Why forward-facing spokes should be "heads in", except on the drive side of the rear wheel? Shimano service instructions for hubs show that out of the four sides, three should be "forward-facing spokes are heads-in", and one, the drive side on the rear wheel, the other way around:

What is the reason to specify one way out of the two?

When you accelerate, the backward going spokes of your rear wheel are put under additional stress; and when you use a disk brake, the forward going spokes are stressed. The lacing guide you cite tries hard to put all the spokes that get these stress peaks on the outside with their heads facing inwards.

Why is this important?
The flange of your hub typically makes a right angle with the axis of the wheel, but the spokes do not. Instead, they angle away towards the center plane of the wheel. This angling of the spokes relative to the hub's flange puts an additional bending force on the spoke's neck. For inner spokes that have their heads going outwards, this bending force adds to the bending force that is caused by pure spoke tension. For the outer spokes, the two bending forces are in opposite direction, partially cancelling each other out. Thus, inner spokes are naturally under higher danger of breaking at the neck than outer spokes.

Putting the spokes which are stressed by accelerating and braking on the outside (head facing inwards) avoids them getting the structural stress that the inner spokes are subject to.

I learned this the hard way, because I used to lace my wheels without considering this effect. At some point, I realized that it was always the inner backwards facing spokes on my rear wheel (stressed in acceleration) that broken when I accelerated hard. Learning from this, I laced my rear wheel with the backward going spokes on the outside, which significantly reduced the frequency of broken spokes.


Can I replace the crank on a Raleigh m20 with one from a Schwinn Ranger? I have a Raleigh m20 mountain bike with a messed up crankset.

The only other crankset I have is from a Schwinn Ranger. The two cranksets look like they are the same size. Is it possible to install the other crankset on the Raleigh or will I encounter any problems doing so?

If they're both the same interface, then it should be okay.

There's a fair chance they're both square taper, so you'll need a 14mm socket and a puller to get the good crank off.

You might have problems with the chain line, and the front derailleruerueure will need aligning.

How did you mess up the crank on the raleigh originally?

How's your bottom bracket?  While the crank is off you may as well service it.


I don't know what year my old bike is I don't know what year my old bike is.(like is it a 1970's etc). I think it may be a 1970's, or something like that due to research but I'm still not sure. I know it's a French old make, I believe Ravenna. But what year is this bike?

It's really easy to do but it's not very reliable either.

Since you got some good old 550 chrome wheels and it's french maybe they come from Rigida. Thing is, Rigida wheels where, at the time, stamped with their fabrication year which you will find inside a little losange.

Other way is to go for the hub. Some manufacturers like Normandy also dated their production by engraving the year (you got two numbers and have to look at the second one which is the two last digits of the year).

So assuming that the wheels are the original ones, that's your best bet to date your bike.

From instinct I would say that it's a late 70's bike and from the tubing it could be italian more than french but here I can be wrong.


Aero bike considerations for purchase I am trying to decide between aero bikes from two different brands.  What are some of the things I should think about when comparing these two (or any other) aero bikes?

There are several things (such as fit) to consider when buying any bike.  However aero bikes have some special considerations to be made.

Comfort

Has the design compromised the comfort by making the ride overly harsh.

Weight

Are you going to be doing a lot of climbing on the bike?  Aero bikes are heavier than normal bikes due to the tube shapes, however some aero bikes are particularly heavy.

Maintenance

Are you going to be looking after the bike yourself?  If so, maybe you don't want the nifty hidden brake calipers integrated into the fork.

Travel

Are you going to be travelling with the bike?  Is any integrated bar/stem and magical cable routing going to cause problems?

Wheels

Do you already have your own deep section wheels?  If not, does the bike have a good set?  Wheels will give bigger aero gains than the frame itself

Tyre Clearance

Given the increasing popularity of larger tyres and wider rims, does the frame have clearance for larger (28c) tyres?

Aero Bars

Are you potentially going to want to use the bike for  triathlon or time trials?  If so can the shape of the handle bars accommodate clip on aero bars, or does the manufacturer produce their own special version?


How long will Ultegra 6800 parts be available? With the recent release of the new Ultegra 8000 groupset, is there an official word on how long Ultegra 6800 parts will be available?

Is Shimano still manufacturing Ultegra 6800 parts?  Or have they stopped producing 6800 and it's only a matter of how long resellers inventories will last?

Is there a way to somewhat reliably estimate the likelihood that, for example, an Ultegra 6800 50/34 170mm chainrings will be available 6 months from now?  A year from now?  2 Years from now?

For those with substantial past experience, with the release of a new Shimano groupset, how long do resellers still usually offer the previous group for?

Don't expect something official. If you don't see it listed on the main page of Shimano's website, production has likely ramped down or stopped.

Resellers will go as long as theres demand and stock. This also controls availability, and its tricky to estimate length of time, especially on less commodity groups (e.g. Ultegra vs Sora; you'll have a lot more Sora spare stock around, just cause a lot more people have Sora). Some retailers show stock levels on their websites, which could give you a rough idea.

This will also depend on your regionality and other things too, so don't expect something reliable.

That being said, you shouldn't worry if you want to just keep things working at a comparable level -- innovations from higher group sets do trickle down to lower ones. So, next year's 105 chainrings may be essentially identical to your Ultegra rings, for example. You could also mix with the new Ultegra (or other sets) where possible. It isn't the end of the world to not have a full set of one kind -- you'll be able to find parts in other group sets or manufacturers which are compatible (especially for things like chainrings). And if you really want a full set of one kind, well, you might end up ponying up for the new one in the future if its that important to you!

Of course, there are exceptions to the prior statement, when Shimano introduces a big incompatibility (e.g. mixing pre-97 ish dura ace with anything requires some trickery, and the Dura ace 7800 had extra tall splines making some compatibility issues for people; price of being on the edge, I suppose0.


Why are brake levers still bent in form to accomodate more than one finger? I thought of it for a while now. Our brake levers look like this:

Why aren't they designed more like this?

Is there a purpose for the extra space? Is two-finger braking still essential in hydraulic brakes?

EDIT: Due to the misunderstandings occurring, here's the alternative lever shape I'm talking about.

TL;DNR - single finger levers have little (if any) advanatage and some disadvantages.

Most people do not start out cycling with XT/Ultegra quality bikes and therefore (do not) start out on bikes that have brakes good enough for one finger control.  Even today, many low end disc brakes cannot reach full braking potential (i.e. wheel lock), with one finger. Also think of kids' bikes and kids' hand/finger strength.  No way an average child with an average child's bike can brake with one finger.

People transitioning from those brakes would likely be uncomfortable with single finger levers during the transition, and would likely not buy a bike equipped with them. If the bike might be resold or lent out, one with single finger levers would have a smaller potential market.

Poor maintenance, accepting pad contamination can occur at any time, means even the very best brakes may require more force than a single finger to achieve full stopping potential.

Presuming the bike has good, well maintained brakes and single finger braking is how the rider rides all the time, what's the disadvantage of current lever designs? They work very well on a single finger.  A rider can intuitively feel exactly where on the lever the finger is to achieve maximum performance. Changing the shape will not improve braking, and there is no weight saving to be made.

The only advantage would be aesthetics and marketing spin to sell the new shape as a premium product aimed at the cashed up MAMILs.


How to compensate broken thread in brake barrel adjuster? On my disc brakes I realized the barrel cable adjuster has its thread broken and most of it is stuck inside the calliper.

The picture is not my brake but they are quite similar: the black barrel thread is broken and a part of it is stuck in the silver-y thing on the calliper.

I asked the support of the manufacturer and they say the spare part is not sold separately (and I don't know anyway how to remove the broken bit from the calliper).

Right now I just live without it, but it is quite neat to fine tune the brake cable length.

What are my options? Are there some "standalone" barrels that don't require to be screwed in the calliper? that could maybe be directly inlined in the housing?

Should I show it to my LBS and hope him to have some more or less compatible part in his magical drawers?

Should I buy a new calliper (<-- yes, that's overkill,.. but well...)

It would require replacing your brake cable housing (and you may want to replace the cable at the same time) but there are brake cables with inline barrel adjusters. In these, the barrel adjuster is usually situated somewhere between the brake lever, and the braze-on at the front of the bike. They look something like this and are sold by themselves, or often included with the cable housing.  As your local bike shop and they should be able to get you something that will work.


Where to park a bike during a year for free ? (in the Netherlands?) We are two French in love with the Dutch people and culture. Each time we have the time we rush there. Rather than hitchhiking (as we used to), we plan to travel across the Netherlands by bike as it will be much easier to meet people. We plan to buy 2 cheap bikes somewhere there since renting them looks more expensive, and also it'll be less stressful and more relax (no fear to damage them, no renting delay, more freedom to go wherever and whenever we want to go... ).

As usual, we will hitchhike from France because we don't want to waste 15 days out of 25 just to go to the Netherlands or to come back (we live in French Brittany, Vannes)

As we can't take the bikes back we us (we will also come back by hitchhiking), we will leave them in the Netherlands. We are thinking of lock them somewhere, maybe in a small city for a year (or 6 months, we don't know yet) before the next trip...

So the question is the question is: where can we lock a bike for such a period of time?

We don't want to put them in a place where they could bother people (such as in front of train station). We heard about the 100€ options to secure them for a year but since our bike won't cost more than 50€ (hopefully even less!), we are looking for free and safe options/advices. Would it be a good idea to park them somewhere in the North in a small city ? Less risk of theft ? But what about the police, would they allow it?

Any advice concerning these bike parking issue would be warmly appreciated !

Thanks !

Probably your best bet if you want to park them is to meet someone with a large shed who'll put the bikes up for you.

If you make the finance/convenience tradeoff I think selling the bikes after your stay and getting new ones when you return might be a better option, but I understand the convenience of having the same bike.

