Lowering my Tour bike gearing to MTB gearing I am going on cycling tour on the Himalayas through Tibet, Bhutan, India, Nepal and Pakistan on my Araya FED touring bike. Now I am thinking in changing my gear, crank which is SR-SUNTOUR XCT 48-38-28T×170mm w/Guard and my Cassette is SHIMANO CS-HG31-8 11-30T 8 speed, to very low gearing 10 speed. Would Changing to Shimano XT M782 3x10 setup (22.32.40) with an 11.36 cassette, help overcoming for many hours everyday for 3-4 month cycling the Himalayas? I think I have to change derailleurs, chains and more.

Pleas I need some advise from mountain climber cyclists ( I come from very flat country,Denmark) , what groupset would give me the best range and lowest gears for climbing? Thanks beforehand.

To change from 8 to 10 you will need an upgrade to 10 speed shifters and likely a new derailleur. Almost certainly it would be cheaper to sell the bike and buy another, I would recommend against spending that amount of money on that bike.

The rear derailleur should be OK, the Altus have a capacity of 43 and max cog size of 34. The front is rated 48MAx, 20 Capacity.

A 8 or 9 speed 22/32/42(e.g. Shimano M361) crankset would be ideal, but are not that common in better quality sets.  22/30 is a seriously low gear, you will be riding slow enough maintaining balance will be a problem. You can also get a 11/34 8 speed cluster, giving an even lower 22/34 at the expense of wider gear inch gap.


How can I gauge what angle I can safely ride at on a downhill curve? On a Strava segment featuring a 80-100m-long, 40-50m radius curve going downhill on a paved road at about 8-10%, I make generous use of my brakes out of fear of wiping out on my 23mm, fairly slick road tires. Because of this, my 30-second time is almost double that of the KOM, which seems borderline unsafe from my point of view.

I suppose this is actually two questions:

Is it likely that the KOM has some special downhill setup on his road bike?
If not, what are some best practices to quickly go down a downhill curve on a road bike without losing traction/having a wipeout/otherwise having a bad day?

Focusing on the strava bit - its a screwed up strava track.  The track shows they flew, and strava's point-grabbing routines have gone wonky.  Short answer they did not do it in 11 seconds.

They are bike rides though - just a fortuitous error on the GPS signal makes it look like they were faster, and much more direct.  I suspect there's some obstructions in the way (like a big `merkin freeway bridge thing) that are capable of interrupting and limiting GPS positional signals.  So when they get around the corner and get a better fix, it looks like they've gone really fast.   Its happened to me elsewhere.

There are no easy fixes.

You can flag the whole ride, which is somewhat draconian.
You can go out and ride faster again (you've tried, its really hard)
They can crop that piece off the end of their rides (but its in the middle for both top riders)
They can use something like SNAP (strava needs a polish) at http://strava-tools.raceshape.com/snap/  to generate a "polished" file to re-upload and delete the original.  (image below)
You can tell strava to only show your own results in the preferences, and stop caring so much about KOMs.   Remember you're only competing with yourself, despite what strava imply, so its your own results you want to beat. I've got some KOMs, and they're not that special.  Seeing my own improvement over time, that's special.

Here's a pic of SNAP showing the sugested tweaks for the KOM holder's ride


What are the shimano rear derailleur families? What are the rear derailleur families, offered by Shimano? I need to replace a Shimano Acera derailleur and am trying to decide on a replacement part.

Cross country component

XTR [M980] (10 speed) – Top of the range for cross-country mountain
bikes
Deore XT [M780] (10 speed)
SLX [M660] (9 and 10 speed), replaced Deore LX
Deore [M590] (9 speed) Entry level cross-country mountain bikes
Non-series (brakeparts, cranks and pedals)

Trekking component

Deore XT
Deore LX
Deore

Downhill/Freeride component

Saint [M820] (10 speed) – Top of the range for downhill and freeride
bikes
Zee [M640] (10 speed)
Hone [M600] (9 speed) – discontinued in 2008

Recreational mountain bikes component

Alivio [M410 and M430] (8 and 9 speed)
Acera [M360] (8 and 9 speed)
Altus [M310] (8 speed)
Tourney (6, 7, 8 speed) – Includes several different levels of
quality, and can be found on department-store bicycles

The above list was pilfered from Wikipedia.

