Lightweight aluminum frame transported via trunk rack I've been riding steel for a while now and recently added a CAAD10 to the fleet. I am planning on taking it with me on our upcoming vacation.

I have a Thule gateeway 2 (trunk rack) that I've been transporting the steel bikes on very happily. My question is, should I be concerned carrying the lightweight aluminum frame in such a manner?

I brought the bike home from the shop initially this way and I felt that I had it secured on there without placing too much undue pressure on the frame itself. However, that was a short 5-10 mile transport.

Update: I have found it and included here. Upon re-inspection, I see that it says "not recommended" for either, but "do not use" is for CF.

"hAnGeR RACk
On this type the bicycle hangs on two arms projecting aft from a trunk mounted rack: Not recommended for either carbon or aluminum bikes. Do not use on bikes with carbon fiber tubes. The point loading where the arms contact the underside of the tubes may crack the tubes. Additionally the lower part of the bike is difficult to secure, and it may move, causing chafing and structural wear. Additionally when two bikes are mounted on these racks the contact points between the bikes may be cracked or chafed, causing structural damage."

PDF here page labeled 101 (103 of PDF)

As far a aluminum goes, do this experiment. Get an empty soda can with no dents and stand on it. It will support your weight. Now put the tiniest dent in the side, notice how easily this happens. Stand on it and it collapses with a fraction of the weight it previously supported.

How does this translate to bikes? A bike frame is built much much stronger than it needs to be to support the forces generated when riding. They are built to withstand the forces that will cause dents, the even a dent in aluminum can be catastrophic.

When placing a bike on a rack such as yours, there is a chance it can be dented - probably not from straps being too tight, most likely from other bikes on the same rack banging into it. If you secure the bikes firmly, they are fine. You must use padding between them of some sort - "Dog Bones" are great (plastic spacers with a strap at each end), or foam.  If the bikes can swing around freely you damage them.

I used this style rack for years with aluminum bikes, as do most of my mates. The main reason to discourage the use of such racks is every bike I carry has paint damage from rubbing against another bike where I was a little less careful than I could have been putting them on. I have seen derailleurs knocked off from them as well. Roof racks or rail based racks are much better at protecting the bike in transit and virtually ensure no forces are generated that will break a frame.


Most effective upgrades on Road bike Earlier this year I purchased my first road bike (a 2013 - Felt F75). I had never really ridden before, so I didn't want to spend too much money up front not knowing how much I would actually ride. All in all, I think I'm riding more than I really ever thought I would.

My question is this:

If I wanted to start upgrading components on my bike, generally speaking, where can I get the most bang for my buck right off the bat? I've heard that getting new wheels can make a night-and-day difference in some cases, but didn't hear much evidence to back that up.

What do you guys think? Here is the spec list for the F75 for reference:
http://www.feltbicycles.com/USA/2013/Road/F-Series-Road-Bike/F75.aspx broken link.
For the 2016 edition see http://www.feltbicycles.com/International/2016/Bikes/road/race/f75.aspx

looking at your bike, which I basically see as a alu-105 setup (albeit a good setup, Felts are lovely bikes), I can suggest a few things but right away I'll say I don't think there is a "magic bullet". In no particular order:

wheels, as you say. On a lot of low-to-mid-range bikes, you just need to look at what wheelset they have to realise that this is where the manufacturer is keeping costs down. Obviously this goes away as you climb the range but whichever way you look at it, the better the wheels, the more expensive they are. For example I upgraded my wheels last year, but the ones I got cost me 50% of what I paid for the bike, over 1000GBP. (In fact I started off with near enough the same question as you just asked, and this was my answer.) So, relatively speaking, a lot. However, purely performance-wise, this is probably one of the best upgrades you could do. As with most things cycling, you're paying for lightness and aerodynamics.
groupset. Your bike has 105 components, you could always upgrade your components to Ultegra.  (I'm thinking specifically of the 10-speed mechanical Ultegra rather than the 11-speed or electronic versions here.) The plus side here is that you can do this in a piecemeal manner, so they will fit to your budget/timeframe, the downside is that these parts work out a lot more expensive if bought separately than they would if they came on a new bike. That's just down to economies of scale. A further possible downside is that you won't notice much difference! 105 ain't a bad groupset.
keep saving until you can upgrade the frame itself. You always have the option to go carbon.
how much are you interested in the actual mechanics of your bike? In terms of maintenance, for example. Some people hand their bikes off to the bike shop, other people do things themselves (or would like to). If you're in the latter category, a decent tool set perhaps? Plus of course this type of "upgrade" would last you for life.
lastly not so much the bike itself but peripheral stuff like getting good clipless pedals, if you don't already have them, more comfy shoes etc. Perhaps, if it turns you on, a gps-enabled trip computer. Personally I love the "data" aspect, and a Garmin 800 was top of my "next cycling purchase" list for a very long while, of course it doesn't make me any better a cyclist but to be able to look at all my rides retrospectively certainly adds to my enjoyment. Perhaps also smaller bike parts such as a better saddle etc. Obviously there are no big bangs here, but if you're budget-driven....

I think which, if any, of these you choose is ultimately going to be down to how you see yourself using your bike going forward. Are you wanting to get faster? ride longer? go touring? compete? etc. etc. etc.

Likewise you could look at every suggestion and decide that none of them is worth it.


What's the deal with the axle of my wheels? (or, why is one gear so much smaller than the other?) I want to put a smaller set of gears on my bike, but looking at the wheel I see that I already have the smallest gear for my axle. Comparing it to another wheel, I found that the other wheel has a much smaller axle.

Thicker axle, 14 tooth gear:

http://chrismsmith.net/IMG_2231.JPG

Thinner axle, 11 tooth gear:

http://chrismsmith.net/IMG_2230.JPG

I want to know the names for these two different axle types, or how they are described at all, and why one would be chosen over the other.

Ok, I googled that funky MegaRange 14-34 (first picture) and it appears to be a 7-speed threaded freewheel.  The second example is a bit harder to make out but it appears to be a modern cassette+freehub design, not sure how many sprockets.  The two designs are incompatible and use different hub styles.

The freewheel design includes both the sprockets and freewheel (the mechanism which lets you coast) as one piece, which screws onto the hub body.  This is an older design and is limited to a lower number of gears, typically 7 or less.  I'm not sure of any clear advantage, other than it's easier to replace the freewheel in this design.  It's been a long time since I had one of these.

Most modern hubs use the second freehub design, where the hub includes the freewheel mechanism.  The sprockets come separately as "cassettes" and can be slid onto the freehub; a locking ring (black in the picture) holds the cassette in place.  Cassettes make it easier to change out a worn sprocket set, or to switch between different sets for different conditions (e.g. one for flat terrain, another for climbing).  Because the cassette widths are standard, you can often upgrade to more sprockets without changing the hub (although you still need to upgrade the shifters).  The tradeoff is that to replace the freewheel you'll end up replacing the entire hub.

For more details (with pictures), check out Sheldon Brown's site.


What Type of Brake Pads Should I Look For? The brake pads on my bike have worn out, so I ordered a new set online, and after I spent a lot of time trying to adjust them, I noticed it won't work as they're not long enough to grip the rim when braking. I'm looking up online, and I can't seem to find anything without those bits and bolts just with a plain long-enough bar.

What name/keyword shall I look up to find what I need?

The Original Brakes:

The New Brake With Bolts That's Short:

The New Brake Without Bolt Which Is Not Safe Enough:

UPDATE:
Googling "cantilever" was helpful as @mikes mentioned. They seem to be 70mm pads. Also here's another picture from the pads:

If you search cantilever brake parts you should find what you need. They are sometimes referred to as threadless  post brake pads.


Wilier Zero9 bottom bracket Im trying to investigate what type of bottom bracket has by Wilier Zero9 road bike. Looks like some pressfit but Im Not sure,  inner bearing width has 25mm. I have Shimano Ultegra 2x11 6800.

A quick Google search suggests it's a BB386Evo. Do you see that number, or maybe just a "386" stamped anywhere on it?

Further confirmation:

https://machiine.com/2017/the-wilier-triestina-zero-9/

https://www.racycles.com/product/detail/5707

That last link makes it sound like it's a custom BB:

"The bottom bracket standard is the Wilier co-designed BB386EVO, designed for 30mm diameter thru-axles and 86mm wide bottom bracket shells"


Should I restore my old mt-bike for winter commuting (and for wife to ride with me) or throw it away? One year ago I moved to Boston and my father-in-law gave me his old Specialized mountain bike. He is a road bike guy so this bike was left aside for the longest time. It was in a decent shape. The only money I spent on it was for some lights, one tire and two tubes. I commuted to work (3 miles total) every single day: with sun, rain or snow. But (unfortunately) I didn't take care of it at all. And now the bike is in a really bad shape. Chains, front/rear derailleurs and cassette are all SUPER rusty. And both breaks are also gone. For my birthday I bought a new bike (Specialized Sirrus Comp) but I don't want to ride it in the snow.

So I decided to restore the old one. The idea was to slowly restore this bike with decent parts, ride it during the winter and take care of it, and after that, I'd have a spare bike that my wife could use.

First step: brakes. They were REALLY bad, so I bought new v-brakes from Amazon (Shimano Acera Mountain Bicycle V-Brake / $23) and I tried to install them. It didn't go well because I also need new cables. Because of that, I got really frustrated and I completely disassembled the bike and there's no turning back.

Here is my question: should I do that or not? This is the list of parts I will probably have to buy in order to put the bike back in the streets:

Shimano Brake Cable and Housing Set - $14
Shimano Stainless Steel Shift Cable - $9
Shimano Tourney 6/7-Speed Mountain Bicycle Rear Derailleur - $13
Shimano FD-TX50 Tourney Front Derailleur - $11
Shimano Tourney Shift Lever SL-RS45 - $16
New chain - $10

Am I missing something?? I should probably buy new wheels but I can certainly wait.

So the total cost would be: $96. The (ideal) final result would be an old but decent Specialized frame (it's the only part that's not rusted) with brand new entry-level Shimano parts. This sounds better than a department store bike.

Is it stupid to do that considering I have no idea how to put everything back together (Youtube will help me)?

Two questions here - restore an old bike and what bike for your wife.