I can think of several options that don't require you to find such a nice person but they all have their drawbacks:

Park them somewhere on the street. This would work for an EUR 50 bike, just fix them to something with a good lock somewhere out of the way. However, the dutch climate won't be nice to your bike.
Park them in any public bike parking area near a big train station. Most of them have a roof these days, and they are free. However, in the bigger cities and all university towns you're not allowed to leave your bike for more than a few days at most, and this is actively policed. So chances are your bike will be removed under this rule. If this happens you have a few months to pick it up from the depot before they sell it off.
Park them in a "private" bike parking area near a big office building. This might be a reasonable option if you are willing to do a bit of sneaking to get in. Most of these bike parking areas have room to spare, so two exta bikes won't bother anyone, and if you park far away from the office entrance no-one will notice the bikes standing there all the time. Downside is that these buildings are usually not in very central locations. You could even ask the concierge if he'll let you park the bikes for a few months (with the risk of him turning you down where he wouldn't have noticed the bikes if you hadn't asked).

In all cases the property owner or the local city government is within its rights to just remove your bike if it is deemed to be in the way or a wreck, which is always a risk for a EUR 50,- bike.


If external bearing BBs are better, why use traditional ones? Related:

What are the benefits of external bottom brackets?
An outboard BB includes any BB which uses the same BSA or Italian threading as older style BB's, but places a larger bearing outside the frame, rather than a s,Allen bearing inside the frame. This increases BB stiffness and durability, while reducing weight. - zenbike

So if external bearing BBs are better, why don't all bikes use them? I have never seen a low-end bike with external BB. Are they inherently harder to manufacture? To install?

The average cyclist won't notice the difference in weight and torsion stiffness. Also most bicycles that are not used for sports purposes will not live long enough that their BB will ever wear out that much that it has to be replaced, therefore also low wear is not of huge importance.

So why are conventional BBs cheaper?

It's the question of a closed cartridge (conventional BB) vs. a (some kind of) open (external BB) system. One huge advantage of the closed cartridge approach is that the manufacturer has less points where they have to meet exact dimensions: for a conventional everything is OK as long as the threading is right and the axle is square – especially the axle can handle some tolerance at the square cones where the cranks are mounted. The rest of the internals can be constructed more or less freely which makes work easy for the manufacturer.

In the external case the axle is part of the crankset, but not necessarily from the same manufacturer. Nevertheless it must fit very exactly into the bearings of the BB. That means the lead-though for the axle as well as the axle itself have to be worked very exactly to fit together also among different manufacturers. Above that, if the BB consists of two halves (Shimano Hollowtech II) then the two halves have to align very well towards each other. In sum there are more production steps that require higher precision compared to a conventional cartridge BB which makes stuff more expensive.

Another point is, that in the closed system approach the BB itself stays encapsulated if you remove the cranks. In the case of the external BB the BB is somewhat open after removing the cranks which requires to be more careful when doing maintenance work. That means it's either more time and effort for the mechanic that you have to pay or if you do it yourself there are more points where you should know what to better not touch or to keep clean.


Can I use a hollow rear axle without a quick release shaft? Does quick release shaft works also as an extra protection/strength ? And if I don't have it, can the hollow axle break more easily ?

I bought the wrong one on the web, in the picture I didn't saw that it was hollow.

The skewer is not a load-bearing component of the hub axle. It serves only to tightly clamp the dropouts around the sides of the hub. If you have an alternate method of doing so (e.g., threaded nuts), you don't need the QR skewers.

I'm concerned that an axle designed for QR skewers probably isn't also capable of having a nut tightly threaded on both ends, so in practice this probably isn't possible. If threads extend out past the dropouts for nuts to be installed, I don't see how the ends of a QR skewer could press against the dropouts, without a specially-designed skewer. But if you can clamp your hub to the dropouts, whether or not the axle is hollow shouldn't matter.


Can I 'toe in' these cantilever brake pads? I'm riding a new bike (new to me) and I am unfamiliar riding with some of the components, specifically the cantilever cross brakes.  On my road bike, I toe in the brake pads to help with noise, feel, modulation, etc.

On this bike, the brake pads contact the rim pretty much evenly and don't have much modulation.  They are making a fair amount of noise right now.  I've done the obvious things to fix this besides toeing in the pads.  However, they don't really sit in and tilt around slightly on a rounded bushing when loosened like on normal road calipers, allowing for toeing in.

Is it possible to toe in the pads on these brakes? If so, how?

You could try replacing your current pads with a set that come with double conical washers. It sounds, and looks, like this set of pads doesn't have them, but there appears to be enough space for you to install them.

The washers come in pairs, one concave and one convex, with enough "slop" to allow them to sit at an angle as the pad mounting screw passes through. Each pad would have two pair of the washers, one pair on either side of the brake arm.


Chain rattling in lowest gear despite adjustment I have bought an 80ies (?) Vicini vintage road bike that I've mostly used on flat terrain so that I haven't used the smallest gear until recently.
I found out that the chain rattles against the front derailleur in the smallest gear. I've loosened the lower adjustment screw as far as it goes and put all the tension from the shifting cable but it still rattles. The FD is installed at the correct height and parallel to the chain. The only possible explanation I can imagine is that the BB isn't wide enough.
It is an old Shimano 105 chainset with frame downtube shifters.

Assuming you haven’t done so, I’d check that the derailleur moves freely and isn’t seized or gunked, preventing it springing inboard up against the low limit screw. You can peak at the screw tip to check.

Drip some oil in the pivot points and maybe spray light lube carefully on the mechanism, then exercise the FD manually with your hands a number of times to make sure it is moving freely. (No chain movement or cable tension).

It's worth measuring the chainline too and reporting back to ask if it’s in spec. for the B.B. spindle length possibility.

It might be that you can tweak the derailleur so that it isn't exactly parallel, but functions properly, i.e. no rubbing, shifts properly and doesn't drop the chain inboard or outboard from the chainrings. Try rotating the tail of the derailleur inboard just a little and see how you get on.


How could I find out about my bicycle brand/model? I've purchased a bicycle on eBay thinking it was a Colnago as the stickers/item description would let you believe.

Unfortunately, looking at the bicycle a bit more closely, I'm pretty sure this is not a Colnago at some clover-shape embossed stamps are missing on the frame...

The bicycle has got chrome forks and some numbers engraved on the bottom of the frame (see pictures):

D 014
358
6

I'd like to know where my bicycle is coming from and what made/model it is.

Has anyone seen a similar bike in the past?
Would you have any idea how to find out more about this item?

I share your doubt that it's a genuine Colnago.

I Googled "when was colnago clover leaf embossed" (you could try that with the .au removed also).

The hits show plenty of people asking such questions, and a couple of the hits seem to provide valuable answers

Unraveling the Mystery of the Colnago "Clubs"
How to identify a fake or genuine Colnago

Both of these suggest that without the "Club" embossing, it's not the genuine article.


How to avoid getting swindled when buying used cranks? I'm looking for a cheap, used set of cranks for a bike that was fished out of the garbage :)

Because the cranks won't be on a bicycle when I go buy them, how can I tell if they're bent or not?

I'm thinking of taking a BB spindle and pedals along, putting the cranks on and trying to rotate them somehow...

Any ideas?

I've actually never seen bent cranks, so that's probably the least of your worries. And if they are bent, then I don't think you'd be able to tell until they're mounted on the bike.

Bringing pedals is a good idea - not to check for straightness, but to check if the pedal threads are damaged. If they're square-taper cranks, you should also check the dust cap threads - if they're messed up, you may not be able to take the cranks off again.


Is deep v wheels safer then the standard fixie rims I'm thinking about getting a new fixie but wonder what size rims I should get. I've heard that deep v wheels are easier to handle then just the standard rim size.

The consensus opinion (for typical road use) seems to be Deep V's, apart from being best for showing off cool colors and looking good, have no advantage over other rims. Some people report they are stronger - break spokes and go out of true less often, although I cannot find a scientific study to confirm this. What I have read, people have replaced old, worn out, cheap wheels with new higher quality deep V rims, and then claim the Deep V's made the difference. The reality appears to be the new and better quality made the difference, not the deep V.

I have found no evidence that Deep V's improve handling, to the contrary, there are many reports of Deep V's making the bike harder to handle in cross winds - presumably due to the larger cross section of the rim.

Its not a big surprise that Deep V's and Fixes are commonly seen together - they are both products with more disadvantages than advantages for an average cyclist, promoted with evangelical enthusiasm by a few and ignored by most.


Should I stick to the fork oil weight specified? I've got a pair of Rockshox Reba race forks. I'm going to service them. Fork oil weight says 5wt but in the past I have generally used a heavier oil weight 7.5 / 10 wt due to my size. However, saying that, the rebound damping is so effective and adjustable on this fork that I don't have any problems like I used to- should I stick to the 5wt?

Rockshox recommends using 5wt in the upper and 15wt in the lower legs of the Reba, and differing the PSI to tailor for rider weight.

140-160lbs = 90 - 105psi

160-180lbs = 105 - 120psi

180-200lbs = 120 - 135psi

200-220llbs = 135+

MAX PSI = 200

Although changing to heavier weights for heavier riders is not uncommon, i would stick with the recommended weight, especially if its working fine for you with tuning the rebound.

Sourced from the Sram 2014 Suspension fork air/oil charts


Are there adult bicycle passenger trailers for adults in Australia? I understand that there are kids bicycle trailers, but are there adult bicycle trailers? Specifically selling in Australia?

There are recumbent trikes available here in Australia which link together so that one tows the other - if the back person chooses not to pedal then it would effectively be a trailer, with the rear person just sitting like in chair.   These would be much lower and more stable than having a scaled-up kiddie trailer or wheelchair.

For slow speeds and a smallish adult have a look at a 'bakfiets' style cargo bikes, there are Australian brands.

A longtail cargo bike might be an option too, if the passenger is able to sit up on one. (I use one of these for larger kids)

Here are some of the specific brands and shops in Australia:
Linking recumbent trikes:
Hase Kettweisel

Bakfiets style:
Kangaroo Bike (May or may not be that brand specifically ... I have seen this style bike ridden in Australia with a kangaroo logo on the side)

Longtail cargo bikes:
Kona Ute
Yuba Mundo
Surly Big Dummy
Xtracycle conversion kits

Recumbent shops:
Flying Furniture (Canberra dealer for recumbents and other interesting machines for cargo and multiple people)
Trisled (Manufacturer in Melbourne, might be worth asking them about something custom built...)