You're probably best to go with Acera again, to ensure it's compatible. I've had one fitted to my hybrid in the last year, so they're still available.


Is there a pump / Schrader valve adapter that prevent leakage during disconnection? My tyres are rated at 120psi and I like to inflate them close to that. My pump is electric with presure indicator. If I just unscrew the pump and connect it back the pressure drops by about 20psi. I have tried multiple pumps with the same result on both wheels.

Is there any device that I can connect between the pump and the valve to allow a quicker / 'cleaner' disconnection from the valve? Of course I can push to 120 psi and let it drop, but trying not to get close to the limit.

Much of the drop you see will be due to the reconnection, not the disconnection.

When you disconnect the pump you have 120psi in the tyre and the hose, gauge and a little bit of pump. This immediately drops to zero (as these are all gauge pressures). Most of the hissing you hear is this air leaving the system

When you reconnect the 0 psi in the hose etc. is averaged with the 120 psi in the tyre, weighted by their volumes (a slight approximation but it will do).

You can test this as you have Schrader. You can get a little tyre pressure gauge from a car parts shop that has very little volume inside (do the experiment at at lower pressure if it doesn't go to 120psi). Pump up the tyre. Measure the pressure with the gauge a few times, nothing the pressure each time. Connect and disconnect the pump. Measure with the gauge again. Repeat until you're convinced.


Tektro HD-R210 bleed port adapter identification I have a generic brake bleed kit and I'd like to use it on my Tektro HD-R210. I'm pretty sure the brakes are just an OEM version of the Tektro HD-R310 - when I asked Tektro for support with the HD-R210 they referred me to the documentation of the HD-R310.
The instructions in the kit aren't too clear and don't seem to match the contents of the kit.
There was a bag containing 10 brass fittings labelled 1-10 in the photo, as well as a separate bag with the two fittings labelled 11-12 along with plastic fittings, some clear tubing, and clamps.
Can someone help identify which adapters are compatible with the HD-R210 bleed ports?
The kit is labelled EZmtb master version.

It's possible someone might randomly know, but for the most part that's not how this game works.
Bleed fitting typology on random OEM type hydros is chaos. There are no resources. It's not all the same within brands. It's figured out by having a variety of options when you crack it open.
When you take out the bleed screw, look at the diameter, pitch, threaded length, presence or absence of an o-ring, and shoulder profile. All you're trying to do is find a fitting that's a match. Usually in a nice completist set like this, something is going to match exactly. Assuming you're doing a two-syringe bleed, where you skloosh the fluid back and forth until no more bubbles come out, you'll do the same for the lever end. (This method works best for most Tektro brakes in my experience despite how their basic consumer bleed kit only comes with one syringe.)
Some Tektro caliper fittings don't have an o-ring and may not seal right if the syringe fitting you attempt to use has an o-ring. So if you run into sealing problems, remember you can take the o-ring off a fitting you have to create a match.
If by some chance you open a bleed port and find you don't have a match, it's true that's not ideal and it's theoretically possible to introduce air and find yourself in worse shape then when you started, but in practical terms the other end being sealed is going to keep the bulk of the fluid in, so all you're likely to lose is some droplets right at the opening. You can carefully drip a little oil back in and seal it up and there shouldn't be much change if any.
Take heart that the ironic thing about bleeding Tektros is that despite lack of clear written procedure, it almost always works out fine if you just do it. Over the years I've come to postulate that that's why the written procedures are so bad; they seem like an afterthought because they probably are.


Toe overlap on mountain bike How common is toe overlap on 29" wheel bikes? Also, is there a way to fix the overlap by say replacing the shocks for some with more travel? Lastly, is toe overlap a major issue on a mountain bike?

It is known some people moving to 29er's have issues with tow overlap, especially on small frames. I know when I am not using cleats, I sometimes get a bit of toe strike, less so now, but initially it was happening regularly.

Best not to try and 'fix' the overlap - the bike geometry will be negatively affected unless extreme care is taken. Its not a major issue, you get used to having to keep your feet back (where they should be for efficient riding) Clip less pedals solve the problem completely.