Lets deal with the easy one - an old Specialised will be a better bike than a department store one. If you need much more gear to be replaced, consider looking for a donor.  Add another $100 to you list for things that might need doing - like new cluster and chain rings, brake pads etc. Strip and repack wheel bearings and headset and you are probably good to go. From the sound of it though, a second hand bike might be a better option, as the deterioration that requires those parts replaced almost certainly means other parts are on their last legs. Cannot tell for sure without seeing it.

Next one - What bike should your wife ride - that depends on your relationship.
I see this all the time- Fit, active strong guy out on the trials riding a multi-thousand dollar ultra efficient lightweight bike miles ahead of his partner who clearly does not live breath and dream cycling like he does and is nowhere near as fit. She is struggling on an old beater her partner would not be seen dead riding, miles behind, exhausted and close to tears.......

If you don't like your wife, and/or want to be sent our riding on your own with her blessing, give her the beater.

If you like your wife, and/or would like her to like you, enjoy riding and spend quality cycling time with you, give her the nicest bike and ride the beater. If she gets to like riding, you can buy her a nice bike that fits her properly. Play you cards right, you can buy her a better bike than yours, and when you go out solo - ride that......

(Presumption I have made is that the bikes fit both riders.  My wife and me fit the same frame size. I have two seat posts and seats for "her" bike - one set up for for her, one for me.....)


What kind of crank extractor do I need I'm trying to swap the cranks on our Thorn tandem and would like to know what kind of crank extractor (if any) I need for the job.

Is there a way to tell from this photo, before I've taken it all apart?

EDIT: Photo updated after cap removed (sorry it's a bit blurry). Centre has a thread, is that what I'd screw into and pull?

For example, Thorn list several crank extractors.

You will need a specialty tool referred to as a crank remover or crank extractor. A Park Tool CCP22 or something similar. I would suggest considering the Park Tool CWP7 or equivalent as it offers increased flexibility. While the CCP22 is suggested for square shaft interface the CWP7 will do square, splined and octolink. While you only need the square type now the universal design of the CWP7 may come in handy later.


Active Cycle Touring Blogs I'm in the planning stages of a big US cycle trip and am doing some research into the best cycle touring blogs. I'm looking for active blogs of people or groups who are on the road and blogging along the way.

I'm already aware of Vague Direction - which is awesome - but any others that have inspiring photos / videos?

Thanks!
Jonny

Crazy Guy on a Bike sounds like just one blog but is actually many blogs with lots of touring information. The interface is kind of minimal like Craigslist but there is a lot of content there.


Which replacement pulley wheels fit a Shimano RD-6400/6401? I'm looking for replacement pulley wheels for my RD-6401. It needs to have 10 teeth and a thickness of about 7.2mm.
I do have a set of Shimano 10 teeth pulley wheels in front of me (Y56398030) which don't fit because they are about 9mm thick (plus they are of poor quality).
Are there still replacements parts available?

There are third party replacement pulleys available from at least BBB brand. They come with a set of adapters for different derailleurs, and in my opinion are better quality than low to mid tier original pulleys. There is also good chance that searching for the original spare part code finds a mail order shop that has the original part.


Looking to get correct size bike I'm 59 years old, 6'6" with 36" inseam, I presently have a carbon Teschner road bike. looking for at either a gravel bike or hybrid bike I have not decided yet, but my main concern is getting the correct size.

In normal times, I would advise you to visit a bike shop and get fitted by the staff. Of course, these are not normal times. It would still be worth talking on the phone to a local shop and seeing what they can do for you and what they'd recommend.

It sounds like you've got a long torso. This can be accommodated by seat setback, stem length, and handlebar reach, although those will affect other aspects of your fit and the bike's handling.

If there are specific bikes you're interested, check the manufacturers' websites to see what their fitting guidance is. There are some bike manufacturers that direct-ship to consumers (and more are doing so during the C19 crisis). They usually don't build to order to accommodate fit, although I've seen one or two that do.

Road and gravel bikes are sized by what you might call the virtual seat-tube length (I think hybrids are the same, but less sure). This is the distance from the center of the bottom bracket to a point extrapolated from the seat tube where it intersects a horizontal line extended from the top of the head tube (this is a throwback to when bikes had horizontal top tubes). And usually, the seat-tube length will be ⅔ your inseam; hybrids will probably express this in inches and gravel bikes probably in cm. So you'd probably take a 60/61 cm bike (frames are mostly sized in even-numbered increments), which is big.


What is the generic name for the gear shifter where you have one trigger for the up shift and another for down shift? I recently bought a bike with new advanced gear shifters where you can shift easily as the shifter has a trigger for the up shift and downshift? I would like to replace the twist shifter in my old bike with these but do not know the generic name for it.

So I would like to know the generic name for it so that I can get the old ones replaced at a bike shop.  This one comes with integrated brake lever and position indicator

Sounds like an indexed thumb shifter or an indexed pod shifter or a trigger shifter.  All three names mean the same kind of thing, though different designs may put the two levers in different places, or may use a button for release.

Examples:

 Shimano Tourney 7 speed TX50

 Shimano Altus three position left hand shifter.

Integrated

Its possible to get shifter/brake levers integrated into one unit.  Advantage is that you have fewer mounting bands on your bars, so its a space saver and a small weight saving.   Disadvantage is that changing a shifter MAY mean changing the brake lever too.

Shimano has a bunch of standards for combination shifter and brake levers, named I-Spec and available in variants called "I-Spec A" which is the original, and "I-Spec B" and "I-Spec II"   none of which are inter-compatible.

There is nothing wrong with running a separate gear shifter and brake lever, as long as they're both reachable from your grips.  From a future-proofing point of view, separate makes a lot of sense.

Others

  The grip shift, or revoshift, or many other names.  These are commonly found on cheap nasty bikes known as BSOs, and are renowned for having a short life.  They tend to crack rending them useless.  The exception would be the Rohloff grip shifter which is super robust.

 bar-end shifters - popular with touring riders, and can often run in indexed or friction modes.  I find the cable routing looks weird, so its not uncommon to route the cable under the bartape, or even completely internal to the bars.

This is a friction shifter, where the position is determined by your skill only.

This is a pair of downtube shifters, more common on 80s road bikes.  These never really appeared on MTB.  Can be mounted on the stem, in which case they're called stem shifters.

 Finally brifters - the gear change of choice of the drop bar rider.  Common on Road bikes and Cyclocross, and gravel.


Switching to Lower Gears for Climbing Right now, I've got a SRAM 11/26 cassette. I just moved to San Francisco, and some of the climbs out here (e.g., Mt. Tamalpais) are pretty brutal with over an hour of climbing. My cadence over some of the steeper sections towards the top tends to hover around 70, when I'd much rather be up at 80 or 90. I've been considering switching to an 11/28.

The thing stopping me from doing so is wondering if it would be better, training-wise, to grind it out for now until my power and endurance improve, bringing my ability up into the range where a 26t climbing gear is appropriate. I'm afraid if I switch to a 28t, I'll use it as a crutch. Should I stick it out with the 26t until I get stronger?

A cadence of 70 RPM while climbing is not unusually low, so switching to a lower gear may just encourage you to slow down instead of making you more efficient. But the only way to know for sure is to try it and measure the difference.

There isn't necessarily a right cadence. The article Technique - Pedal like a pro reports that seven pro cyclists (a small sample, I know) dropped their cadence from 80-100 RPM on the flats to 60-80 RPM on a 5% grade. Although Lance Armstrong is famous for climbing at 100+ RPM, this does not seem to be common.

I personally do better when I climb at around 70 RPM than I do at a higher cadence. The higher cadence just causes me to get out of breath faster. But this is different from person to person.

In the end, there's no harm in trying a different gear and seeing what works best for you.


When should I not use my front brake? I have only been riding for a short time and I remember when I was a child there was a belief that if you used your front brakes going downhill that you would fly over your handlebars.

However, my friend who is a long time rider said I should use my front brakes more often as they are more efficient and you would have to be doing something crazy to go over.

Is there any truth to the belief and should I use my front brake the most?

This comes under the category of things taught to children which simplify the whole truth in order to facilitate learning and keep them safe. Late on they will be ready to learn how to use the front brake effectively.

When children are learning to ride, they are learning lots of new skills. Balance, pedalling and braking. They don't need to apply a lot of braking force as generally they are travelling slowly - whilst still learning - and also have lower mass - than most adults. So, for safety's sake and to simplify the learning they are taught to apply rear brake first, and front brake later to reduce the likelihood of going over the handlebars. In the conditions children are learning in - generally not wet slippy roads - the risk of skidding or fishtailing from applying the rear brake first is lower than the risk of going over the handlebars and the consequences are likely to be lower impact.

Once you have learnt the balance and pedalling and can ride the bike reasonably well. You can move on to more advanced skills to become a really competent rider. One of those is how to stop more quickly when going at speed and with more weight on the bike (i.e. you're bigger). Now the risk of skidding the rear brake, or just not stopping in time due to inadequate braking force applied for the speed and mass is greater and needs to be dealt with. If the front-brake is used properly it can apply much greater braking force, without the risk of skidding associated with the rear brake. The most critical things is to ensure you keep your weight behind the front wheel and not over the top when applying the front-brake. To do this, ensure your weight is toward the back of the bike and that your arms are braced against the handlebars to absorb the force and keep you on the bike.


Hayes Nine Hydro brakes - oil do you think that I could use Shimano mineral oil on/in Hayes Nine Hydro brakes (where it says Dot 4).

Thanks for your help people!

No. Can not, must not. Fluid type mismatches in either direction can make seals and other non-metal parts degrade, swell, and/or fail. Mineral oil, being the less caustic and reactive one, will generally do it more gradually when this mistake does get made, but it still does it or at least can.


Which tube size to prefer if several options apply? I have 40-622 (a.k.a. 28x1.5") tires, and Schwalbe offers
two different sizes of tubes - their models "17" and "19" - as applicable for that tire size.

Ok, either one would surely fit well. But apart from weight difference (150 vs. 220 grams), is there any reason to prefer one over another? Is it better to have as small & light tube as possible? Or perhaps a bit larger and heavier one would be more durable, as it wouldn't be stretched as much? Err on which side?