Is it normal for a fixed gear bicycle's rear wheel to slip forward in its dropouts from time to time? My fixed gear bike has a track fork with a chain tensioner, and uses Pitlock's solid axle nuts to secure the wheel in the dropout, though I had similar issues with the stock nuts.

After tightening the nuts with a torque wrench to the 260-390 inch-pounds recommended by Park Tools, the wheel appears secure, and will typically be fine for weeks at a time.

Inevitably however, the rear wheel slips forward on the drive side, perhaps by 0.5-1cm. This produces considerable slack in the chain, though it's usually still ridable in the short term.

My guess is that this is happening under sudden braking, which I've heard can cause slippage when the nuts are insufficiently tight. Indeed, I usually notice it after having to stop sharply somewhere along the ride.

Is this normal, or an indication that the torque specification I'm following is incorrect? If normal, is this preventable with some maintenance (for instance, is it caused by gradual slippage?). If it's not normal, what's the cause? Are there perhaps different torque specs for a fixed gear bike?

This can be a fairly common occurrence with a fixed wheel bike. It may depend on a few different things, ie what sort of nuts you are using, how tight they are, what style of dropouts, and what the dropouts are made of.
A different sort of nuts may help. eg something with serrated nuts or washers could grip better. Also you may be able to tighten the nuts more, maybe a bit higher than what Park recommend.
Probably the best option is to use chaintugs. These fit on the dropouts, and have some sort of screw to hold them in place. So this stops the axle from moving forward. Usually you only need one, on the drive-side dropout, though you can use one on each side if you want.
One example is the Surly Tuggnut.

(source: surlybikes.com)


What is the make and model of this 16" kids bike? I've seen this picture in one of the Facebook groups and was curious to what the brand is and model. I found a lot of close makes but not the actual bicycle on internet and gave up after searching for hours.

I would call that a generic low end kids bike.

The manufacturer will be some anonymous factory in asia, making the same frame for a dozen different contracts.  The only variation will be in paint and perhaps decals.

Any "model" specification will be created by the assembler/importer/distributor and won't really tell you much.  It is probably as simple as "the boy's 16 inch wheel model" and that differs from the girl's one by paint colour, basket, and perhaps streamers or maybe crashpads on the top tube or handlebars.

What I do see is a bike with one brake, a rear caliper brake only.  This bike may have a coaster brake in the rear wheel because I can see what looks like a reaction arm under the left chainstay, but its very strange to have a caliper brake on the same wheel as a coaster brake.  There is clearly no front brake because there is no second brake lever.

The cranks appear to be a one-piece unit, which is a hallmark of a lower-end bike.  Higher bikes have three-piece cranksets where the bottom-bracket axle is a separate piece to the two crank arms (you might know them as "pedal arms")

The frame shows "value engineering" where the design has less metal in it by using a shorter top tube.  This also makes it easier to weld at the head tube - Shorter weld runs means less heat so less distortion.

Frankly - look at the kid.  He's having an awesome time rocking out on the bike.  He'd have as much fun on any working bike, as long as its safe and functional, and he has somewhere to ride it.


My handlebar and My front tube are no longer one. Might I have died? So, I have this problem [problem].

This happened today while I was putting it in a car to store overnight, but clearly I have to fix this.

Could someone please tell me: what exactly qent wrong here, and how likely would this have been to kill me?

Just in case it is hard to see, this is my handlebars coming off of my stem....

This is a "quill stem" and uses a "wedge" or an "expander" to press against the inside of the steerer tube (the top part of the fork.)

When fitted correctly, the quill stem sits in the fork and is held in place because the grey part at the bottom is pulled up by a long thread and it is pressing against the inside of the fork. Here the thread that pulls up the bottom piece must have been come loose or broken.

If this happens quickly it is dangerous because you no longer can steer the bike with the handle bar and quite likely will crash. If it happens slowly you will find that front wheel and handle bar are no longer properly aligned and this would trigger you to inspect it.

I can't answer how likely a fatal accident would have been but count yourself lucky to have noticed the problem.


Can I fit an MTB freewheel onto my road bike? I am looking to replace  my 7 speed 12-18t freewheel on my old road bike to a different 7 speed (something like 14-28t) for easier hill climbs.

Is it possible to do so and what are some possible problems I might encounter while doing this?

I found some 7 speed freewheels online and they are all advertised for mountain bikes. Can I fit one onto my old road bike? How do I know if the derailleur will still work and the sprockets aren’t too big for it?

My derailleur is an EXAGE 300EX.

Thank you

Most freewheels use the ISO standard thread and are interchangeable. Some hubs have a 'British' or 'Italian' thread which are very slightly different but still interchangeable. See the Sheldon Brown page on freewheels.

I don't know where to look up the specs of older Shimano derailleurs. Googling for examples for sale on EBay etc. and looking for specs included in the product description suggests:

Min sprocket: 12t
Max sprocket: 28t
Total capacity: 28T

So you should be good with a 14-28 freewheel.


What to upgrade to achieve a higher top speed? I enjoy going fast and my current bicycle tops too early, what kind of upgrades would I need to make to achieve a taller final gear?

Bigger tires, bigger chainrings and a smaller cassette all lead to a higher gearing (the crank arm lengths among other things also come into this, but that encapsulates into bike fit).

Bigger tires are subject to frame clearance and feeling squirmy possibly.

Bigger chain rings require front derailleur compatibility.

Smaller cassette also requires appropriate derailleur capacities.

Other ways of getting more speed include improving your aerodynamics (part of your bike fit - if you have drops for example, you may not be using them effectively) and increasing your cadence (most of the time when people ask this, their cadence is too low and they should be riding in a lower gear or pedaling faster). Losing weight (bike and yourself) does help as well, to some extent. If you're spinning out on say a steep downhill incline, that's normal (chances are you shouldn't be going faster than that anyway).

You may find that the type of bike you're riding is not a good fit for your riding style, i.e. you're using a mountain bike for road riding. Switching the type of bike (which does include corresponding gear and position changes) can help as well.


Replacement compatability for Shimano Mountain LX Chainring and or Crankset I need to replace Shimano Mountain LX Biopace Chainrings with 48/38/28 110 bcd and am having difficulty finding replacement chainrings, particularly the center chainring 38T. It appears Mountain LX is rare and I would like to know what other Shimano (Deore) or other chainrings or complete cranksets are compatible.

You cannot replace Biopace unless you find some antiques. Biopace ended 20 years ago.

Other chainrings are all compatible if the BCD is correct. The only issue is the ramps or pins that are meant to improve shifting performance. The manufacturer will always tell you to match everything up exactly but that is their sales pitch. Realistically having something ramped on the middle ring is a good idea and maybe on the big ring too. Ramps on a granny (smallest) ring don't make any difference. If you are really worried about compatibility get something similar (XT, STX, Deore...) with ramps that is from Shimano and you will be just fine.

Any square taper crankset which allows clearance for the frame and similar chainline will work fine. Actually buying a complete crankset with all the rings included is a lot cheaper than buying individual rings. The extreme example is a low end shimano riveted crankset for less than $40 vs the typical budget of $1/tooth for chainrings.


Is it a good idea to buy a 7-year-old MTB? I'm a single speed rider and I'd like to buy an MTB.
My main purpose for MTB is hardcore forest riding(rocks and little downhills).
I thought of buying an used one and I saw today Marin Rock Springs 2007 at a local shop.
The original price is about 1650 euros($2300) and their call is 500 euros($700)

The shop has pretty good reputation and the bike seems to be in good condition.
Fortunately there is a tiny "mountain" behind the shop so I could testride it and the feeling and the fit were just great.

Is it a good idea to purchase a 7-year-old full suspension MTB?
Will I struggle with constant repair of breaking components?
Thanks a lot in advance :)

Being the owner of a 2004 dirt jumper, and a 2007 full-suspension, I can say it's just fine. However, be prepared to solve problems...creatively. Certain things that are specific to the bike may not be available anymore, but there's usually an after-market part to fill the gap.

The main reason not to buy an older mountain bike is the difference in how it's made, what it's made of, and what it can ride.

How it's made: Newer carbon, and even alumninum, is much stronger and prepared in different ways.

What it's made of: New steel is generally lighter than old steel frames, this reflects both material and manufacturing changes. Some things like carbon and titanium have come down in price, but are still worth more even on older bikes.

What it can ride: The downhill of yesteryear isn't what it is today. 3" of travel back then was more than enough for some serious trail riding, but now that same style of riding might require 4", 5", or 6" of travel.

However, these are just general problems that can arise or should be taken into consideration. I've had zero trouble with my older bikes (although the full susser is pretty heavy and not the greatest to pedal!). So, I would recommend that test ride and then compare to what a new model would cost and make a decision. Good luck!


11-46 cassette with 48 chainring for commute bike I'm building a new commute bike.  Would like to consider the idea of using single chainring with 11-46 cassette.  Looking at the ratio, 48 front with 46 rear should give me the climbing option I need.  What is the disadvantage of this setup vs 2x11 or 2x10?

I'm getting similar overall range. There are big jumps, but that doesn't bother me as much.  I'm thinking the catch would the shifting experience. (i.e., shifting with 11-46 cassette might not be as smooth as 105's 11-34)   Is that it?

The advantages of 1x11

11 fairly evenly spaced gears
Can use narrow-wide chain for decreasing chain jump.
"lighter" by some small amount
mechanically simpler

The disadvantages

Gaps between gears are larger than on a 2x10 or 11
you need a really big back cog for low gears rather than having a smaller secondary front chainring.  This adds weight and its at the back.
You need a fancy rear derailleur capable of handing all this spare chain.
This all increases cost.