There is a reason the industry quickly moved to 650b. One take is one size does not fit all as the failed 29 experiment shows. The other (cynical one) is the industry needed a reason to sell more bikes, so they came up with 29er as the new "must have" for a couple of seasons then introduced the 650b and said "this one is much better again", knowing all along 650b was a better "one size for all" size.....


Best XC riding position To follow off my last question (what are good training program for offroad racing?), what is the best ridding position/riding positions for each portion of XC racing?

Feet on the pedals, hands on the handle bars, one or two fingers on your brake levers would be a base position.

If you're doing something technical, then bum off the seat or at least unweighted, with pedals fore-and-aft.  Doesn't matter which pedal leads, but it'll probably be your primary side, right foot for those who are right handed.

Pedaling when you are able to helps maintain momentum.  Pedaling on a downhill may feel redundant but it gets you up to speed faster.

On a long climb sit forward in the saddle and lean forward to keep your center of mass forward.  If it gets too steep and the front wheel starts lifting on the downstroke, stand up and lean forwards.  You can get your stem right up close to your crotch and still pedal uphill.

For downhill you want the opposite, to have your weight back.  The skilled and truly insane drop their seats and can essentially put their arse on the rear tyre while riding.  This reduces the chance of doing an end over end, over the handlebars should the front wheel drop into a hole.

Cornering - There are plenty of different opinions on cornering technique, as per comments below.

Cornering depends a lot on the surface.  If its hardpack treat it like a road and lean in, raising the inside pedal and pushing down on the outside one.  If the surface is looser you should unweight the front wheel by leaning back a little through the corner.  Lean the bike a bit more to get the knobbly shoulder bumps of the tyre biting the ground surface.  The rider should not lean as much as the bike leans.

That's a start, I'm sure the offroaders here can expand on points.

On hindsight this answer is somewhat facetious, so please use comments to clarify.


Should I change gear set to increase gear ratio on old bike (2011 GT Zaskar)? I've been away and just got back into bikes after 10 years and bought a used 2011 GT Zaskar 29" MTB (similar specs to this https://www.pinkbike.com/product/gt/2011-Zaskar-29er-Expert/).

I find that the highest gear (biggest chainring + smallest sprocket) is "too easy" on flat or on downslope.. in other words, i want to be able to go faster.

I think I may need to invest into new chainring / gearset. Question is whether this bike is a good quality bike (and given the age) that's worth sinking more money into (vs get another)?

Happy to hear opinions and advice. Thanks.

Your specs link shows a 11-36T  cassette with a double chainring with 39T and 26T.  So your "fast" gear is 39:11.  Assumning 29" wheels with 2.3" tyres, 1 revolution of the crank carries you

8.9 metres in 39:11 (fast/hard gear)
1.7 metres in 26:36 (easy/slow gear)

Basically you have a mountain bike, and its geared for off-road usage, not too fast.

11 tooth is about as small as you can go at the back reasonably, so increasing the size of your front chainring is about the only option.  It may be untrendy, but a triple chainring with 50/39/26 tooth would give you  10.5 metres travelled in 50:11 which is road bike territory.

You'll need a replacement 3 position shifter and a triple crank.  Your front mech may or may not have enough width to cover all three chainrings.

The other option is to replace both chainrings on your double and slide the front mech up.  This will lose you the lowest hill climbing gears, but sounds like you don't need them.


Are all chainring compatible with all chain? I want to change my drivetrain on my bike and i found everything except the chainring. So I was wondering if I could choose any chainring.
Thank for yours response.

No.

The chainring needs to be compatible with the rest of the drivetrain.

Chainring pitch (width + spacing) gets tighter with increased cogs on the rear wheel. So a 9 speed chainring is not compatible with an 11 speed drivetrain.  Additionally there are new narrow-wide chainrings for single chainring setups will not work well in a system with a front derailleur.


Buying a CO2 tyre inflater I am thinking about buying a CO2 tyre inflater. I have never used one before and have 3 questions:

Do they have enough pressure to get a road tyre up to full pressure (~100psi)
When you use a cartridge, do you have to use the entire cartridge at once?
Are there any common cartridge standards? i.e. am a better off going with a particular brand because it is compatible with more brands of cartridges.. or are they all happy to mix and match?