Basically, the tube box will list the sizes it covers. Make sure your size is within those parameters (and ideally not "on the edge"). Beyond that you'd generally pick the lighter tube for road and the heavier one for off-road.  And a heavier tube will generally provide a slight improvement in puncture resistance.

Avoid very light tubes unless you're a racer, as they will often "leak down" much faster than heavier tubes, requiring you to inflate your tires twice daily in some cases.  (It would be nice if manufacturers rated their tubes based on leakage.)


What is the maximum recommended rider weight for using a dual suspension bike? I am interested in buying https://myroadeo.com/hercules-mtb-geared-bikes/27-5-29er/hannibal-27-5/ model which has dual suspension. Can a rider weighing 105 Kg, use this bicycle?

Most department store, BSO (Bicycle Shaped Objects), and entry level bikes carry an advertised weight limit of 250lbs (113kg), which is also I imagine on the safe side, or what some would call a lawyer number. So you should be fine if you decide that is the route you want to go.

A steel framed cheap full suspension will be very heavy, and I would recommend starting with front suspension only, and an alloy model of bike if possible to save some weight – that same company offers several. Then if you ride the bike for a few years and really get into it, save up and spend a little more on a decent full suspension if you want. I ride full suspension and don't necessarily "need it" but I enjoy it more and I do a lot of trail riding with technical features. A higher end full suspension will have different levels of lock out which is a big plus when riding pavement or anything other than trails and off-road.


What causes chain suck? Specifically when changing gears from middle chain ring to smallest, the chain will sometimes get 'sucked' up between the inner chainring and chain stay. It seems to happen more often in muddy conditions. I keep my drive train clean and lube my chain often.

I bought the bike new and maybe 1200-1500 miles on the original chain/derailers.
I have swapped out the original (aluminum) inner chainring with a new steel chainring and still get chain suck.

The problem you describe is caused by either a badly worn cog, a rear derailer with insufficient "tooth capacity" (given the gear combo you're using), a seriously deficient rear derailer tension spring, or a chain that is simply too long.  A worn chain will tend to exacerbate things, as will a chain that's "sticky" from grease or mud.


Rear gears don't turn anticlockwise I've taken the rear wheel off my bike but the rear gears are stuck and do not spin freely anticlockwise.

It had been out of use for about 4 days, kept in a dry garage. I took the wheel off because it was bent, then found this problem.

Any idea what's happened or if i can fix it?

Well, the freewheel/freehub is frozen, apparently.  Generally nothing to do but replace that component (repair is possible but difficult).

But there are two other possibilities:

Look between the big gear and the hub to make sure there's nothing (eg, a pebble) jammed in there.
The nuts on the axle (including some you can't see) may have somehow become overtightened.  You can try loosening the nuts you can see and see if that improves things, but you might as well take the wheel to your local bike shop since they have the tools to take it apart and know how to adjust it.


How can I tell where the damage is in the hub? I am pretty new to bicycle maintenance.  I've replaced brake cables, and patched tubes, but not much else.  This week my plan was to clean up my back hub, because the wheel hadn't been turning as smoothly as it should.  It felt like I was riding with my brakes on, and I couldn't find anything else wrong with it.

When I removed the skewer, the axle came out with it, and the bearings started falling out.  This was completely unexpected, since it didn't happen the last time I took removed the skewer, and I hadn't ridden since then.  At this point, I'm not sure how to approach the issue.  So, here is what I'm asking:

What is the best way to tell whether the hub or axle is damaged?
** Edit:  The axle is broken.  I didn't notice before, but when I went to take pictures, I could see it.  (Pictures didn't take well, though)  Should I assume there is other damage to the hub that I haven't noticed?
Should I be able to repack the hub with new bearings, or do I need to replace the cartridges entirely?
** Edit:  At this point, it looks like I should replace the whole wheel, as suggested.

I can tell that the skewer is slightly bent, and I think that is why it pulled the axle out, but the axle shouldn't have been that loose.  I'm guessing that the damage to the skewer was done when I had trouble putting the wheel back on the frame.

This same issue happened to this bike five years ago, and a shop repaired it, but my deal with that shop has long since expired.

Hi you say this is the second time it has happened , did the axle snap/break on the previous occasion ? is it a mountain bike ? does it take a bit of hammering ?

if the they are cartridge bearings ,you shouldn't need a new wheel ,just a couple of new cartridge bearings ,and an axle . just take what's left of the bearing cases , get a ruler , measure inner ,outer and width , you''ll probably get a couple new for a fiver on e bay, then measure the length of the axle ,if you can source the specs for the bike , even better ,should state it. then the thickness of the axle(9,9.5,10 mm ),you might have to buy an old school axle with cones, but you can just use the axle ,stick it all back together. good as new .  fixed for under a tenner  . p.s if it is taking a lot of stress ,go for a solid axle over quick release,plus you have the added bonus of your wheels not getting nicked if the thief hasn't brought a spanner he he


Clipless pedals: Why clipping in so darn difficult? I do understand that this question been asked million times, and million people have million different opinions and it's all down to personal preferences, yet I am struggling and need to find a solution that would work best for me.

So there's no question - clipless pedals are better. I knew that when I was buying my bike and now I have "Look" pedals, and of course I had to learn to unclip them safely without falling.

I can do that now, but clipping the cleat back into the pedal is my biggest pain. The pedal's back-side is heavier than its front, so it allways dangles upside-down and I have to keep kicking it with my toe, until it rotates back to its normal position. And even after that I usually struggle to get it clipped. And in the city it's a huge problem - sometimes, I have to roll without clipping it till a next red light. And very often that sucker ironically clips right before the light. Also the "Look" cleats are made of plastic and they definitely will deform over time, making it even harder to use.

Yesterday I even thought about installing a regular pedal for one foot, but then decided it's a bad, bad idea and I don't really want that.

Can you guys tell me if I should definitely try using SPD-SLs? Are they much better? Can someone who actually had experienced both systems (and maybe older SPD as well) can tell me that I would benefit from spending another hundred bucks and more? Or there's a way to train myself to clip without even having to look down and this is a newbie's problem and I will forget about it very soon, after maybe fifty thousand stops and after replacing forty pairs of cleats?

Also I noticed that I prefer to unclip my left foot and stand on it, so my left cleat is going to wear off faster. Are left and right cleats are the same? Can I just keep replacing one cleat (although I noticed they always sold in pairs)

And Look cleats are not compatible with SPD-SL, right? What about shoes? Would I need to buy another pair of shoes as well, if I decide to switch?

UPD: Switched to SPD. And I gotta tell you, it feels significantly better.

Yes, I don't care that these XT 785s are meant for mountain bikes,
I don't care that they almost twice heavier than my KEOs,
I don't care that KEOs were almost twice the price i.e. maybe of
better quality.
I don't care that SPD is older technology than Look and SPD-SL

After all, like Genghis Khan's adviser said once to his son:

  It is possible to conquer the world sitting in a saddle but impossible to rule the empire from it

That said - riding a road bike is not always about speed, it's also about comfort. Maybe advocates of asymmetrical pedals would disagree, but I love my new pedals, they are awesome. Also I think now I understand why my previous pedals company called "Look" - you damn can't clip them in without looking straight at your foot

This is part comment, part answer, but too long to fit in a comment, so here we go.

Personally, I use SPD, and when I ride with a group, everyone else has SPD-SL or LOOK.  I'm usually clipped in and across the intersection before they're clipped in.  Either I'm just really good at clipping in, or SPD are designed to be easier to get clipped in to. Even the very experienced riders tend to have problems with clipping in from time to time.

Personally I don't know what advantage SPD-SL offers over SPD. People say that the larger platform allows for better power transfer, but I don't see how that makes difference. The foot pushes on the hard sole of the shoe, and sole of the shoe pushes on the pedal, which is made of rigid metal. Assuming there is no flex in the pedal or the sole of the shoe, it doesn't matter how large the attachment point is.

Personally, I would recommend you try out a pair of SPDs. Borrow some from a friend or see if the shop has a demo pair and see if that works better for you. Too many shops will push you towards road pedals (either SPD-SL or LOOK) because you're riding on the road, and you will break "Rule 34" if you use mountain pedals on a road bike. I think that SPD pedals are a much better solution unless you're an actual road racer and only plan to unclip at the end of the ride.


Ever seen a locking bag that could be locked to the bike? This might take a little explaining.

I've got stuff on my bike that removes easily and could be stolen: head light, tail light, cyclometer. If I'm riding to a concert or something, I don't want to lug that kind of stuff around in my pockets, but I don't want to leave it sitting out on my bike for thieves, either.

I've been looking for some kind of small bag or pouch made from a tough material (like those locking bags banks use for deposits) that could be locked to the bike. I'm imagining something with a sturdy strap that would fit through an opening on the other side, so you could then feed your U-lock or chain through the loop, thus locking the bag shut and to the bike at the same time.

Has anyone ever seen anything like this? Is this overkill for a problem with a simpler solution?

Do you mean something like this from PacSafe it's got a secure steel mesh inside:

I remember using one of their bigger backpack bags when travelling to New Zealand a few years ago, and the only complaints I had were from the TSA when we went through the US.

Alternatively if you have a rack on the back, then it may be possible to attach a lockable box to that in some secure way. Although my worry would be that anyone who noticed such a box, would immediately wonder what was locked up inside and decide to break it open.


105 BR-5500 an improvement over Sora BR-3400? I'm currently overhauling a bike with a Shimano Sora 3400 groupset. I've replaced most of the parts with Sora 3500 (notably not the brake levers -- still 3400) and am interested in buying some nicer used brakes, but don't want to spend a ton. Would 105 BR-5500 brakes be much of an improvement over what I have?

Would 105 BR-5500 brakes be much of an improvement over what I have?