I believe theres a 10-50 cassette in the sram line now - marketted as "Eagle"


Are there any route planning/mapping apps or websites that can show a chart of cumulative ascent? Strava and Ride With GPS both show elevation charts, but they show elevation at any particular point in the ride, i.e. on a circular route with 2000m of climbing the charts will go up and down but they will always finish at the same elevation they started.
I'm looking for a way of showing a chart that adds up the ascent/climbing as it goes, so the same route would have a chart that always increased and ended up at 2000m. Is there an easy way to do this for any given GPX file?

Starting from any route-planning tool that can export GPX, you can do this on my website. It's more about the mapping and planning rides for Veloviewer Explorer, but I've added a graph showing cumulative ascent below the map that displays multiple GPXs. Multiple rides can be plotted, automatically colour coded to match the map.  Processing is handled on your own machine using javascript; nothing is uploaded to my server.  Just drag and drop the GPX onto the map.

The code is also available at GitHub under the most permissive of licenses.
Originally I took this as an interesting challenge to my spreadsheet skills.  The spreadsheet I created (xlsx, original LibreOffice ods) takes a GPX file pasted into one sheet, and displays on another sheet a graph of cumulative elevation, as well as calculating the distance at which you've done half the climbing.
It doesn't attempt to parse the XML of the GPX file; everything is done in cell formulae.  This means that each track point is assumed to look like this and to not have a timestamp (so it works for RideWithGPS and Strava routes, but not Komoot).
<trkpt lat="51.53166" lon="-2.4620100000000003">
    <ele>57.870000000000005</ele>
</trkpt>

This is what the output looks like:

I'll probably write something in javascript as well, and host it; that would allow the route to be displayed on a map.


How much runout is acceptable in a disc brake rotor? I'm trying to sort out pad dragging / noises in Avid BB-7 mechanical disc brakes and I'm wondering how much runout in the rotor is acceptable? Right now I have about 0.05 mm (measured with a Park DT-3i).

0.05mm is nothing. Stop worrying about it. As long as rotor does not make noise or drags extensively on the pads, you'll be fine.

Rotors change shape every time you ride: you apply breaks a little longer than couple seconds, rotor heats up and expands, then cools down and shrinks. On extended periods of braking rotors can heat up enough to burn your fingers when you touch it (done it myself unfortunately). And when this level of temperature change is applied all sorts of transformation happens to the level of warping/runout. So you can spend all the time in the world to make rotor as true as possible, then you go for a ride and it all changed and rotor is nothing like you've left is last time when you fiddled with it.


12 speed cassette touching spokes Upgraded from 3x9 to 1x12 and encountered the problem with cassette touching spokes.

Cassette is Sunrace MZ90 which is advertised as compatible with Shimano Hyperglide freehub bodies.
Hub is Shimano XT M756.

Cassette-spoke interference is barely noticeable it touches spokes ever so slightly only when bike is tilted particular way. I assume the freehub body has a little bit of play / float which is normal under other circumstances. The interference is absolutely minimal. Anyway, I am trying to solve this problem.

Obvious thing to do is to stick a spacer between the freehub and the cassette. I have tried 1mm spacer and it immediately removed the interference. However with 1mm spacer I do not have enough room for a lock ring. I can screw the lock ring on but it is holding on too little thread (1 - 1.5 full turns only). I was naive and thought this will do but ruined a lock ring after a few rides. It was original aluminium lock ring from Sunrace.

Any ideas? Did anyone have similar issue with upgrading to 12 speed on standard hyperglide hub?

I see posts all over the interwebz about people successfully using MZ90 with Shimano HG hubs and so far I have not seen anyone reporting the same issue. I wonder, did I do something wrong?

==========================================

Update:
Found a longer lock ring (from another Sunrace cassette) and assembled the whole thing in order: 1mm spacer, cassette, new lock ring. Managed to torque lock ring with no problem, there was enough thread. Will ride in that setup and see what comes out of it.

Big thanks go to @Nathan Knutson who's answer ended up being my solution and also to @Fred the Magic Wonder Dog for detailed explanation. I can only mark one answer as "accepted" ))

Sounds like the easy solution is going to be get an extra long lockring. Wheels Mfg and another company I can't remember both used to offer them. I believe current Chris King ones are longer than average but I couldn't come up with a number.

Double check your wheel dish is right, because if it happened to be way over to the right, it could cause or contribute to this problem. But it would have to be extreme and you'd probably notice.

Another approach would be lacing tricks. I'm assuming it's 3x now. FH-M756 is the sort of hub where the shell has a fairly large smallest inscribed diameter and so torsional loads can be handled all by the left flange if you want, meaning you've got all sorts of options for half-rebuilding it, but not knowing where exactly the rub is I won't speculate what would be best in terms of being able to solve the problem while giving up the least bracing angle. The lower a cross number you choose, the further away from the hub the cross will be, and it's usually the cross area where you don't have the clearance you need in these situations. Just making it 2x or 1x on the drive side could very well solve the problem. There's also options that involve moving some or all of the drive side spokes to being heads-out, which also threatens to reduce the lateral strength of the wheel.


Can a BB30 Crank Arm (Left) power meter can be used with a BB386EVO Crankset I have read many websites and articles about the interchangeability of BB30 and BB386EVOsuch as this and this YouTube video. Many say yes and many say no. Yet, I am not sure which Stages FSA power meter I should order for my Opus Allegro 4.0 2014 version FSA Gossamer C6020SS 50-34 172.5mm crankset.
I am not sure if using a BB30 on a BB386EVO will adversely affect the Q-factor or not. I have attached my left crank arm for your reference.

These are the Stages FSA power meters that I found (I live in Canada):

1) FSA Energy (3rd Gen)
2) FSA carbon (3rd Gen)
3) FSA SRAM BB30 (2nd Gen)

Any help would be appreciated

The first two you list are BB30 arms and will not be able to work on a BB3860EVO spindle. BB386EVO and other "long-spindle BB30" left cranks almost by definition are going to have the flatter profile of the third one and not flare out like the first two. They would go on the same frame but with the BB386EVO there would be an external cup in the way taking up that space. If it's any of these it's the third.

The third one looks like it probably would work in terms of physically being able to bolt to the spindle, but one frustrating thing about where we're at with these kinds of cranks is that FSA has never actually come out and said, "Hey, all our 8-lobed 30mm spindles interchange with all the 8-lobed 30mm left cranks for a sound connection." So given that your crank model doesn't appear in the compatibility list for that version of the power meter, it's kind of no guarantee.

The other thing is that even if the spindle interface compatibility is likely to be fine regardless of what the compatible model list does or doesn't say, the same inference can't be made that you're going to wind up with an exactly symmetrical Q-factor, although it would likely be very close.

You really should contact FSA with this question before you buy. They're the only ones that can answer questions about cranks such as this that are a few years old and don't show up in their public-facing documentation. Also the model number is that CK-OS6020/86/79.


What's the safest way to turn left from a right-side bike lane? (United States road configuration and customs here. Sorry, those of you who drive on the left!)

On my trip home, I use a bike lane near the right side of a very busy one-way arterial street; there is a bus/right-turn lane between the bike lane and the curb. I need to turn left, crossing three lanes of traffic, at a T-intersection (no street to the right). My options are:

Turn left directly from the bike lane.
Keeping a weather eye on traffic, move into the left-hand lane and turn from there.
Veer right onto the sidewalk (avoiding buses, obviously); wait for the pedestrian light to cross.

Which of these is the canonically correct way to manage, assuming heavy car traffic?

The Oregon Bicyclists Manual explains this very well, and with good diagrams, so I'm going to pretty much copy them verbatim here:

There are several ways to make a left turn on a bicycle:
As a Vehicle
As you approach the intersection, look over your left shoulder for
traffic  and, when clear, signal your turn, move over to the left side
of the lane  on a two-lane road (1), or into the left lane or the
center turn lane when  available. You should be  positioned so cars
going  straight through can’t pass  you on the left. Yield to oncoming
cars before turning.  if you are riding in a bike  lane, or on a road
with  several lanes, you need to  look and signal each time  you
change lanes. Never make a left turn from the  right side of the
road, even  if you’re in a bike lane.
“Box-style”
Proceed straight through  the intersection on the  right. Then stop,
and either  cross as a pedestrian in  the crosswalk (2), or make  a 90
degree left turn and  proceed as if you were  coming from the right
(3).  If there is a signal, wait for  the green or walk signal  before
crossing. Yield to  pedestrians in crosswalk.

In your particular case, I would suggest method 2. Cross the intersection, then pull off to the side and orient yourself to cross with the crosswalk. Then wait until there's a break in traffic, and head across that way. If you eventually become more comfortable biking in traffic, you may choose to use method 1. I find that cars almost always slow down and let me in if I clearly signal that I'm making a left turn, but it depends on how fast traffic is, how confident of a cyclist you are, and what the road conditions are like.


What variables are considered when determining wheel size and how do they affect these variables? What variables are considered when determining wheel size from a theoratical perspective and how do they affect these variables?

I noticed that city bikes tend to have smaller wheel sizes, whereas sometimes I see very large mountainbike wheels.

The first variable is the size itself. When talking about folding
city bikes, they have to be as compact as possible so you can take
them as normal luggage when folded.
There's also the aspect of weight - smaller wheels are lighter but
also have lower rotational inertia. This means they are easier to
accelerate but once they gained speed, they don't hold it for quite
as long as large wheels.
In mountain bikes the wheel size is a very individual thing. Smaller
wheels offer better acceleration an better maneuverability (such bike
is generally shorter and of course requires less force to turn a
wheel). On the other hand, large wheels give better angle of attack
meaning it's easier to roll over any terrain obstacles. Also, on a
larger wheel you can have larger contact patch giving better grip.
There's also a question of stiffness, Small wheels, especially in
cheaper ranges are stiffer because of shorter spokes used.
In most disciplines of cycling the wheel diameter is 550-650mm (not
too precisely), so the differences are not enormous. Smaller wheels
are used in folding bikes and BMXes - in the latter because of easier
handling of a sherter, lower bike both on the ground and in the air.
I've partly mentioned the changes in bike geometry, but I'd like to
make it clear - wheel size can affect your position on a bike. In
particular when really large diameter wheels are used, handlebars
will be up pretty high and there's little you can do about it with
manipulating the frame geometry.