Yes, this is no problem, though I would suggest practicing once before you have to use it on a flat. The first couple of times I used an inflator I had trouble inflating my tire fully.
No, but I've found that once I start a cartridge it will leak slowly, so it doesn't last forever. In my experience it doesn't last more than a few hours, certainly not more than a day.
You can buy inflators that handle both threaded and unthreaded. For example, this one -- http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00278XO0Q -- can take any 16g CO2 cartridge.


What should I look for in a cycling undershirt for warm weather? Road season is about to start here and I think that it is time I stopped using my cotton singlets as an undershirt and start using something more specific for cycling (and racing in particular).  What is the best material for me to get?

My favourite base layers are Merino wool, in particular from Rapha. They are seriously not cheap, but they are definitely worth it. Very warm in winter with the long sleeve, but surprisingly cooling in the summer with the short/no sleeve.


Brake cable housing too long? I replaced the no-name brake calipers on my bike with Ultegras today.  Am I correct in thinking the rear brake housing is too long and needs to be shortened?  And if so, how do I determine how much to remove other than trial and error?  (With one of the errors being too much.)

The curve above the brake looks like it is crimping down on the cable, so yeah, it is too long. The curve coming out of the cable stop is about the curve that you want going from the stop to the brake (but curving down rather than up). And it is ALWAYS better to be slightly longer than shorter, you can all ways cut it if it is long, but too short and you need another housing.

The best way to measure the housing is with the cable out. I would drop the adjuster almost all the way down (leave a few threads showing so you can adjust it down if you need); remove the cable, chop an inch or so (from this shot I would maybe even do 2 inches), replace the housing and look to see if there is a gentle curve. Chop a little at a time until it looks right, then put the cable back in and tighten everything down.


Road Bike Tire Throwing Rocks I recently purchased a road bike after having ridden a dutch style bike for over a year and a half. The roads that I ride on have the usual gravel and dirt on them but every now and then my road bike goes over tiny pebbles in the road and ends up throwing them (I hear the sound of them bouncing off stuff behind me). Today was the worst because while going very slow I heard a pebble get whacked right in a car at the red light. I apologized and everything but is this normal with road bikes?

Yes, it's normal.

The higher pressure (eg 100 psi, 6-7 bar) of the tires can squeeze stones out quite quickly.

And, yes, sometimes they can hit nearby cars, cyclists, dogs, cats, ... .

Ride on :-)


Replacing brake system on a bike Is it possible to change the braking system from rim brakes to rotary. I want to replace them because I hate how after a while the pads wear out and I need to replace it so I think the rotary might be better. What would I need to do?

In general, you can't replace rim brakes with hub or disk brakes unless the frame is designed for that.  In particular, hub or rim brakes place too much stress on the front fork unless the fork is designed for them.  You're probably better off buying a new bike with the "right" (for you) brakes factory-installed.

But I'm surprised that you have so much trouble with rim brakes.  I just had my rim brake pads replaced for the first time last year, after putting about 10,000 miles on my current bike.


How do I reassemble this Quando rear hub? Closely related to how to reassemble mountain bike rear wheel hub and bearings, but not quite identical and my noob brain cannot piece things back together.

I disassembled the rear hub to clean it and remove rust, and of course thought too highly of myself to take any picture of how it used to fit together.

Here's what I (think) I managed to identify:

A: Nuts for fitting to the frame

B-C: Nuts and spacers to hold the cones together?

D: Cones, of two different thicknesses - not sure which one goes on which side?

E: Rubber seal? no idea where it goes

F: Metal seal, I understood it needs to go on one on the cones, but on which side?

G: Very thin and very (!) worn out spacer. No idea where it was

H: Very long spacer, same material as the cones

I: Extremely worn out axle. Any idea where I can buy one? Does it have to be exactly the same model?

I would very much appreciate any help :-)

EDIT: I finally found the original part (https://www.ktgroup.net/pro.php?m=d&pid=113&cid=47&f=1). It seems like some of the components I have aren't original (it's a second hand bike so who knows what happened before I got it). Also there is absolutely no way I can find to order a replacement part here in Europe. Can I put another axle? Also it seems like I am missing one of the metal seals. Are those standard ?

How good does this have to be?
If you are going to use this as daily transportation to work I'd want the correct dust seals and I'd go with a different wheel.
If this is a klunker you don't really care about I think you can experiment and arrive at a workable assembly.