What could the improvement be?
Lighter weight would mean the brake arms are less stiff, causing flex in the brake system. Thus, you cannot reasonably reduce the weight of the brake arms. Besides, most weight reduction "upgrades" are not worth it, giving only few tens of grams of savings at most, the benefit of which is infinistesimal but occurs at great cost.
Stiffer brake arms (less flex) would mean the brake arms are are heavier than necessary. Weight being unacceptable in a bicycle, the manufacturers are reluctant to do this.
Higher mechanical advantage (more power in brakes) would mean the brake lever runs out of travel very quickly, requiring frequent turning of the barrel adjuster, and the free spacing in the brake pads is so low that they cannot track a wheel with a broken spoke. However, do note that current trend of high mechanical advantage in dual pivot brakes with their forced centering and current trend of less than 36 spokes per wheel may mean you may run into problems if you break a spoke anyway.
Higher free spacing (allowing to track a wheel with a broken spoke exceptionally and not running out of lever travel quickly) would mean the brake has little mechanical advantage and would require unacceptably large lever force to stop.
Sometimes, a design is a compromise that has been perfected decades ago.
If you want an improvement in brake technology, there are three options (or actually two really as you cannot find hydraulic rim brakes):

Better brake pad material. The Kool Stop salmon-colored compound works exceptionally well in varying conditions, not picking up pieces of sand that work as an abrasive compound to cause early rim wear. This is the cheapest approach and I highly recommend it.

Better actuation mechanism. Cable actuation can be replaced with hydraulic actuation. However, you probably won't find hydraulic rim brakes easily.

Better brake type. Rim brakes can be replaced with disc brakes. However, disc brakes are heavier (because they do not reuse the rim as the brake disc but rather require a separate brake disc) and require a heavier fork and a more sturdy spoking pattern in the wheel. On the other hand, disc brakes do not have brake lag in the wet, unlike all rim brakes. The cost is more frequent brake pad replacements. I don't recommend this approach because in practice it requires getting a new bicycle, as forks not having disc brake mounts cannot support disc brakes.


How to cut derailleur cable housing This is a job I will do very rarely, so I would prefer to avoid buying a specialty tool, if possible.

Unfortunately I don't own a dremel. Side cutters just mashed everything and did not cut at all. Are there any other methods you can recommend?

EDIT: I think this is different from the brake cable housing question, in that side cutters will get the job done with a little effort on brake cable. They have a much harder time cutting the parallel strands of derailleur cable housing.

EDIT2: I asked the guys at the store where I bought the housing to cut it to length for me and they didn't mind. :)

I see you don't want to buy the proper tool - do consider that while some are silly expensive, there are also reasonably priced alternatives.  Brands like Birzman and X-Tools are a third the cost of a Park or Pedro's tool.

Another option is to use a rotary cutoff disk in a tool like a dremel, or even a full-sized cutoff wheel in a grinder.   If you have one already, then this is a no-cost.  To buy one would cost more than the right cable cutter tool as already suggested.


Eating during a 170 mile ride I am doing a solo, unsupported 2 day charity ride, covering 260 miles in total. I am not taking any panniers or backpack, the only things im taking will fit in my saddlebag and my jersey pockets.

The ride isn't an even split with the first day a mammoth (to me) 170 miles, though relatively flat ~1,700m climbing.

I have ridden 100 miles many times and have fueled myself sufficiently through pre ride eating and gels, snacks and drinks on the ride.

I am also not worried about the post ride nutrition as have done this many times as well.

The thing I am unsure on is this:

170 miles is just under 70 miles further than I have ever ridden in one go.

I know I can go just over 100 miles in about 6 hours without any issues on gels and snacks. I have a brand that I know doesn't cause me any stomach upset eating ~ 3 gels an hour for this time period.

I am estimating 170 miles will take me somewhere between 10 and 12 hours to complete.

Would I be stupid to try to complete this on gels & snacks alone? bearing in mind I'd have to carry somewhere close to 30 gels etc.

Should I try to find a place to stop and eat a proper meal? and if so what type of things should I try to eat?

I would assume carbs, rice or pasta but not too much, would any protein be good too? Fat & bread that sit on the stomach would be a big no no I assume.

I was thinking about 90 miles into the first day so after about 6 hours, this puts me just over half way through the day and the area im looking at is on a big stretch between castles (im visiting 32 castles as the basis for the charity challenge)

I would look to stop at least twice and take on protein as well as carbs.  Try an omelette if you can get one on the road.  I would look to take some protein bars as well as energy gels, it will give variety as well as restore what you will blow through in 170 miles.

You are also going to need to stretch, so suggest you plan on a 1-hour middle of ride stop...


Correct Frame Size Trekking Short Legs There seem to be two heuristics for determining frame size without testing a bike: inner leg length and body height. I have an inner leg length of 85cm and a body height of 192. According to my inner leg length, I should buy a 55cm frame. According to my body height a >60cm frame. Any advice on what to do there besides testing? Intuitively, I would think that I should buy the highest frame for which I can still put the saddle in a correct position?

If you have proportionately short legs and a long body and arms, I would recommend against buying a bike unseen. You really need to test ride some bikes and get an idea of the geometry you need.

You’ll need is bike that has a sufficiently long ‘reach’ (horizontal distance between bottom bracket and bars) so that your upper body is not cramped, but a short enough seat tube so you can set a shorter bottom bracket to seat distance. You probably also want a short ‘stack’ (vertical distance between bottom bracket and bars) so the bars are not too high.

You’ll need to seek out and try a number of bikes to find a model that suits you.


Is it significant that my bike sometimes makes a "twang" sound when I hit a bump? I recently bought a 2016 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Disc road bike, which is working great -- however I notice that occasionally when my front wheel hits a bump (e.g. a small pothole or the lip of a driveway), the front fork (or something beneath it) goes into some sort of vibration mode and makes a noise that sounds a lot like the "twang" of a door-stopper for about a quarter-second.

It's a little surprising when this happens (both due to the unexpected sound and the vibration I feel through the handlebars), but I don't observe any obvious problems other than that.

My question is, is this sort of behavior normal/expected with this type of bike, or is it an indicator that something needs adjustment?  (The quick-release lever seems to engaged tightly AFAICT, and there is no reflector mounted on the front spokes)

I would guess these are the spokes. When hitting a bump, you wheel gets compressed. The harder you hit it the more.

When you wheel is getting compressed some (Upper and lower) spokes obviously loose their tension. The wheel then will pop back in it's original shape due the rest of the spokes which are streched. This will bring back the tension to the compressed spokes which usually is noticeable with the "twang" noise.

It may be a hint that you need to tighten your spokes. The looser your spokes are, the more compressed the wheel can get, which again can loosen your spokes even more. This can create a downwards spiral until the spokes start breaking. Simply check your spokes an tighten them if necessary.

Look I drew a nice picture :)


How do I lower the saddle on a Scirocco bicycle? I've acquired a second-hand ladies' Scirocco Elegance 21 speed bicycle.  I need to lower the saddle but can't quite see how it can be done.

The saddle is supported by the seat post which is inserted into the seat tube of the frame. At the top of the seat tube there is a clamp which holds the seat post. On some bicycles this is built into the seat tube, on others it is a separate collar. Undo the seat post clamp bolt, and the seat post should slide in the seat tube.

I'm guessing that the above is obvious and you have loosened the clamp, but the seat post is not moving. Seat posts are notorious for getting stuck as water can seep between the post and frame tube and cause corrosion. If the post is not too badly stuck twisting the seat can unstick it. Using a penetrating oil such as WD-40 can help also.

If the seat post is really stuck there are many videos on YouTube documenting unsticking techniques.

If/when you do get the post loose, be careful to not overtighten the clamp after adjusting the saddle height. It's possible to damage the threads of the bolt or the clamp.


Converting a KHS FLITE 223 into a freewheel fixie? I have this KHS Road bike that I got back in high school and was wondering if I'm able to convert it into a freewheel fixie (I think that's the right term) The bike does have vertical dropouts. Would it be cheaper to convert it or just buy a new bike altogether?
Here is a link with all the specs I haven't changed anything since I got it!
https://khsbicycles.com/bikes/flite-223-16/

Based on the photo from your link, this bike will be difficult to convert because of the dropout having no adjustment at all.

Effectively this means you will need some other way of tensioning the chain.

Eccentric bottom bracket (expensive)
Chain tensioner (looks like a derailleur) This also means you cannot use fixed gear, because the chain will go slack on the top run if you forget and try to coast.  Also means skid-braking is impossible.
Half-link chain (expensive, heavier, somewhat uglier)

Also in your shopping list will be a single-speed conversion kit, which is a single cog and a bunch of spacers to replace your rear cassette.

Its probably advisable to fit a new chain at the time of conversion, to help keep track of mileage on components.

You might choose to replace your chainrings too, but that's more for aesthetics.  Its reasonable to pick a chainring, run the bike on only that ring by locking off the front derailleur.  You might choose to remove the inner grannie chainring for weight/appearances.  Removing the middle or large chainring will probably require a different set of chainring bolts, or some washers added to make up the missing thickness.

Brakes - For other future readers, just leave them on.   I am of the opinion that two brakes are mandatory on any road bike.  And that skid braking is not an effective emergency brake.  So don't strip off your rim brakes in the pursuit of appearance.   This doesn't apply to OP because the cassette conversion kit does not remove the freehub and the bike will just coast, if you try to skid stop on a single speed.

UPSHOT  compare the sum of cost of parts, with the loss of versatility of your quite-nice road bike.  Compare that with the cost of a second bike, and make a decision yourself as to which is more suitable.

I'd recommend N+1 if you can afford it, and would only consider conversion for a bike that isn't being used.


What are the considerations before buying a Full Suspension bike (India)? I am planning on buying a new Full-Suspension Bike withing few months specially to use in hilly terrain.  So far I've been to few hills around my home town, they are roughly 100-400 meters high.

What technical and geographical aspects should I consider while purchasing full suspension bike?

Full suspension bikes are very costly here in my country and not many use them also I am confused which one to go for. Full-suspension or proper downhill?

Activities I do on my current hard-tail is lots of small drops (up to 2-2.5 feet) staircases are normal. I want to do more longer jumps, up to several feet.  I also want to do a little more aggressive downhill. I want a bike which is easy and affordable to maintain.

There are a few questions to ask yourself. 90% of the time what sort of riding are you doing? Hike-a-bike where you'll repeatedly walk your bike up a hill and ride down, do you commute by bicycle, etc. If you want to use it solely for riding down hills and hucking off jumps and nothing else then maybe get a downhill rig. If you do any other form of riding at all don't get a downhill specific design. Their made to be ski lifted up mountains and then ridden down, that's about it.

