -- I sort of > know what I'm doing, and have books to refer to, but don't have the > experience to tell me what sort of tension to expect here -- but it > seems way too high, like 2-3x as high as it ought to be. > > Looks like it's a FD-A417 Chainstay angle 63-66 degrees. *Looking > carefully at the spring while it's moved, it looks like the entire > spring is working and is clean and not rusted and such. > > Thoughts? > > -- > Doug McLaren, dou...@frenzied.us > `The chief obstacle to the progress of the human race is the human race.' > *- Don Marquis. Shifting front STI is often harder than rears. That said, they're can be really hard if the cable's under the tab (by the pinch bolt) instead of over it. Not enough leverage. Check and maybe move the cable so it passes by the tab on the "inboard" side (of the bicycle) then over the top of the pinch bolt. |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In article <6faa5b12-0064-4900-a63b-53f9ddef7272@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
almost_fast@yahoo.com <almost_fast@yahoo.com> wrote: | Shifting front STI is often harder than rears. That said, they're can | be really hard if the cable's under the tab (by the pinch bolt) | instead of over it. Not enough leverage. Check and maybe move the | cable so it passes by the tab on the "inboard" side (of the bicycle) | then over the top of the pinch bolt. Thanks -- your second suggestion nailed it. It wasn't quite clear what you meant at first, but I looked at my other bike and realized that the the derailleur was almost identical -- but the cable was connected to the derailleur differently, and when I made my new bike match, things got much easier. And now that I look back at your post, that's what you suggested. It doesn't look right, but it does give it more leverage, and while it doesn't look like much, it made a huge difference. Thanks again! -- Doug McLaren, dougmc@frenzied.us Yow! Everybody out of the gene pool! |
|