Here's my best guess at something workable.
Parts "F" and "E" look like dust guards. Sometimes they press fit into the hub AFTER the bearings are greased into the races.Sometimes, like in the picture you linked, they are attached to the cone. They usually match so I'm not sure what to make of the rubber seal. See if it will press into the hub on one side or the other.

With the bearings in and the dust covers on (assuming they fit into the hub)
And, with the freewheel off - if possible.

Thread the thin cone "D" about 1.5 inches down the axle.
Thread locknut "B" after the cone until it hits the cone
Tighten the locknut against the cone but only snug - not tight, you'll probably have to move it later.
Insert your axle assembly into the non-freewheel side
Thread the fat cone onto the freewheel side of the assembly until it just touches the bearings.
Slide the spacer "H" onto the freewheel side
Thread the other locknut "B" onto the freewheel side
Play with the left over washer "G" and see which side it works on. My guess is that it will go on the freewheel side. I'd put it between a lock nut and the spacer if it helps spacing on the freewheel side. If it helps the spacing on the non-freewheel side I'd put it between the cone and the lock nut.

Now you play with the spacing so that the wheel is spaced in the frame, the freewheel spins and the chain has enough room on the smallest freewheel gear to clear the frame and the axle sticks out about the same amount on each side.


Sun Tour Cyclone brake levers and brake cable housing I have a vintage road bike with Sun Tour Cyclone single-pivot calipers, with Cyclone levers.  I recently had the front brake cable housing "detach" from the brake lever. It appears to have a large 'ferrule'-type piece on the end of the housing. (what's the name of this part?)

The right lever appears to have the housing head straight into the lever, and appears crimped in.  It's not visible in the photo either way but I don't believe there is a similar cable housing ferrule.

What is the correct method for me to get the rear-brake cable housing back into the brake lever, and secure it in place?

Generally, if you were to roll the shroud back, remove the cable, squeeze the lever all the way, and then look, you would see that, with the lever squeezed, there is a sort of hole in the lever arm exposed where the barrel-shaped cable end fits.  You need several inches of slack in the cable to get it into/out of that hole.

On re-reading the question: It sounds as if your complaint may be that the ferrule on the end of the cable housing has slipped out of the hole on the end of the brake lever assembly (vs the cable inside coming loose from the moving lever).  If this is the case, that housing is held in place by "habit" -- there's no crimp or anything that holds it there, except that tension from the brake cable keeps it in place.  If the tension is gone, either because the cable has been loosened at the other end, or because the cable has developed too much friction inside, then the housing end will be pushed from its resting point as you operate the lever.


Rear Wheel Jamming on kids bike after Training Wheels We got our son a Hyper Metro bicycle from walmart for Christmas and I assembled it with no problem.  We also go training wheels for it and when I installed them, the issues began.  The rear wheel will spin and then eventually just jam and stop spinning suddenly.  I can spin it the opposite way and then it will spin the correct way again until it jams again.  Almost like it's tightening itself down and then just stops moving.  I loosened everything and thought that i had the problem fixed, and i pushed it around the driveway and then the nut on one side just fell off, so it definitely spun on the rod.  I'd like to get input and see if it's an easy fix before I go to a bike shop since there aren't any nearby.  Any suggestions?  Is it fixable?  Should i just buy a new rear wheel assembly?

Sounds to me like the bearings in the rear wheel are unhappy.

So normally on a kids bike, they use cheaper cup and cone bearings which have a cone nut and a locknut on each side.

 Note the lock nuts and cone nuts in the above cutaway are merged into one part.

So the locknut and cone nut should be pressed up against each other and therefore unable to move.  I guess that something has caused the locknut and cone nut to be loose against each other, allowing one or both to turn with the wheel.

The Fix  you'll need a normal adjustable spanner, and a specialist spanner called a Cone Spanner which is quite thin, and fits the two flats on the side of the cone nut.

Remove the wheel from the bike, and work on its axle directly.    Its fiddly, but you want the axle to rotate in your fingers without crunching feeling, but without much detectable slop.

To do so, lock one locknut against one cone by tightening them against each other.  Then adjust the cone nut on the other side so it spins right.  Lastly hold that cone nut still and tighten the lock nut against it.

Things will subtly move, and your adjust will likely be wrong. So fiddle it until you have the axle rotating freely with no graunch, but with minimal sideways play.