From what i read though it sounds like an all mountain or all around trail bike would be ideal for you, something you can use the lockout's on the suspension to get around. Trying to ride up large steep hills on a downhill bike is pretty horrible and tiresome. You also loose a lot of work in the bob of the suspension if you're just tooling around town.

A good quality trail bike with 120-140mm suspension with lockout sounds like it would be right up your alley as far as the type of riding you're doing. The most important part of the suspension system is your body after all. But with 120-140mm of suspension that should be plenty to soak up what your doing but still be usable in other aspects and styles of riding as well.


What bike/helmet camera resolution is needed in order to read licence plates? Has anyone had any success with cameras that can resolve the license plates of vehicles that are near the bike?

What resolution will be needed if we want to be able to read license plate later on?

EDIT: Is resolution 1920x1080 enough for license plate resolution? Or is frame rate (interlaced vs. progressive; 30 fps vs 50fps vs 60fps) necessary; or is it the bitrate that is the most important?

Security cameras have a standard called "pixels per foot" (ppf).  This means that at a certain distance, an object 1 foot across (about the size of a US license plate) will have a certain number of pixels.  As the object moves further away, the number of pixels per foot decreases.  As the object moves closer, the number of pixels per foot increases.

This is the correct way to measure whether you can read license plates or not, because it takes the camera lens field-of-view into account.  This is particularly important when dealing with the GoPro since it has a maximum field-of-view of 170 degrees!  This means its pixels are spread over a much larger area.

Conveniently, security cameras makers also have a standard for reading license plates of 40-45 pixels per foot.

Take a GoPro recording at 1920x1080 (aka 1080p) @ 170 degrees. Presumably you'd use this if mounted to the bike; the wider angle simply records more.  Your resolution will drop to 45 ppf at 14.4 feet away.  That is, beyond 14.4 feet away, it will get harder and harder to read license plates clearly.

A more thorough listing of a few different cameras:
 - GoPro 1920x1080 @ 170 degrees; 14.4 ft
 - GoPro 1920x1080 @ 127 degrees; 19.2 ft
 - GoPro 1920x1080 @ 90 degrees; 27.2 ft
 - GoPro 4k 3840x2160 @ 170 degrees; 28.8 ft
 - GoPro 4k 3840x2160 @ 127 degrees; 38.5 ft
 - GoPro 4k 3840x2160 @ 90 degrees; 54.3 ft
 - Novatek NT96650 G1W 1920x1080 @ 120 degrees; 20.4 ft
 - Mobius ActionCam 1920x1080 @ 116 degrees; 21.1 ft

The last two were selected because they were reviewed by Popular Mechanics as car dash cams, not because of their suitability for use on a bicycle.

More math! (oh noes!) A car travelling at 30 mph (relativistic) is travelling at 44 ft per second.  That is, a car approaching you at 44 ft per second across a 30 ft distance (picked at random) will take 0.68 seconds to reach you.  At 30 frames per second, that means you can record 20.5 frames.  The more frames you get, the more likely that you get a clear one.

However, after laying all that math out, I'm not sure that 40 ppf is the minimum.  Digital Image Forensics can recover an amazing amount of detail out of a blurry image, particularly because license plates are high contrast.  Judge for yourself by searching for "digital forensics license plate"

I'm also not sure that 30 mph is a reasonable target to aim for; it seems a bit fast in most cases.

I recommend trying it out for yourself.  Get a tape measure, borrow a camera, and record your license plate in 5 ft increments, and judge for yourself what seems like a effective distance is.  Take angle into account; not everyone is going to be approaching the camera straight on; they could be approaching you from a cross street, so you might be viewing it at 45 degrees or so.


How much easier is it to go fast on a road bike and why? I have a very comfortable ~500€ basic mountain bike with 2.2" tyres and 27.5" wheels on which I can maintain an average of 24-25 km/h on a windless day on flat asphalt when I'm feeling strong. I cannot keep pedalling in top gear continuously. Instead, I keep switching between the hardest and next to hardest gears.
How much easier would it be to go fast on an affordable road bike with narrow tyres?  Sure it has "faster" gearing, but that alone won't help me since I don't spin out on my current bike either. I am simply not strong enough. Would I see a real speed improvement from a road bike, and if yes, approximately how much? Does that improvement come mostly from a more aerodynamic (but perhaps uncomfortable) position, less rolling resistance, better position for pedalling, or something else? I assume all of these matter, but there is likely a dominant factor.
I have never had the chance to ride a road bike, and I am simply curious. No, this question does not stem from any practical need such as commuting. However, it would be nice to know if a more efficient bike would allow me to reach more places within a reasonable amount of time during this pandemic when I am hesitant to take public transport. I suspect it wouldn't (without better fitness).
EDIT: Another way to phrase this question is, does it even make sense to think about a more efficient bike until I regularly spin out on my current one?

Aerodynamics are very important in cycling, and the faster you go, the bigger a factor aerodynamic drag becomes, because it increases with the square cube of your speed, but other sources of drag (mechanical resistance, rolling resistance) increase linearly. So putting your body in a more aerodynamic position is important, and not something you can really replicate on a mountain bike. At the speed you're going, aerodynamics are not trivial, but not overwhelmingly important.
Rolling resistance is the second-biggest source of resistance. You could put high-quality slick tires on your bike and get faster right now.
If you are commuting in a city, your travel time has more to do with the number of stoplights you hit than your top speed. If you race from one stoplight to the next and then spend more time at the stop, you won't reach your destination much faster. Your "light-to-light" time would need to improve enough that you would beat the stoplight.
"does it even make sense to think about a more efficient bike until I regularly spin out on my current one?" That's not a good way to look at it. Bikes will generally have top gears that you'll never use except on a downhill or with a tailwind. If you regularly spin out in your top gear on level ground in still air, your top gear is too low for your riding conditions.
You would probably be faster on a road bike, or you'd ride the same speed for less effort. How much faster is hard to say. 25 km/h is a pretty good speed for urban riding.


How does the risk of a cyclist colliding with a vehicle vary with the speed difference? In a recent answer I asserted

  Statistics show that the probability of a collision rises rapidly after the speed difference between two road users exceeds 20 kph (12 mph). So choose paths without vehicle traffic, or roads with lower speed traffic.

User ebrohman requested a source for this. Since I remembered this "fact" from years back (er ... not only was it last millenium, it was from before the internet) I had to scrabble about to try to find an online source.

I found weak support for my thesis

  ... this US pdf Synthesis of Safety Research Related to Speed and Speed Management; it doesn't explicitly support the 20 kph claim. This Dutch pdf The relation between speed and crashes says at a collision speed of 20 km/h nearly all pedestrians survive a crash with a passenger car; again not the same as my claim ...

Intuitively, my claim makes sense. The greater the speed difference between a vehicle and me, the more likely a random driver is to make an error and collide with me.

But can we factually quantify how the risk varies with the speed difference?

As some have pointed out in the comments, the question is somewhat misleading, i.e. speed difference is always going to be greater in a head on collision, all things being equal, versus if the collision had been a rear ended collision or a t-bone, but, as @Daniel notes:

  "This is (mostly) unrelated to the probability of the collision in the
  first place"

According to The League of American Bicyclists:

  In 40 percent of the cases (628 total), the victim was struck from behind. The second-most common category was T-bone crashes, which accounted for 10 percent of fatal crashes. Head-on collisions (8 percent) and right-hook crashes, where the driver makes a right turn into a traveling straight (6 percent), were relatively less common.

Getting rear-ended is obviously the most common type of accident.  These numbers do not say the percentage of fatalities from rear-end collisions (they mention it for T-Bones).  However, if one holds to certain basic assumptions regarding the topic at hand:

Most cyclist will try to avoid a collision at all costs
A collision is prerequisite for fatality
Speed difference is always greater head-on than same direction, rider speed and vehicle speed held equal

The conclusion one can draw from this is that all things being equal, following these stats (and other sources below) one should always ride head on, because statistically, one has the least chance of collision, even if the closing speed is the greatest, which itself, would then seem not to have any correlation with risk of collision, or possibly an inverse relationship if assumption 3 is held.

Head on collisions may have a higher incidence of fatality than others, I don't know.  If someone finds data on that please share.

In summary, riding at a lower relative speed (to other vehicles) alongside traffic is more dangerous but probably less fatal, whereas riding at a higher relative speed against traffic is statistically less dangerous but may prove to be more fatal in the event of an accident.

Other relevant sources: http://www.trafficsafetycoalition.com/bike_studies


Tightening torque: 5Nm, 40Nm... how do I tell? I have wonderful new manuals everywhere, of brakes, wheels...
In these manuals I see "tighten up to 5Nm", "tighten up to 40Nm".

There must probably be tools with such measurements on them, but I don't have any.
Is there a way, an equivalent I can use to know the approximate torque I'm putting on my tools?

You do this with a tool called torque (sometimes called dynamometric) wrench.
Without a tool you can estimate it this way:

Make yourself familiar with a weight of 1 kg
Apply the force with your simple wrench 10 cm from the bolt in question

This will give you 1 Nm of force. To get 5 Nm, use 5 kgs of weight or increase length to 50 cm. The math is simple:

  τ = r * F

Where τ is torque, r is radius and F is force (1kg has 10 Newtons of force)

If your bike is expensive racing machine, this tool is a must. By applying too much force you risk making cracks in lightweight materials.


How can I move the saddle further forward? Recently I bought a clip-on aero bar for my road bike and has been practicing aero position for triathlon. I read that moving the saddle forward could mimic the triathlon bike geometry.

However, I cannot move the saddle all the way forward to reach the 'max' line indicated on the saddle rail. The saddle would be slanted if I move it further forward.

How can I move the saddle further forward? Thanks.

You've exceeded the manufacturer's recommendation on saddle positioning -- the clamp is supposed to clamp on the saddle between the stop lines. So, the saddle should be moved back. Many people exceed these recommendations, but its at your own risk. I'd be less inclined to do it on a lightweight or fancy saddle.