There's no single standard of wheel size for any bike types, which shows that manufacturers change their approach and priorities over time. It's also hard to determine the perfect wheel size for each person (talking about MTBs here), because it depends on people's personal preferences, experience and use of the bike.


Triban headset reassembly Does anyone know the correct order to reassemble a Triban headset (specifically a Triban RC120)?
I bought the bike recently, was raising the handlebar height, but neglected to pay sufficient attention to the order in which the parts are reassembled. Two of the parts stubbornly resist going back (a large thin rubber washer and a wide plastic split ring).
A Triban headset exploded diagram would solve this problem. I've searched online but have come up with nothing. I've emailed Decathlon but they say they do not have have a diagram.

Reassembling a headset without documentation or notes is truly frustrating.
The plastic split ring is likely a compression ring which is jammed between the steering tube the top bearing,  if it looks like this:

Otherwise, it is a seal.
The compression ring does not have to go in easily by hand and is usually driven into its final position when tightening the complete assembly with a star nut bolt.
The rubber washer is likely to be a seal, but where it comes from is impossible to say. First of all, you need to determine if it came from then lower or upper half of the headset. Then you can try to find a position where it makes most sense (i.e. where it can prevent mud from entering the headset).
Good luck!


Disc brakes don't work at all I recently purchased a brand new mountain bike with disc brakes. It's only been a few months of riding and the brakes have stopped working to the extent that I can still ride (with effort) while fully engaging the front brakes. They worked well at first, then became increasingly ineffective as time went on. I did get some oil on them once, but I thoroughly cleaned both pads and rotor with rubbing alcohol. I have constantly tinkered with cable tension and space between the rotors and pads but nothing has made any improvement whatsoever. I even went out and bought new pads which did absolutely nothing to improve stopping power. Are the rotors bad? Should I take it into a repair shop? What should I do to fix this problem?

Once pads are contaminated with oil they are pretty much junk. Cleaning the surface is ineffective as oil gets into the porous pad material. Obviously you have eliminated this problem with new pads - unless the pads are becoming contaminated without you noticing.

To cover all the bases I'd thoroughly clean the levers, rotors and calipers, inspect the levers, cable, housing and calipers for issues, then go through a step-by-step adjustment process, and see if that results in an improvement. Note you may have to re-bed in the pads depending on what you do to the rotors and pads.

There are plenty of videos out there on cleaning bikes, and some on cleaning disc brake in particular.

Check the cables are not frayed, and the housing is secured properly in the levers, calipers and mounts on the forks and frame. Check the pads are wearing evenly. If they are not wearing parallel to the backing plate that indicates a bigger problem and you probably want to go direct to a good local bike repair shop.

Park Tool has a great video on mechanical disc brake adjustment.

If all that does not work, it's time to take it to a good local bike repair shop. A good shop will explain what the problem  is and give you some advice on adjustments.


Why does my inner tube have brown liquid inside? Now with internal photo I flatted the front wheel going up a climb the other day - I heard the pop and the PSSSSHH, and I could see a geyser of pale "steam" or vapour coming out the puncture.

I swapped out the tube for the spare and continued, but noticed the tube was wet inside the tyre.  It hasn't rained on my bike for months.

When I got home I patched the tube, and noticed a lot of dampness around the hole.  When inflated it bubbled like a mud pool.  The tube also felt squishy and I couldn't push all the air out when stowing it later.

I guessed there was some water inside, so the tube was left hung up with the presta valve at the bottom and unwound.

8 hours later this is what it looked like underneath:

Bigger photo of the pool - this is 10 hours of draining time:  Quantity is about 5-6 dessert-spoons full (estimated)

The liquid was runny not viscous, and was clearer on top with the colour sunk to the bottom.   The coloured bit looks like mud, or a suspended powder

The tube is labelled as "CST 700c 19-23" and a long number  There is no mention of any sealant or puncture resistance to this tube.

Why does my tube have brown liquid in it?

EDIT:  I removed the valve core and tried to purge the goop using a rolling motion.  It didn't work so I junked the tube.  I cut it open to see what was blocking the open valve, and it looked like this:

Not the best photo sorry, but its a jelly-like mass with many black dots like grains of sand.  I suspect these are suspended fragments of butyl rubber from the inside of the tube.

TL;DR?  Squishy tubes are bad - buy a new one.

I've seen that color before. If you are filling from a compressed air tank, make sure the tank has been bled recently. More frequently in humid areas air tanks will get condensation inside. Normal maintenance is to bled the water out of the tank. The condensation rusts the inside of the tank and can eventually cause tank failure. When you put an air line on them the air comes out but a little vaporized water goes too. That gets in your tubes and builds up over time if you use the same filling source. Avoid by placing an in-line filter on your air hoses as well. Test by blowing air over your hand from a safe distance. If it's wet or damp you have found the culprit.

Experience case: They didn't bleed the compressor at the beach shop I worked at. I bled it when we upgraded to prep it for storage. One gallon of water came out of that little six gallon tank. One-sixth of the volume for air was taken up by the water and it was the cloudy brown milky color too.

Also, respectfully agreed. White liquid is often stop flat liquid filled into a tube as a flat preventative. Stop flat can be neon green in color too.


What are the disadvantages of having an old, worn cogset? I'm always a little wary of people telling me I should replace things on my bicycle that aren't broken. Because of this, I'd like to know details and symptoms about what happens if I ride my bike with an older, worn cogset? Do I lose efficiency? How much? Is there higher potential for breakage? Do my gears skip?

FYI, the answer to this question should be about the same as answering these similar questions:

"What are the benefits of replacing an older, worn cogset?"
"What
symptoms will my bike exhibit that means I have to replace my
cogset/casset/sprocket?"

As a chain wears out, the distance between links gets bigger (this is what chain wear tools measure). As this is happening, the chain will grind the cogs to match the worn chain (distance between teeth increases). This is why your gears might not feel so bad, but then they get much worse when you put on a new chain. The new chain's links do not line up with the teeth on the cogs. This will be noticeable in a few ways depending on how worn the cogs are.

First is the noise coming the drivetrain and no amount of lube will silence it. The next one will be shifting performance as you find the chain getting stuck on a cog more often. If the cogs are extremely worn, you'll then get slippage as the chain slides forward over the cog (staying on the same cog,  not shifting) when you put pressure on the pedals. This last one can actually be a safety hazard as you might fall if you are out of the saddle pushing, then suddenly the drivetrain lets go (it feels similar to a broken chain when it happens).

Based on this, you might think that it's a good idea to keep the worn chain on for as long as possible, but that will lead to much faster wear on other components as well. Chainrings and jockey wheels rarely need replacing on a well-maintained drivetrain, but if the chain is too worn, then it will grind into these just like the cogs, making it a much more expensive replacement. Many people replace their cassette and chain at the same time once the chain length is 1% longer than when new. This ensures that you won't put excessive wear on the chainrings and jockey wheels.

I prefer to replace my chain at 0.75% which allows me to keep the cassette for about 5-6 chains. This is cheaper for me since I use Dura Ace and Ultegra cassettes, but if you're using more entry level gear, then it's usuallly cheaper to wear them out together and replace them both at once.


My left pedal keeps falling off My left pedal keeps falling off, I think it's loose, or I'm not tightening it properly, but every time I ride my bicycle it gets loose.

There’s a best case scenario and a worst case scenario. Neither is too terrible.

Best case scenario: Your pedal is just loose. You can tighten it with a pedal wrench (some pedals can use a hex wrench) — however note that the left pedal is left-hand threaded so it’ll be the reverse of what you are used to. Thus, you have to screw it counter-clockwise to tighten it.

Worst case scenario: is that the crank threads themselves are badly damaged. This can happen if you pedaled on it while it was loose — because the crank is usually soft aluminum and the pedal is hardened steel. If the crank threads are worn, then no amount of tightening will work. Instead, you’ll have to take the pedal to your local bike shop where they will drill out the threads, tap slightly larger ones, and insert a helicoil. This will allow your pedal to go back on. It shouldn’t be too expensive, usually one-half hour of shop labor plus the cost of the helicoil (5-10 eurodollars).

So neither scenario is too terrible. Good luck!

P.s. don’t ever use thread lock to try to retain a loose pedal. Pedals by design are always tightening themselves when pedaled normally.  If a pedal is loosening itself, it’s not because of screw loosening forces, it’s because the crank threads are bad, and threadlock will not help. However, if the threads are still good then threadlock can cause the pedal to bind terribly such that the pedal won’t ever come off. Instead, you should grease the threads of pedals rather than ever use threadlock.


External BB cranks not spinning well I have a Cannondale F2000 that I'm updating and turning into a gravel/commuter bike.

I replaced the original square taper bottom bracket with a new Hollowtech II version.
Now the new crank does not spin freely at all.

One thing to note, the crankset spindle is too long, but I don't see how this would make a difference to the whole thing.

You can probably make up the extra room for the long crank with spacers, normally 5mm worth for a mtb crank in a 68mm shell.

I would want to find out if the bottom bracket shell has been 'faced', which is more important for external-cup bottom brackets than it was/is for cartridge square taper BBs.

Facing is removing any paint or imperfections on the sides of BB shell, where the cups sit against it. If the bearings of the BB are not perfectly parallel to each other, they will not spin as freely and it's those imperfections that cause a lack of parallelism.

This isn't so bad with 'cartridge' BBs because the unit was made perfectly parallel in the factory and you just have to thread it into the frame. Being parallel also helps with the wear life of the bearings, one reason cartridge square taper BBs are still the darling of touring cyclists, where reliability is crucial.

This video shows the whole process in detail so will explain better what needs to be done, but it is one of the few jobs that make clear economic sense to have done at a good LBS. The tools are expensive and aren't justified to purchase as a one off, so check whether the BB shell looks like it has been faced, and if not, find a good shop that is able to do this for you.


Are aluminum or steel chainrings more resistant to bending? I mash a lot and wind up killing chainrings. I later find that my chainring warps at the midpoint between two chainring bolts. Usually my first sign that something is wrong is my chain pops off or breaks and I can see the bump in the chainring that caused it.