Lastly, remember this is a kids bike that won't do 10 km in its entire life.  As long as the wheel turns freely and doesn't self-adjust you'll be okay.


Why are so many technical aspects of cycling so subjective? I come from an Engineering background and I have a strong interest in science. It has always struck me as odd how so much of cycling is so very subjective.

As an example, though this is by no means the only thing, the best method of lubricating a chain. Now I appreciate that there is a difference between conditions that it has to operate in but from an engineering viewpoint there will be an optimum type of lubricant and methodology for applying it. Yet most of the advice you can read about it is laced with conjecture and opinion.

The entire industry appears to be built on arguments that should be resolved with simple repeatable testing.

Does this type of research simply not exist? or do we just enjoy arguing too much!

Edited to respond / clarify

As a species we have now sent a number of spacecraft out to the edge of the solar system. One of breakthroughs of New Horizon was getting it to leave earth orbit so quickly. I imagine the number of variables that were contemplated, researched and tested where considerably more complex than the handful that we can consider for a cycle chain.

The concept of testing isn't to account for every variable, it is to account for individual variables so eventually they can be merged together to get a complete understanding of the underlying system.

So imagine for a minute a box containing a cassette that can provide some constant friction. Then a powered front ring that turns at x rpm. Every y amount of time the gears are automatically changed.

At that point you can measure how much the chain is stretching, and whatever other criteria you're interested in.

You could run the same test with different lubricants and get an idea of what lubricant changes which result.

Once you have that data, you could have a mechanism that drops / throws / shoots z grams of dust / dirty / water / banana at the chain and run the test again.

At the end of a few chains you're going to be able to categorically say that for riding in mud, a is almost certainly better, for riding in high temperature, b is better.

It slightly staggers me that we can look at a photograph taken from billions of miles away and say that this is too complicated to figure out.

Further edited

It seems that somebody has already come up with that scenario, A guy named Jason Smith at Friction Facts spent $50k building a test lab to test chains. Velo Magazine had a report done on assorted lubes which articulates my point that facts are much better than anecdote. That gives a report that anyone can read and make an informed choice about what would best suit their situation.

My point in asking this question is that it surprises me that such data isn't used more in conversations about technology and that there isn't more high quality quantitative data about this thing that costs us so much bloody money!

As far as outside testing goes, Friction Facts is an independent company that does exactly what you ask for, testing components against each other to find out what is best, including chains in a variety of conditions (new, re-lubed, wet, dirty, etc).

The top manufacturers presumably have unpublished data, considering that bikes continue to get faster and lighter. This research probably does contain blind spots, and I haven't seen a lot of manufacturer's recommendations about detailed advice on how to maintain a bike.

In addition to this, a quick google search for "research bicycle efficiency" turned up a significant amount of published research about cyclists, but not about bicycles.

I think the reason there are so many arguments on the web about the best way to do anything is that people just like arguing, although you could certainly argue otherwise.


23 mm combined with 25 mm tyre in racing I met a guy who mixed 23 and 25 mm for his front and rear tyre respectively.

Now thinking about it, I believe it's a pretty good idea since the rear wheel bear a higher proportion of the rider's weight. Wider rear tyres would support more weight with the same pressure as the front. It also helps reduce the wear and tear on the tyre itself.

So why don't bicycle (especially racing) run a slightly wider tyre in the rear, as the rear wheel mostly bear the weight of rider? It makes the ride more comfortable, and not aerodynamically terrible as the front is still 23 mm.

I would be genuinely surprised if it made any real-world difference.  Some racers commit all sorts of voodoo... err... questionable practices on the off chance it might give them an advantage. In terms of 23 vs 25 mm tires, both sizes are frequently used by pro tour teams, if one had a distinct advantage over the other you wouldn't see both sizes being used at the same events.  It terms of aerodynamics, even for sizes up to 32 mm  there doesn't seem to be much difference in   aerodynamics drag.

In terms of comfort getting the right tire pressure for your body weight will likely have a bigger effect than 2mm gain in the tire width.

Other disadvantages include complications  introduced into the assembly and supply chain for the manufacturer, which would eat into profits.