The easiest way to move the saddle forward is to use a different seat post which has more ability to move the saddle forward. There are zero setback seatposts and forward seatposts even (e.g. the Profile Fast Forward line). I'd go for this option.

You can also try reversing the seatpost (e.g. loosen the seatpost, turn the saddle 180 degrees, tighten the seatpost and then remove the saddle and install it so that the front is facing the dropbars; in short, install it back to front). This is usable with some seatposts, but others will be impossible to level properly.


What are the main differences in Giant's Toughroad and Revolt drop-bar bike series? I'm at a bit of a loss trying to decide what sort of a (Giant) bike I should be looking towards.
I used to have a Ribble Sportive 7005 from 2014 to 2017. I am now looking for something that would enable a better posture for a longer (50-150 km) ride on gravel, compact dirt, and tarmac.
Firstly, I'm looking at Giant because it's one of the few reputable companies that offers anything in my area that I'd feel comfortable going with—including one of the only ones that have at least a slightly relevant model for trying out.
I've been looking at the Giant's Revolt series, but the differences between the various options are not very well described by the company:

Toughroad SLR GX: "When you’re unsure what lies ahead—smooth roads, gravel or dirt—and you relish the adventure of quiet backroads, this is the bike. With its lightweight aluminum frame, drop handlebars and rugged, high-volume tires, you’re ready for anything."
Revolt: "Over half the world’s road are unpaved, offering ample opportunities for adventure on gravel, dirt and scenic byways. This lightweight aluminum all-rounder is the perfect way to explore roads you’ve always thought about but never ridden."
Revolt Advanced: "Almost anything goes in gravel racing and riding. It’s a mixed-up challenge of speed, endurance and handling. This high-performance all-rounder does it all. It’s smooth, it’s efficient, and it’s your new best friend for pushing limits on roads, gravel and dirt."
Revolt Advanced Pro: "Almost anything goes in gravel racing and riding. It’s a mixed-up challenge of speed, endurance and handling. This high-performance all-rounder does it all. It’s smooth, it’s efficient, and it’s your new best friend for pushing limits on roads, gravel and dirt."

I tried a comparison on the Giant site, but it wasn't particularly helpful except for highlighting that the Toughroad SLR GX should be worse in nearly every category. It helps to know that the technologies marketed below in the Giant comparison table relate to bike construction techniques.

Though the Toughroad SLR GX isn't marketed under the "Gravel" category, the description mentions relatively poor road conditions, and in the shop I went to, it was described as the "lower level Revolt". Some other companies (Kona and Bianchi) don't make such a Gravel/Adventure distinction.
road.cc lists the Revolt 2020 model as one of its "best gravel & adventure bikes" while bicycling.com goes out of its way to make clear that the Revolt Advanced is not a touring bike (which to my ears is synonymous to adventure/gravel). Instead, bicycling.com recommends a non-drop bar Toughroad SLR as a touring bike (and even one of its best)—which makes no sense to me. Meanwhile, Specialized Sequoia Elite which is described in this review as "Gravel" (but coming out worse than Giant's Revolt Advanced) is marketed as a "touring rig" by Specialized so there's some overlap here.

I've now also received the specifications for the Giant 2021 range:

How important are the differences between these Giant's adventure/gravel drop-bar series'? Are any of these more suitable by their configuration for specific usages (e.g., racing, touring, forest-riding, etc)?
Please note that answers which say "Go out and try them all" are extremely unhelpful in today's climate where a) many bike shops have been bought empty (e.g., Pelago everywhere), and b) some shops don't offer options for trying bikes in any case (e.g., Kona in my area). I was able to try a Giant Toughroad SLR GX for about 10 minutes, but that doesn't tell me how it would feel going for the 100th (nor the 20th...) kilometre.

I think you are confused about the frame 'technologies' that Giant offers. More boxes checked does not mean a better frame, the choices are mutually exclusive. 'Advanced Composite' means a carbon fiber composite (CFC) frame. 'ALUXX' means an aluminium alloy frame. CFC frames are generally held to be superior to alloy ones.

I'll give you that the 'SL' and SLR postfixes are confusing, intuitively they would appears to indicate a progressively higher grade of either CFC or alloy construction, but the lowest spec bike has the SLR tag.

It's very obvious that the Revolt Advanced is the better bike, and the Toughroad the inferior. Generally the Toughroad series sits below the Revolt in Giant's range, with a bit of overlap.

The 'gravel', and 'adventure' adjectives don't mean much. Asking who are these bikes are for is a kind of meaningless question. What you should do is find stores that have the bikes you are interested in, sit on the bikes and do some test rides. Figure out which gives you the riding position, ride and handling you are looking for, then decide how much money you want to spend and which level in the range you want to get.


7 speed front Derailleur on 9 speed crankset I have 9 speed crankset (44-32-22 FC M542), and matching RapidFire 9x3 speed shifters (FL M590).

Can I use 7 speed front derailleur FD M550 in that combination?

9-speed chain is slightly narrower, so a "9-speed" front derailleur might have plates slightly closer together, but that's not going to make a lot of difference:
 http://sheldonbrown.com/speeds.html#derailers

So if the FD M550 worked with a 7-speed 44-32-22 crankset, it will work with the 9-speed equivalent, but a new 9-speed might shift very slightly better.


How to align a chain on a single speed My bicycle currently has poor chainring/rear sprocket alignment (as in the chain at the front is more than a chain's width from the chain at the rear). I'm wondering what the procedure is to correct this alignment, because currently riding the bike damages the chain. (I have already moved the wheel as far across as i can using washers)

To adjust chainline, you can:

At the back

use spacers between the hub and cog

At the front

use a longer/shorter bb spindle (as Kibbee says)
use spacers on the bb cups (as Mark W says)
use chainring washers (and likely different bolts) to adjust the position of the chainring on the crank

I'm struggling to think of any more options.

The only other thing I could think of is that if you do end up with an imperfect chainline, despite your every effort, then a 3/32" chain will be more forgiving than a 1/8" chain. 3/32" chains are designed to be able to traverse cassettes so have a little more flexibility in them.


Replacing Tiagra 9-speed shifter with 9-speed 105 or Sora shifters So my handlebars were stolen from my Salsa Casseroll the other night, levers and all. (Argh.) The bike has a Tiagra 9 speed triple drivetrain, and Shimano discontinued Tiagra 9 speed hardware, leaving me with only Sora shifter to buy new. On ebay old tiagra 9 speed triple levers that aren't beaten up are hard to come by, but I'm seeing some 105 9-speed triple shifters that look reasonable. Are those compatible with my Tiagra parts? Will I notice any performance difference? Or should I just suck it up and get the Sora levers? (Guy at my LBS looked down his nose at their quality a bit, which has me leery.)
Thanks for any help.

You can use either the Sora or 105 shifters (all the cable pulls will match). Sora 9 speed has the proper ergonomics (instead of the silly button that it used to use on 8 speed), so its a good shifter.

As for if you will notice any performance difference, both should shift fine (if the 105's are indeed in good condition) [if you're racing, maybe you'll notice a difference], but the ergonomics may be very slightly different between the tiagra-105-sora levers (but you'll get used to it) [it wouldn't surprise me if the current Sora levers are a slight modification of the 9 speed Tiagra levers due to trickle-down].

I'd probably suck it up and buy the Sora levers personally - brifters are too finicky/fragile in crashes for me to be comfortable buying used ones off eBay unless the price is very good.

My guess is the bike shop guy wants you to go 10 speed which will involve replacing a whole bunch of stuff, hence the upturned nose. Or general cyclist snobbery.


XT 11 speed derailleur (RD-M8000-GS) rubbing 46T cog with b-screw all the way in? I've broken my rear derailleur so I've decided to upgrade from my 2x10 to a 1x setup. For that, I've initially bought:

Deore XT 11 speed derailleur RD-M8000-GS (I've read it can work with 10s, but indexing is not the problem now).
MSC 10 speed 11-46 cassette (I may change this by an 11 speed, same range. See below*).
30T chainring, a chain, and I'm keeping my old 10s Deore shifter (guess these aren't relevant).

My problem is regarding range. It looks like the derailleur wont climb to the 46T cog, even though:

By the spec, it supports 11-46 in 1x setup.
The b-screw is all the way in.
My hanger looks like a direct mount (goes back and outside) and the derailleur is installed as so (no extra link).

* I understand a 10s cassette is not the same as an 11s, but I guess that the biggest cog (46T) is the only one that is in the same position (flush to the base of the hub), so I fear if I buy an 11s cassette (and an 11s shifter) I'll have the same issue.
What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance!

As the comments suggest, you need to install the chain to adjust the rear mech. You can test this yourself by manouvering the shifter to mimic having a chain and you should notice that the mech cage can move up and down.
The proper intaliation process is:

Install derailleur with b screw half way on the hanger
Install chain, length calculated using the manufacturer's instruction
Adjust b screw according to manufaturer's instructions
Fine tune the shifter/ cable
Re-check the b screw as the fine tuning of the cable can change it

On a side note, I tried this same setup, but with xtr 11s mech and xt 10s shifter, and the middle gears where always off and a little jumpy. So I just bought the 11 shifter and I wouldn't recomment mixing it.
Whether the mech is direct mount or not, shouldn't affect this, as long as the mount is not bent or damaged.


Can I glue this crack as a temporary solution? I suddenly noticed a crack in my frame.

Is it practical for me to use glue to seal it off as a temporary solution?

Edit: Further information  ...two incidents so far. Someone opened their driver side door on me and I slammed into it. That considerably weakened it. Then I fell again while turning a sharp corner, it broke it.

Update from 29th Jan 2019:

I went to a bike shop and they told me they could not replace it; I need to talk to the shop where I bought it from and get a replacement from them. Does it have to go this way? I would imagine this fork could be easily replaced.

No.

The consequences of fork failure are likely to be severe and painful. This may only be a secondary fork crown but it's still structural. The fact that it's such a wide crack means something is already deformed and weakened. Any glue joint would be under huge stress and aluminium doesn't glue well. If this happened out on the trail it might be possible to ride back to civilisation at walking pace on a fire road, but I'd probably rather scoot the bike standing on one pedal. As your picture indicates it's indoors, you need a new fork before riding it anywhere.

I wouldn't even ride it to a bike shop.