I've gone through a 3 or 4 34t/36t chainrings between my single speed track bike and geared cross bike bike with a shimano deore drivetrain. Both have bash guards protecting the outer ring, so I doubt impact is a factor.

When replacing these, what is going to resist bending more, steel or aluminium?

As far as My experience gets on mountain biking, cheap steel is more resistant than cheap aluminum, with expensive parts the story changes a lot because many different alloys are used by different manufacturers or even the same manufacturer changes the formula among models.

The advantage of steel anyway is that it can be safely unbent as long as the deformation is not too dramatic.

However, in my case, most of the bent chainrings come from hitting objects on rough trails, except one time that it was due to one of the chainring bolts comming off. I have been kind of a masher myself, but I have never bent a chainring due to pedaling force (I have broken a couple cheap freewheels due to this instead). So I think some other factor may be affecting your problem. A couple of them are:

Chainline: The pull on the chain should be pretty straight, so even under extreme forces it is unlikely to bend a chainring/cog. However a bad chainline makes the chain pull in a direction that is too unalligned with the chanring's plane. This can be due to a bad combination of components, specially a bottom bracket of the wrong spindle length, or, more commonly, a bad choice of gears. In a mountain bike the innermost chainring should be used with the 3-5 closest-to-hub cogs, the outermost chainring should be used with the 3-5 furtest-from-hub cogs and if there is a middle chainring it shoud be used (you guessed it) with the cogs in the middle of the cassete. Check the chailine of the gearing you are using most by looking at the chain so your line of sight is aligned with the point where thr chain leaves the cog and with the point where it enters the chainring. If the chainline is wrong you should esily note how the chain bends at the entering-the-chainring point.
Frame flex: If your frame flexes easily and you are mashing your pedals, both factors add up so when you are applying maximum force, components are most unaligned, causing forces to actuate on parts at wrong angles, thus making them prone to deformation, but the problem is not evident while evaluating the bike onthe workstand.
Bad shifting technique: Shifting gears while applying too much force causes all kind of transmission problems, from bent chainring teeth to bent chain links, broken chains, premature wear and even derailleur malfunction/damage. Proper technique, specially for downshifting while masshing pedals up a steep slope is to a) plan prior to shifting, specially shifting before you exhaust your momentum. b) Accelerate a little just before the shift. c) Ease the force on the pedals while at the same time applying the gearshift. During the whole shifting process you should practically just spin the cranks, you rely on innertia to continue in movement and that is what the previous acceleration was for. d) resume normal pedaling once the shift has completed and the transmission is working silently again. (noise is often a sign of bad shifting).
Bent parts: There may be something else bent on the bike. Particularily the crank spider or even the whole crankarm. If thats the case, it is making you loose the chainline at least two times per pedal revolution, once towards one side, once towards the other. This has happened to me with cheap, soft aluminum, square taper crankarms: with heavy use, the spindle interface deformed, causing the whole crankset to rotate off axis causing a set of not-so-funny symptoms, including chainsnap and front shifting difficulties. Careful inspection on the workbench wile manually rotating the cranks is advised. If this is the case, it is diagnosable by eye or a simple ruler/metric tape. A bent frame is less likely but not impossible, however, it may be harder to diagnose.


How to adjust chainline for 2x10 crank set I replaced my 3x8 system with 2x10 system on my Trail bike.
My BB is of 73mm size and as a standard I left one spacer at drive side and none at non-drive side of the chain-ring as of now. But I could see the median of chain rings is not aligned with middle of my cassette and the smaller chain ring is aligned in line with 5th or 6th gear on cassette.

The model is Shimano Deore 2X chain ring.

What would be the best solution?
Adding spacer(1 or two) at non-drive end of the crank and dropping the spacer at drive side?
Or additional spacers to smaller chain ring bolts? Or both?

I can give an explanation of what is going on with the setup you have, and why the chainrings seem offset from the cassette. I think that perhaps there is not any problem and you don't need to adjust the chainline.

An older bike with a triple drivetrain will have 73mm BB shell (as you said) and a 135mm rear dropout spacing. Standard chanline was 47.5mm. The M6000 group cranks are designed for the modern MTB 142mm or 148mm rear dropout spacing and runs a wider chainline: 48.8mm or 51.8mm respectively. Shimano specs are here. The FC-M6000-2 model crank has the 48.9mm chainline, the FC-M6000-B2 crank has the 51.8mm chainline. Hopefully you have the former. In that case you're chainline is only 1.3mm wider, and your large ring on the new double crank will actually be closer to the centerline of the frame than the large ring on the old triple crank.

If you have a -B2 model, hopefully you can return it and exchange for the -2 model.

Updates:

Can't believe I missed this - if you have a 73mm BB shell you should not need the two 2.5mm spacers that come with Shimano mountain BBs. Those are for use with MTB frames that have 68mm shells. Check the BB instructions.


Can you identify this cheap single speed bike? Is it worth $250?

Seller says he bought it for $350 from a bike shop.
It's got no visible decals from the pictures...

Those wheels are worn.  That would need to be a $700 bike new to be worth $250 in that condition.

Pictures don't show detail on the items like brakes, bb, crank, wheel, hub, and chainring that would give a clue. If you are not finding mid range name brand components that bike is not worth $250.

A lowest end bike is under $100.  This is picture of $300 bike new.  Assume that is a low end bike until you have evidence it is not.


Can I use Cube Analog 29" as touring bike? I don't know if there is an excellent place for asking this kind of questions or not, but please help me, I need professional people's help.

I know many people who ride their mountain bicycles as a touring bicycle. And the touring bikes are usually more expensive, and I'm going to travel using Cube Analog.

What do you think?

Can I screw (install) rack, carrier, fender, luggage and something else on Cube Analog?

UPDATE

I made my bicycle trip, and used Analog.
That is an excellent bicycle, and I had no problem with that. But I think it is better to have a touring bike, that should be more comfortable. Something like Cube Central That should be a little more expensive :)

Didn't look at the 2015 model (just your link - 2016 model).  On the rear there are rack bosses that can be used to mount a conventional rear rack. The rear brake is also on the lower stay which will keep it out of the way when mounting a rack (good news). There are however no such bosses on a suspension fork so you will need a more specialized rack (e.g., old man mountain) that uses clamps in place of bosses, if you want a front rack.

Once you have racks installed you will need to also purchase panniers (bags that securely mount to racks).  Or if you are especially creative you may find other ways to to secure regular bags (don't underestimate the difficulty, panniers will generally work much better).

As for fenders, this will depend on the fenders(full, partial, metal, plastic, etc) and tires you want to use, your final clearances and your ingenuity as you don't have any dedicated fender eyelets left once you mount the rear rack.  If you don't have a lot of experience coming up with solutions for fitting fenders you may need to seek help.

Alternate Answer

As a completely alternate answer that indirectly address your original question...

you may also want to consider frame bags.  These require no racks and mount directly to the frame, handle bars and seat post.

There are lots of tutorials available on the internet, here is one from Adventure Cyclist


Solid rubber bicycle tires I just bought a Schwinn bike with the following codes on the tire. AKR6483 / 40-622 / 700x38c. I have gone to numerous websites to possibly order a solid rubber tire for my bike so I will never have to by a replacement tire or repair a flat due to puncture. Can you tell me which solid rubber tire would be acceptable for this bike

Thank you very much

Ron

As the comments have comprehensively pointed out, solid tyres have some significant problems.

I recently fitted a solid tyre from Tannus on my bike with the same goals as yours. I only managed to last a few weeks before I couldn't deal with the problems and refitted my standard tyres.

Pros

No flat tyres!

Cons

Rough ride - the ride quality was awful. Jarring and rattling constantly.
Poor grip - The tyre didn't have anywhere near the grip of a good standard tyre.
Somewhat loose attachment to the rim - there was a sensation of the tyre 'rolling' off the rim. It didn't ever roll right off and I don't think it would, but there was noticeable give where the tyre attached to the rim leading to this instability when cornering.
Flat spotting - I locked up the wheel to avoid a car in the first 10 minutes of fitting the tyre and it created a significant flat spot. I actually had to feather the flat spot with sandpaper because there was a very noticable 'bump' with every revolution of the wheel.

If you want to give them a try, this tyre from tannus would fit your bike. The item code WMI702H or WMI702S would both fit, but be a bit narrower than your existing tyre (32 rather than 38).


Reducer for 1" fork and 1 1/8" stem So I have a steel road bike which orignially had a 1" threaded fork. I replaced it for a ahead fork and have been using this with a 1" Ahead stem without issues.

The stem was just a temporary solution and somewhat too long for my comfort, so I decided to replace it. I found it much easier to find lengths and angles of ahead stems for 1 1/8" steerers, so I opted to get one of those(FWIW Tune "Geiles Teil 4.0").

I was aware, that I was going to need a reducer and I was initially just going to buy one, but then I saw that at 15€ I consider them too expensive for what they are(a piece of shim) and that there are different heights and it was not trivial to find one to exactly match the 39.5 mm height of my stem.

Anyhow: Seeing that I have access to a bicycle workshop and scrap parts, I took an old 1 1/8" suspension fork with an alloy steerer, reamed the inside of the  steerer to exactly 25.4mm inside diameter, cut 39.5mm off and made a 1mm wide cut, along the tube, all the way through, to allow for some compression.

TBH it fits like a glove, it's definitely stiffer than the previous stem, when riding hard out of the saddle  and I am pretty happy with having made my own solution, however one Question arose:

Is it even correct to make a reducer with exactly the inside and outside diameters one is going for, or should, the outside diameter for instance, be slightly larger than the inside diameter of what it will be inserted into.

This might be a silly question, but seeing that I don't have access to a quality reducer like this one to measure myself, I thought I'd ask.

There are off-the-shelf products satisfying your needs at sub €2 price tag
:

This one is actually an adapter for stem tube but I don't see a reason that it shouldn't be used as stem quill adapter. Which means you simply manufactured this part yourself, even using the same material (the one depicted is aluminium).