More generally (thanks to cmaster): Never ride a bike where there's so much as a crack in a) the front axle, b) any part of the fork, including the steering tube, c) the stem, or d) the handlebar. There is zero backup for any of these parts, and failure usually means immediate loss of control and consequently unmitigated crash.


What can be done wrong changing the chain in a single speed? I changed the chain of my singlespeed. I though it was going to be something really simple and quick, but I was completely wrong...

I keep getting a lot of noise while I'm pedaling (unless I go really slow/downhill)

What I've done:

Remove the old chain (It had around 1500-2000km).
Measure the number of links and cut the new change to the same number.
Close the chain.
Adjust tension so it can be moved around 3-4cm in vertical direction.
Center the wheel.

The same in photos:

I ordered a singlespeed chain and I think it is the same as what I had, at least I don't see any difference. The silver chain is the new one:

Installed:

Tension:

If I added tension the pedals would not move freely backwards, if I remove tension it feels too loose.

I tried first without lubing, and then when I heard so much noise I added some oil but didn't make much of a difference.

What am I missing? The noise is the all the time when I pedal in in the whole range of motion.

Added photos of the cog and chainring:

The photos show that the contact surfaces of the cogs have been worn to match the old chain. The new chain does not match them perfectly, which is the reason to the noise.

For some reason singlespeed seems to be much more sensitive than derailleur cogs. The good news is that if you can tolerate the noise and vibration for a while, the new chain and old cogs do wear to match each other. If you do not want to do this, replacing the freewheel should help.


Convert fixed gear to coaster bike I want to convert my fixed gear 700c bike (raleigh rush hour) to coaster break bike. Can anyone recomend the best way to do this. Can anyone recomend a good coaster rear hub or coaster rear wheel?

This can be done two ways:

Easy way: Purchase a new 700c wheel with coaster brake hub from your Local Bike Shop or the internet. It may be hard to find this as it is not a particularly popular option, but it's not uncommon to find one at a well-appointed bike shop.
Hard way: Purchase a new coaster brake hub, and rebuild your existing rear wheel (or have it rebuilt--wheel building is a complex process) with the new hub. One advantage to rebuilding your existing wheel is that it will be easier to find a new or used, unbuilt coaster-brake hub. Additionally, you'll be sure to have matching front & rear rims.

Other than that, there are no other steps or considerations you'll need to take.


Is it necessary to reinforce a carbon fiber steer tube? There seems to a belief circulating online that carbon fiber steer tubes need to be reinforced with the compression plug specifically underneath the clamp points of the stem.  If this is true, why isn't it necessary to reinforce (with a compression plug or in some other manner) carbon fiber seatposts and handlebars, both of which are tubular and generally subject to greater stresses than a steer tube?

There is absolutely nothing about requiring a compression plug inside the carbon fiber steerer in Trek's owner's manual.

Given the plethora of warnings embedded throughout that document, I'd say such a lack is definitive.  So, despite it being impossible to prove a negative, umm. no:

In general*, carbon fiber steer tubes do not need to be reinforced with a compression plug.

The myriad of compression plugs available support this assertion.  There are plugs that cover the entire inside of the tube from just a few mm under the cap down well past the stem.  There are plugs that reach down only a few mm total.  There are plugs that "hang" down inside the steer tube several cm from the cap before a short plug grabs the steer tube for a cm or so.  If the plugs were in general needed to support the steer tube, they'd all be longer than the 3 cm or so length that stem clamps onto the steer tube.  And user manuals would have warnings not to put too many spacers on the top of the stem that would prevent the compression plug from being located properly.  The Trek user manual linked above has no such warnings.  It only states that there must be at least one 5 mm spacer above the stem.

* - because there's going to be one out there somewhere that does say it's needed...


Do older Dawes cycles use standard components? I'd like to built a commuter/utility/messaround type bike. I like hub gears, and I want a steel frame.

I've been looking at older Dawes bikes. Specifically a 'Streetwise' or Galaxy.

I know some have 135 OLN already (though I'll have to check before I buy). Are all other components standard? Meaning headset dia and threading, bottom bracket, brake mounts, mudguard and rack mounts etc.

I've already been caught out with the non standard-ness of older Raleigh and Peugeot bikes,

Many thanks.

I'm not sure about old Galaxies, but in the case of the Streetwise, possibly not. I once restored an old Dawes and found it a bit of a nightmare - for a start the seat tube was an odd diameter which made fitting the front mech interesting. The seatpost was 26.8mm which is not unheard of but does limit your options. The headset was the old JIS type (Japanese Industrial Standard, I think) which had slightly different diameters (head tube 30mm, crown race 27mm) to a standard 1" threaded (30.2/27.4). And finally the rear mech was fixed on with a strange bolt-through arrangement which meant that the threads for the mech hangar had never been used, and needed tapping as they were covered in paint.

So basically don't count on it :)


How can I improve my cable routing I need to re-cable* and rewrap my bars anyway.  I'd like to take the chance to improve the cable routing for a couple of specific things:

The gear cables catch on the dynamo light mounted on the fork crown in tight turns.  This can cause the barrel adjusters to creep, losing my low gears (I've locked off the rear one as there's another, but can't do that for the front).
I sometimes use a bar bag. At the moment I have to fit the bag behind the cables (brake and gear), then pack it on the bike.  The cables restrict what I can put in there.  If I want to use the bungee net on the outside of the bag, I have to remove it and relace it over the top of the cables.

So I'd like to re-route the cables, but I'm not sure what my options are.
Here are front and side views, without the bar bag:

And a front view with the bag empty and roughly fitted for show

The light mounted on the bars, that clashes with the bag, is only there for testing, and isn't a concern.
If I extend the cables to give more clearance for the bag, they'll be even worse for hitting the dynamo light.  Part of the problem is the cable stops with barrel adjusters on the headtube.
I suspect there are things I can do without more accessories, but there might be some small  device that makes a big difference.  Ideally the cables would route behind the bag, but they're not doing that with those cable stops.  The rear brake cable (left hand as I'm in the UK) also doesn't work too well for this, but would be easier to deal with.

* I snapped a gear cable inner yesterday, and there was so much friction when I fitted the replacement at the roadside I couldn't shift at the back.  For 200km until I got home.  The outer seems to be the issue.

You want to get the housings situated closer to the frame so there's room to put your bag in front.
They curve pretty far into that space now. To get them as tucked as possible:

Don't zip tie them together like that.
If your STI model is one that has two routing options for the shift housings, use the one that puts them behind the bar.
You can route the brake housings (as well as the shift if the above option doesn't exist) so that under the tape they slope downward, and then exit around the 6 o'clock position on the bar, rather than in front like they do now.
Make them all as short as possible. They don't look like they are now. This is usually defined as the minimum length to still have some slack when the bars are turned as far as they're able in either direction.
Corroborate that you can't cross the shift cables under the downtube (usually not possible with this style and location of stops). If you can, doing it that way may make the housings protrude less.

The bag you have isn't made to work with a handlebar bag rack and decaleur, but eliminating this kind of problem is one of the things they do, along with the sorts of handlebar bags they're used with. They could also provide a better place to mount the light as well.
For the light, if the above doesn't get the housing out of the way, one avenue is switch to metal fenders, use a bracket to get the light all the way forward on them, and put an additional strut behind it for stability. A number of old and new rando bikes have this sort of thing. There's even now an off the shelf product that does it. Do not forego the additional stabilization of either a strut or a rack, and don't do it with plastic fenders.


Brakes won't release after being applied? My son recently received a second hand bike with both hand and pedal (?) brakes.  He had been using the pedal brake because the hand brakes for both the front and rear were too loose to work well.  When you would apply the they barely touched the rim.

I attempted to fix the brakes by tightening up the cable which worked... sort of.  Now the issue is that the brakes won't release after they are applied.  They aren't applied with the same force as when the hand lever is applied, but they are still touching the rim which makes the bike painfully slow. If I pull open the caliper itself then the wheel spins freely.

I am referring to rim brakes; the types of hand brakes where there is a separate lever for front and rear and when you squeeze them little pads touch to the rim to stop the bike.

How can I adjust the brakes in such a way that they apply pressure to the rim but also release when the lever is released?

Brake calipers have return springs to move open the caliper arms after closing force supplied by the force on the brake cable from the levers is removed.

If the calipers are not opening there are several things that can cause this:

Return springs are too weak
Caliper pivots stiff or jammed
Brake cable friction is preventing it from retracting through the housing, either due to contamination or poor routing.

Many linear pull or V-brake calipers have return spring adjustment screws near the pivot. You could try increasing the return force and see if that sufficiently opens the calipers.

Disconnect the cable from the calipers. With the cable removed do the calipers move freely? If you close the caliper arms by hand is there a reasonable return spring force opening them?

If the calipers look OK, try cleaning and lubricating the cables as in mattnz's answer.


How do I make my pannier bag less smelly? Because I ride my bike everywhere, my pannier bags (Ortlieb Back Roller Classic) carry all kinds of cargo, from wrapped-up fish-and-chips to damp swimming and gym kit. I store them open whenever I can, so they're not as ripe as you might think, but they've still developed a distinct odour over time. What's the best way to wipe down the inside and leave them smelling like new again? Do you have any recommendations for a particular cleaner that won't damage the waterproofing, or a special technique that gets rid of the bad smells?

I know it sounds too simple, but these bags are made to be cleaned (assuming yours is unlined. If it's lined, you'll never get it out).

First, try dish soap and water. Citrus scents seem to cut the smell best, but that may be a personal preference.

If that is not enough, then the next best option is to use a diluted solution of something like Pine Sol or other bath, kitchen and tile cleaner.

I've used Pine Sol in a 1:4 ratio with water, and it did the job that dish soap wouldn't.

Another thing to consider:

Seal the products you are carrying better.

Don't take fish just wrapped in newspaper like the fish market gives them to you. Ask for, and insist on if necessary, a ziplock or similar plastic bag or wrap to keep the fish oil off of your bag.

For Gym clothes, pack them in vacuum storage bags like you get for packing luggage tightly. Push the air out of the bag, and it will keep the nasty sealed in well enough to keep your bag form smelling.

They come large enough to put most anything that will fit in your panniers or messenger bag, (even newspaper wrapped fish), and they don't take up much room when empty.


How can I get a snapped gear cable out of my Shimano brifter? Shimano's brifters that route the cables under the bar tape make the gear cable turn through a tight corner to get into that routing. This seems to weaken the cables and, if they're not replaced in time, they invariably snap there, leaving a frayed stub of cable stuck in the shifter mechanism. How on Earth do you get it out?

Use the small lever as if you were moving to the small chain ring or smallest rear cog. This unwinds the cable as far as possible, though it might not have a huge effect depending on how frayed the stub is.

Then, traditional advice is to start poking around with tweezers, needle-nose pliers and anything else that's small enough to get into the little hole the cable feeds into.  If you can grab the frayed end with pliers and pull firmly (not hard) on it while you use the small lever, that might help it unwind more.  You're trying to get it into a position where you can see the cable's end block, so you can push it out.

However, don't try that for more than a minute or two. Replace the rubber cover on the hood and then peel it off from the front, like this (sorry, didn't think to take photos until I'd already replaced the cable):

On the underside of the hood, close to where it meets the bar, there is a screw ('scuse my big ol' thumb):

Undo that screw and you can remove a cover from over the shifter mechanism (this is why you need to peel the rubber cover off in the opposite way to usual). That will give you full access to the shifter mechanism and you can usually remove the cable stub in seconds.

Thanks to YouTube user cycling stuff for this technique.

Comments under the video say that it won't work for Ultegra 6600, but that's nearly 15 years old, now.


Why has my ride changed? The bike is a Specialized Camber 29, about five months old, from a shop about 220km away.

Something feels different in my ride, and I'm wondering what it is.

the rear goes sideways in sand much more often,
there's an different running sound from the rear tyre, at a different pitch than before,
the rear tyre is about 3mm taller than the front tyre, measured with callipers from the inside of the rim to the valleys in the tread,

After a flat rear tyre last Thursday, I took the wheel to a local bike shop 70km away, who took the initiative to insert the old tube as a covering for a new tube.  There was already a protective layer of some sort between the tube and the tyre.  The region is known for thorns, but there was no evidence that a thorn caused the flat.  I put the wheel back in.  I'm wary of blaming this event, because I don't have enough experience.

I ride twice daily for half an hour each time, on dirt roads, for about 6km.

I lack the tools and strength of hands to repair the wheel myself, and have no other riders nearby.

There's a possibility that my failure to maintain the suspension system may have caused the problem; but I don't know enough about it to tell.  It has been left alone for the life of the bike.

There's a possibility that recent light rain may have changed the sand.

The rotation markers on the tyre are pointing in the right direction.

The protective layer is known as "rim tape". The old tube shouldn't remain within the tire - the only thing inside the rim should be the rim tape and the new tube.

You may have different tire pressures than before - have you tried playing with them?


What are the differences between the Alfine 8 and the Nexus 8? I'm shopping for a new bike and I have a choice between one with the Alfine 8 and the other with the Nexus 8.

They seem to be pretty similar, but from what I could gather from forums here and there, the Alfine has more praise than the Nexus.

What are the actual differences between the two?

Another significant difference is that the nexus is supplied with a grip/twist shifter:

And the Alfine has a trigger/pod shifter:

Both shifters are intended to be used with the right hand.

Also note that the IGH has variable pull amounts between gears, so you cannot substitute a linear pull shifter from a derailleur setup.

Also see Installing Alfine shifter with nexus 8 hub


Bottom bracket bearing issues I’ve been having some bottom bracket (BB) woes. Noticed a click on the top of the left pedal stroke so decided to re-grease the BB. Took it apart cleaned and re-greased everything, then put it back together.

Roll forward a week. I notice that my cranks sticking here and there, it gets progressively worse on the ride. I get it home and off the bike notice my bike has turned into a rain-stick (this provided no calming effect).

Queue another strip down of the BB.
Upon inspection, I found all the bearings on the drive side were out of the cage, which now would no longer hold them. I pinched the cages with pliers to secure the ball bearings back in place, re-greased & repacked.

I lifted my bike out today for my cycle to work and jingle-jingle; LOOSE BEARING!
Cycle to work was sub 3 miles so risked it.
Want to take care of this ASAP, so my questions are:

1. I figure I am over-tighting the bottom bracket, causing the damage to the cage, however what else could cause it?

2. What size bearings does an Italian threaded BB take?

BB info:

Campagnolo Italian threaded
plastic sleeve is in two parts, the smaller part pushes into the
other.
2 caged bearings from memory 8/9 bearings in each cage.
Two screw-in cones, one locking.

Here are pics of my spindle:

Brev. whatever that means

Take everything apart,get all the grease out of the bb and feel inside where the bearings go,it should be fairly smooth,do this to both sides and compare the "feel" of each..If it doesn't feel right(burrs,cracks) there's your problem...I just replaced the bearings in my bike and they were 1/4 inch but your bearings will probally be metric in that general size,it's easy enough to find online...don't skimp on the bearings,get grade 25 bearings,there the best...amazon has them for short money and good luck


Rear view ears at speed How can you hear cars approaching over wind noise?

As I transition from a Sunday rider to a commuter I've gotten a good deal faster. This increases the wind noise in my ears, and it's gotten to the point were an unexpected car was surprisingly close as I glanced back prepping for a turn and I wobbled.

At low speeds I used my ears for a general sense of what is around me, is that expected to become unreliable at better speeds?

The stock advice is to put zero reliance on your ears ever. There's this issue, there's the related issue of wind direction keeping you from hearing a car even not at high speeds, and there are extremely quiet cars. Basically the choice is look back a lot and get good at it or use a mirror.


Easiest fix for this transmission problem? My bike is an adult mountain bike with different gear shifts and all.

Suddenly my rear tire stopped going but the chain and everything still works - the gear and chain still spins.

What is the easiest way to fix the rear chain/cog if it's not turning the rear wheel?

If you mean that that the cassette can turn both forward and backwards without engaging the rear wheel hub; the freewheel or freehub is broken.

Whether the freehub/wheel can be repaired, or whether the hub or possibly the whole wheel would need to be replaced depends on a number of things. Suggest you the bike to bike repair shop.


Dura Ace 9100 chainring on Ultegra 8000 crank? I mounted a Dura Ace 55T 9100 on a Ultegra 8000 crank. It fit fine but on two sides on the ”outside” the crank and the chain ring is slightly misaligned. The shapes do not fully match. I just wanted to double check that it is as it should?

The shaped ‘arms’ of Dura Ace 9000 and Ultegra 8000 series cranks that continue from the crank body into the chainrings have different profiles, so the ring from one is not going to match either the crank body of the other.

If you don’t care about the asthetics it’s not a problem.


Advice for resuming riding after illness? Just got a rude reminder a few weeks ago that I'm middle-aged (let's call it a cardiovascular accident), and I'll probably be a while recovering fitness. I've signed up for a rehab program at the hospital, and I plan to ask their advice about when I should get back on a bike and how hard I can push...

... But it occurs to me that there may be some optimal program for recovering/developing conditioning as a bike rider, and I'm wondering if there is general advice I should keep in mind.

(I'm much more a touring than racing rider, if that shifts the emphasis. I do have a static stand, so "riding" in air conditioning is not impossible, just not especially interesting.)

There are stages to recovery from any illness (or injury, for that matter).

After surviving the incident and any medical intervention, we hopefully get to the rehabilitation stage. At this point, we're usually weak in a muscular sense, and feeling weak too.

The type of rehabilitation we undertake now has a big bearing on the end point we get to. It's all about goals. Do your goals match your rehabilitation therapists goals? If there is a mismatch between your goals and their goals then you will find the whole process quite frustrating. So have a good talk with potential rehabilitation therapists about what you want to achieve, what they think about that. If they think you're crazy get them to explain, or recommend a colleague. Patient - therapist communication is key.

Let me digress into few small anecdotes before returning to some recommendations

In my 20's I had a knee injury. The injury was responding to treatment, and the physiotherapist I was seeing wanted to measure my knee strength. Strapped me into a machine and said "push as hard as you can". Bang! Total recurrence if the injury. They omitted "without discomfort".
Another knee injury. Surgeon discusses options with me, and says "We could operate, but since you're not a pro athlete I don't recommend it". Good call. I learned to play squash much better than before, because I kept on my toes more.
Tore a calf muscle last year. Right through. My physiotherapist is a former pro footballer, a high profile guy. As my physio for 30+ years, we understand each other well. He knows my goals, my particular level of pain tolerance, my particular level of determination. It's a close relationship. He tells me straight what the prognosis is, how much work it will take, and how much time. Working together, I was back cycling in six weeks. But a year later, not back to full strength. Perhaps it's to challenge me, but he says I'll never get back to full strength.

The point I'm trying trying to make in each of these is that rehabilitation is a partnership. Each therapist has their strengths, weaknesses, interests and focus.

To get to your goal, you need someone whose goals match yours. More importantly, someone who admits where their knowledge or experience ends. And a willingness to call in others who may have the necessary knowledge or skills to help you. So you'll have be open about your goals, and openly search for a therapist who you can really relate to. Communication is key

Oh, and one more thing. Indoor training has come a long way. Check out BKOOL and Zwift.


My chain skips on the front chain rings. What do I do? I currently ride a Cannondale Catalyst 3 and I've noticed my chain doesn't like to catch on my front chainrings. I'm very new to mountain biking and I am on a very low budget, so is there any way to fix this problem without spending $100? Do I have to get new chain rings, a new crankset, or something else? I'm a student and I don't have all those fancy tools that are specially designed for bike work. Any suggestions on what I should do?

Chains stretch over time and, as they do that, they wear the chain rings and cogs to match their new size.  By the time the chain starts skipping on the chain rings, the teeth have become so badly worn that there's no alternative to replacing the chain rings, chain and rear cogs.  Unfortunately, that probably will cost $75+ in parts.

The way to avoid this in future is to replace your chain before it's stretched so much that it destroys the rest of your drivetrain.  Chains themselves aren't very expensive and replacing them is one of the running costs of a bike. You can check how worn your chain is by using a chain checker – you can get them more cheaply than the one I've linked to.