Coming back to your initial question - since you've also put a length-wise cut on your adapter, the inner diameter varies within some range - it needs to be slightly larger to be able to slide it on the steerer tube. Of course, when clamped, the inner diameter is exactly what it needs to be. So in my opinion, yes, it is correct to make a reducer the way you made it.


Is it safe to install these V Brakes? Arms don't sit flush with bosses Replacing my old V Brakes, got sold some Shimano BR-T4000s.
What I found is they don't sit quite flush on the bosses. There's an internal ring that's a bit larger, that ring is just a bit deeper on the old breaks, and just a bit shorter on the Shimanos. While the pin for the spring fits in the hole, there's just this like 5mm gap between the brake and the base. The boss also doesn't quite make it through to the other side like they did on the old brakes, and the included bolt is a bit shorter.
Is it safe to install these? Or do I just have mismatched parts?

This is a duplicate question but I couldn't find it.
It's fine. What you're looking at is the old brake pivots directly on the stud, but the new one mounts on the stud and has its own integral pivot. On the old one, you tighten the bolt very gently so you don't mushroom the post because the bolt is bottoming against the tip of the post. On the integral type, tighten it pretty good (8-10Nm). They both go on the same posts.


Why (and how) would someone steal only my innertube? Upon my return from winter holidays, I found that someone had stolen the rear innertube from my locked bike. They took only the innertube: the rear wheel was still there, the chain correctly attached, and the bike otherwise seems untouched (so far at least, for obvious reasons I haven't ridden it yet).

I had the front tire and the frame locked to a bike rack.
The bike is stored indoors in a common bike room for my apartment building, so access is somewhat restricted to those with a key.

Why (and how) would someone steal just the innertube?

Occam's razor says that you should try the simpler/null hypothesis first, in this case that your tube wasn't stolen.  There are two alternate hypotheses that you should test:

1) Are you sure that you had one in the first place? Perhaps you were running tubeless and never knew it?

2) Are you sure the tube is actually gone? One thing that can happen (either by prank or accident) especially with schrader valves if you don't have a valve cap (but also with presta if you don't have a locknut) is that when the tube deflates, the valve can retreat back into the rim and get lost (I'll avoid making any dirty jokes about this).

I grabbed the following image off an unrelated page but you can imagine what would happen if the valve got pressed in even further and got lodged inside the rim. It would look like there was never any inner tube in the first place.

I've almost done this (gotten the valve lost inside the rim) trying to inflate a tire. It's not hard and it could even conceivably happen as a tire self-deflated.


Minimum speed when riding rollers I have a set of rollers and a single-speed road bike. My 80-90 rpm speed is 27-30 kph (17-19 mph). I feel like I would be more stable with higher rpm, but it's harder to sustain.
If I understand this, the source of the bike's stability is the gyroscopic effect of a spinning wheel. So there are few more variables to that, like a wheel's mass, or even distribution of the mass within a wheel body. For the reference, my wheels are 27" and 1.5 kg (3.3 lbs) each, and I'm 70 kg (154 lbs) myself.
Can you share an experience with the speed-stability relation of a road bike on a set of rollers?

the source of the bike's stability is the gyroscopic effect of a spinning wheel.

This is incorrect. Gyroscopic forces play virtually no part in bicycle stability. What keeps a bike stable is the counter steering induced by the frame geometry, particularly the sloped headtube and resulting trail in the fork.
In any case, your single speed will be fine on the rollers. It doesn't take much speed to stay stable on them, any gear ratio appropriate for a bike on the road will work on rollers.
I'm surprised you haven't just tried it to see how it would go, and not conclude your setup is fine already.


Camber angle on a two-wheel trailer? I am not aware of any two-wheeled trailer with (intentional) camber. Are there any? If not, why don't two-wheeled trailers use a little bit of negative camber?

I think it would reduce the stress on the wheels in turns and also slightly improve stability (due to wider base). A small enough amount would not affect total width nor usable area as the wheels are widest at the hub.

Race cars used to use camber, sport wheelchairs use it (I think regular ones don't only because it would make them wider), so why not trailers?

I am willing to believe it causes an increase in rolling resistance, but I don't think it is significant enough.

I've been thinking about this for a few weeks now and I still can't see a reason why it would not work.

Tyres wear a heap faster when they're not square to the road surface.  For example, tadpole recumbents wear out front wheels very fast.

Also, those riding bikes while towing trailers are going relatively slow.  I've managed to roll a kiddies trailer that was loaded with two landrover road wheels weighing 68 kilos, but that took a speed of around 22 km/h on a fairly tight roundabout.

Certainly it could work - you'd want wheelchair stub axles and mount the receiver tubes at a slight angle.

Downsides, your wheels would suffer from sideways stress toward the middle when travelling straight and standing still.

Also, the wheel bearings are going to be under more stress all the time too.

Racecars and race wheelchairs are about performance, not longevity, so a different set of requirements.


Disk Brake shudder felt through fork and frame I have a muddy fox storm and when I use the front brake, it starts to shudder starting from the wheel and working up. It isn't that bad if I do it gently. Also, this is only a fist bike so I guess it doesn't matter if these things happen?
Thanks

First thing, assess your headset. A loose headset allows feeble vibrations to make the bike shudder. This  tutorial over at Art's Cyclery will guide you through the process of taking care of it: all you'll need is a medium sized Allen Key.

If the headset looks just fine, it's time you get to your break calliper and rotor. I recommend that you sand your rotor and break pads a bit (until they look nice and smooth) with a medium grit sandpaper, wipe them down with some 90% v/v isopropyl alcohol nicely, reconfigure and bed them in. Also make sure that the calliper is aligned just right, if the calliper isn't approximately parallel to the rotor, it can make the thing happen. I would recommend using the business card method to align the calliper. Doing this will almost certainly cure the bike of the issue.
I hope this helps. :)

--

Edit: Also make sure that your pads have enough braking material on them before reconfiguring them.


Is it bad for the bike to pedal backwards? Whenever I near yellow or red lights, I slow down and pedal backwards as I coast so that I can continue to get exercise while I wait for the light to turn green before I reach the intersection. (It's a mountain bike; it doesn't have a coaster brake.)
Is this bad? From what I've read, crank-arms are supposed to tighten themselves as you pedal, so does that mean pedaling backwards loosens it?

(The only thing I can find when doing a web-search on this is about whether it's physically beneficial to pedal backwards on a recumbent bike, not about the effects on a bicycle.)

Note: Some people have mentioned that it's not exercise because of the low resistance, but that's like saying that a motor with no load doesn't burn any fuel or battery to turn. It may not be a hard exercise, but it's still movement. Moreover, there is another point to coasting toward the intersection in that coming to a complete stop at the light requires a lot of exertion to get back up to speed and it's very frustrating to feel rushed, trying to get across while cars wait. By coasting, I'm able to much more easily get through the intersection quickly once the light turns green.

There are a couple of things you should consider:

Your bike isn't going to care. You aren't going to loosen pedals or cranks spinning in reverse, because you're not applying any load, so there is no force in which to cause precession or fretting.

You are getting no benefit (health-wise) from doing so. It might be better not to even bother.


5 arm cranksets versus 4. Which is better and why? I'm looking to buy a Sora triple crankset. Shimano make two types, one eith 5 arms, and the other with 4 arms1. Which should I get and why would that be a better choice? I'm a slow-ish rider. I'm 50 and speed is not a priority. But I'm planning a long ride in Asia and Africa next year. Which of the two chain-ring types would be a better choice for spare parts and any other considerations? Note: the 5 arm crank has a P.C.D. of 130 compared to 110 for the four arm crank.
Editor's note:
The 4-arm R3030 crankset, below, is described as having a 110/74mm BCD.

The 5-arm R3030-CG, below, is described as having a 130/74mm BCD.

With a triple crank it matters more what the inner most PCD is. 110 and 130 both refer to the larger rings only and the length of the crank arms themselves may not suit you and it may not be compatible with your bike immediately either.
I have played with bikes for over 40 years and ridden most Shimano PCD types and arm lengths and 4 of the bottom bracket standards too. You may need new bottom bracket bearings installed at the same time, the different standards don't interchange at all. The newer the better from every angle if you need it and the price is right for you.
Sometimes the bike is better to be replaced if you know enough to understand what you need and more than a few things need to be replaced at once on a mediocre older bike.
Your described style of riding tells me you need the model that comes with the smallest number of teeth on the smallest ring of the crankset. This selection will provide the easiest effort to you regardless of most other things. The other gears are almost always properly spaced to provide 3 separate ranges of gears you can use for riding comfortably uphill, downhill and more level ground. Practice using all you gears to learn when you may wish for just that particular effect on your comfort and your efforts.
Just like your brakes it is important that your gears work just as you need them to when you need then to.
I have used middle and inner ring minimums on 48/34/20T with 94/58PCD and 54/39/24T with 130/74PCD and others in between. Your tyre size, terrain you ride and what you will carry on it really sets your gearing needs the most. If you learn to enjoy using more effort and sweating when you ride your gear needs may also evolve.
I've not seen or heard of less than 20T on a crankset. If both cranksets have the same lower number, then, the wider of the other 2 gears would be my recommendation. You can usually change just the inner ring very cheaply if you need a change but it can only go so small with each PCD.
Bike parts are usually so reliable as metallurgy has improved greatly in our lifetimes, thinking about ongoing costs is not very relevant apart from maintenance of the chain. Keep it clean and dry lubed following the directions is the biggest money saver you can make. It is possible to have a chain last many 1,000s of kilometres with regular care.
Edit: Only now that I've returned have I actually seen these 2 crank set images you referred to. I'd select the 5 arm Shimano with a new BB, the 2 piece design was introduced 20years ago and lots of spares and a 24T is possible in place of the 26T if needed. Bending any axle or crank arm is likely with enough force regardless of the system.


Tire Tread Worn out Very Fast 9 months ago I bought a Cruiser bike for riding around my neighborhood, and over that time the tread has worn out completely to the point you can see the cream surface that the interior of the tire has.

My question is, is this normal? For me, this seems very fast for a tire to wear out. In the past I've had mountain bikes and their tires lasted for years and still had plenty of tread.

So is this problem due to a cheap tire, or something else?

Cruiser bikes tend to be constructed for the mass consumer market. Even if the price of the bike isn't cheap, the components often are.

The big balloon tires that are put on them tend to have soft rubber compounds that allow for a soft ride -- but quickly wear away. The white or cream sidewalls  that are popular on cruisers don't have UV protection in their rubber compounds so they also tend to deteriorate quickly.
If you have a rear coaster brake (which tend to modulate poorly), you have to be careful as it's easy to drag/skid the rear wheel and wear down the rear tire down considerably.

You can get a better wearing tire when you replace it. Harder rubber will be longer wearing but will provide for a harsher ride, all things else being equal.


Sun 24" Traditional Trike Help I am trying to figure out if I need a 23" or a 19" support bar to install a western saddle for my mothers trike.  Below is a picture of the measurement from the frame mount to the old seat.  I estimate I will have to lower the seat by two inches to accommodate the new style.

Can someone provide  guidance on how to figure out the right size before I order?

The bike has 24" wheels...

This 19" bar or the 23" model? I could not add the 23" model picture because of reputation point limitation...

The 24" Traditional trikes use the 19" support bar. The 23" versions are for aftermarket longer seat posts. So if that is the original seat post, and your mother is not extremely tall, then you need the 19".

The 23" comes into play for taller riders so their knees are not smacking their chin and requires the use of a longer seat post than what comes with the trike.


Aerodynamic effect of drafter to the draftee I thought I read somewhere something like having someone drafting behind also has effect to the rider in front. I wonder if it's true and would like to understand how does it work because it's quite unintuitive (if it's true at all).

So, other than robbing the rider in front from tailwind, does the drafter help at all?

When you are riding along on your own you're not only pushing the air in front of you out of the way, the most obvious source of air resistance, but you're also being slowed by the turbulent air behind you. However slightly.

Surprisingly, having someone draft you will help smooth out that turbulence, and so you benefit as well! ( Just make sure they take their turn in front ).

http://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/aerodynamics2.html


Cutting down cartridge bottom bracket left cup I have a Tange 68x103 mm bottom bracket (pictured) that I plan to use in an old steel frame (building a single-speed/fixed). It turns out that my non-drive-side bottom bracket shell threads were a bit destroyed. My LBS was able to chase/tap quite a bit of it, perhaps enough to fit Hollowtech-style BB cups that they likely tested with afterwards.

However, the Tange BB has a very long left cup and it does not fully fit into my BB shell. I would like to somehow shorten it. Given that the BB cup has no lip on it, I plan to insert it in reverse on the non-drive-side, and then somehow cut it down to size, likely with a hacksaw. Is this a crazy idea? Does anyone have tips on ensuring the threads are preserved?

I'll likely cut off 6 threads or 1/4". From my point of view, the function of the cup would be preserved if I can successfully do this. Am I wrong?

Tange 68x103 BB http://www.benscycle.net/bmz_cache/a/a1a0837709b9deb5702d1c46199e4f77.image.700x524.jpg

Another alternative would be to find a LBS with access to "Sutherland's Handbook for Bicycle Mechanics" and find a BB with the appropriate measurements. Much easier, and quite possibly cheaper in the long run.


How to measure a frame to find an appropriate rim? Question: How does one measure their frame in order to know which size rims will fit?

Context: Flatmate left a few months ago, forgot (perhaps intentionally) a Traitor Cutlass frame. When asked, he said keep it.

I read Wheelpro's ebook on wheelbuilding. Tons of great information. I'm excited to get started. One subject not covered, and something I've been having a difficult time finding resources on - is how to know whether a rim will fit?

I understand the rim to frame isn't the only equation - tire size, brakes, fender, ect. all need to be considered too. Are there any calculators or rules of thumb which I should be aware of before blindly buying a 700c and hoping it all works out?

A 700c wheel has a 622mm bead seat diameter, which would mean a 311mm radius.

But note that, according to Sheldon, "The rim's diameter will generally be 5-10 mm larger than the bead-seat diameter, depending on how high the rim flanges stick up above the bottom of the rim channel."  So when Paparazzi measured a 12.5 inch (317mm) radius on a 700c wheel he was seeing 6mm larger than the bead seat radius, which is in the expected range.

Roughly speaking, the brake pads for rim brakes should be positioned at about the bead seat (so as to fall on the flat of the rim), so for a 700c they would be roughly 311mm from the center of the axle dropout slot


Always Lubricate Skewers? I'm replacing the quick release skewers on my bike with allen key skewers for a little security.

Clearly the old skewers were well greased and it sounds pretty standard to grease them. There are plenty of forum posts at a google search but I thought it would be useful to ask here.

Is there any chance I shouldn't lubricate the skewers? There is no indication on the package that this is necessary.

What lubricant should I use?

What exctly is the lubricatant for? All of the rotation should be handled by the hub, there shouldn't be any rotating friction on the skewers themselves right?

Thanks!

This is really a personal preference. Usually people will grease the skewer threads and sometimes the skewer shaft as a way to help prevent seizing and corrosion. This can be especially useful if the skewer is made from cheap steel and/or the bike is frequently ridden or lives in wet conditions.

Sometimes skewer shafts are chromed, in this case I wouldn't bother to grease if the chrome is intact as it will prevent corrosion.

If the bike rarely sees inclement weather (e.g., fair weather and stored indoors) then I wouldn't bother at all.

If you do want to grease the skewer, standard lithium grease should be fine.


What are the best MTB Tennis Shoes ? (without clippers) Can anyone recommend any type of tennis shoe that could help me not to slip while on my mountain bike but without having to use clippers. The thing about clippers is that I hate not having enough time to react when I´m close or about to fall.

You should look for shoes with as soft outsole as possible. Ones specially made for cycling are available from bike stores, labeled "downhill mtb shoes". Skateboard shoes and approach shoes from climbing department also work well, choose one that fits your style.


What are the holes in the mudguard for? I just got an old bike from the 80-90s from my grandfather and I wold like to repair and clean it to use it as backup bike.

This bike has a lot of holes in the mudguard, is it decoration or dit it had a purpose?

Here is a photo of the bike:

PD: This holes are only in the rear mudguard.

All was said already, those holes are for so called coat protector (those prevent your coat or trench being caught by the revolving wheel).
What was not done is placing a picture of one, and one picture saves thousand of words.

By the way, quite popular and easily available in The Netherlands, so if you need help, let me know.


My chain appears to be squeaking when I ride it forward but not backwards At first I thought I just needed to lubricate my chain, so I degreased it and just re-lubed it very thoroughly.  It's still squeaking.  I thought it could maybe be a derailleur pulley issue, but I noticed that the squeak only occurs when the chain is pulled forward and not when it freewheels backwards.  Is there any condition that would cause a chain/pulley/whatever to squeak in only a single direction?

I understand that torque load can sometimes be a factor, so I tested it by pedaling with minimal (near-zero) force and it still squeaks in only the forward direction, so it doesn't seem to be affected by heavy load vs. light load.

The only change I have made recently was that I took out and regreased my derailleur pulleys, but they were fine for about a week until today when it was lightly raining in the morning.  It seems plausible that the rain somehow messed up my pulley greasing, but I don't understand why it would be a unidirectional problem.

Thank you to anyone who gives me suggestions or ideas or whatever.

Since you have 3000 miles on the current chain, it is quite possible that you are nearing the end of the life span of the chain.  An easy way to check this is to grab a ruler and measure 12 links. Remember that a full link has both an inner and outer section so a full link will look something like this : (0)=(0)=()
So count every other pivot.  Each link should be ~1 inch.  12 links should = 12 inches.  If 12 links on your chain is more than 12 1/4 inches you should replace the chain.  This would be a good time to check the rest of your drive train for wear too.


Fluid trainer for an intermediate rider Because of the Xmas sales some internet shops started making offers on roll trainers. My target area would be an intermediate machine, something that I would use an hour or so daily, with two-three hours rides once per week (the actual usage of the trainer will be lower as I tend to alter biking with jogging, swimming, and work-outs/yoga in the gym).

Currently I narrowed down my search to these models:

Kurt Kinetic Road Machine II T2200: 330 Euro
Tacx Rollentrainer T-2200 Flow: 200 Euro
Tacx Ergotrainer T2220 Flow Multiplayer VR Trainer : 333 Euro
2014 Cycleops Fluid Turbo Trainer Fluid 2: 300 Euro

I am a frequent half-marathon runner and passionat mountain and road-biker. Currently, I am training for a marathon. Any comments, which model should I opt? As one may notice, I opt for a machine that is around 300 Euro.

Originally I had a wind trainer which was very loud and the resistance felt weird. You could pedal really quickly and it would get really easier. I've had a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine for a couple of years and have road it about 40 times, putting about 1000km on it. It is quite, still looks brand new and doesn't get easier the longer I pedal which is a problem with some lower end trainers. This is because the fluid doesn't warm up and become less viscous. I would strongly recommend it. Also the resistance feels similar to riding on the road. Another benefit of a Kurt Kinetic is that you can translate your speed into watts. I bought a power meter and have compared the numbers and they are about 5% difference, so pretty close. Hope this helps


When accompanying children on roads - ahead, beside or behind? When accompanying children (in my case roughly in the 5 to 9 range) on a moderately busy (by rural standards) road on our commute to their school I'm sometimes ahead, sometimes beside (at least the smaller one) and sometimes behind.

What is best practice?

Bearing in mind:

ahead of them I can control their speed and demonstrate to them safe cycling
beside is good, but this only takes care of one child (I'm cycling with two)
behind them I can see what's going on

The third option is what I tend to favour most.

For safety reasons I prefer to be behind them. That way I can position myself on the road slightly further out then they are. This forces any overtaking vehicles to negotiate past me first and makes them provide a little more breathing space for my child in front. It certainly seems to prevent them trying to squeeze past.