Recumbent, diamond-frame or trailer to move heavy things? Heavy things can be a lot of books, full beer cans, construction woods and other misc in a place where I cannot use a car and the trip is long and suitable for riding. So which one would you favor? And which kind of adjustment would you make to move heavy things? I have seen a post office with diamond-frame bike framed with a metallic balancing thing, for example. Any such devices for other options and what are they called? Stabilizer? Support device?

I have long been looking for something like that but haven't yet found from second-hand market, I believe they could be reasonable priced. A more sturdy example here from Austria with side wheels, now the frame is original. I don't know yet how much such side supports can stand so open to any suggestions, does not need to be diamond-framed like in the picture.

I would go with a four-wheel recumbent for carrying a big load any distance, just because it's comfortable and controllable. I have one, after building and trying a wide variety of load carrying bikes. It will carry 120kg in a 60x80x50cm bin (220l), and with a bit of plywood instead has carried a chest freezer and a washing machine (separately). With a trailer that has a similar bin I can carry 250kg of soil or other bulk material. It has a Rohloff hub and disk brakes on all four wheels, which makes 250kg loads relatively controllable.

The classic "long john" bike is a good compromise - they can carry 60-80kg bulk loads quite easily and are as fast and nearly as maneuverable as a similar weight diamond frame bike. But, of course, the load is in one piece, low down in front of you. Especially when carrying kids, the advantage of being able to see your load is significant. A long john can often also take a rear rack for added capacity (but you're back to breaking the load up and putting it in panniers).

If you can split the load, a Surly Big Dummy (or XtraCycle) works well, they're easier to ride than a long john but the split load makes them less flexible.

For short trips an upright trike based on a rickshaw works well, but riding slightly canted over (from road camber) is a very odd sensation that takes a bit of getting used to. I've seen one of those with a wheelchair strapped to the platform which was quite cool.

Trailers work well for loads up to about 100kg, but more than that is getting quite dangerous - if your bike falls over the trailer will not stop, it will run you over. For long loads a "jinker trailer" where you attach the load to your bike then the trailer to the back of the load can work really well. I've carried 6m lengths of bamboo and timber behind an upright bike this way. A cheap trailer is often a good start but they are usually poorly made and fall apart if used regularly. Expect to spend $500 or more for a trailer that will carry its rated load 5Mm or more.

My "big trailer" is 1m wide by 2.4m long with four wheels and inertia braks on the front wheels. It's only safe to tow behind the quad but will take ~500kg. It's more a question of how much I can pull.


Litespeed frame has clear film all over it I never noticed the film on my Ti frame until it started peeling. What is this? Can I safely remove it? It seems to be flaking off on its own anyway.

If it’s polished Ti (bright silver) it’s most likely the protective clear coat finish. A picture would help confirm that.

If the bike is relatively new contact Litespeed and see if they will cover it under warrantee.


My tire was slashed. Replaced the inner tube, but should I replace the tire as well? Talking about a hybrid bike.
As the title says my tire was slashed. It happened overnight and the cut is on the side, so I'm 99% sure it was slashed. I replaced the tube and have been riding without any further problems for a while now. However I still have a ~1.5cm cut in my outer tire. My question is whether I should be concerned and whether I should replace it?

You already know the answer to this question.
Slashes in the sidewall tend to open up as the pressure from inner tube is pushing the tire further apart. If you're lucky you might escape with a simple pinch flat. More serious problems include:

the inner tube pushing through the sidewall rubbing on the frame or fork causing the inner tube to burst like a balloon.
the inner tube removing the bead of the tire

Either of these I wouldn't want to happen at speed.


How to make a 1x city bike easier to ride uphill? I'm trying to convert an old city bike (https://archive.trekbikes.com/us/en/2010/trek/navigator10wsd#/us/en/2010/trek/navigator10wsd/details) for my middle-aged mother who did not do any sports so far. There are a lot of slopes in our town, so I want the gear ratio to be as "easy" as possible.
As you can see in the link, the bike has a 1x 42t front chainring and the cassette goes up to 34t.
How would you do it? The following is what I think:
I believe 34t is ok, but 42t is too much. I looked for other 1x systems but no one sells a 1x chainring with 22t or 24t.
Then I decided to buy a 2x or 3x system with a smallest chainring of 22 or 24t and fixing it to that lowest chainring using a front derailleur and limit screws. (You may ask why am I not installing a full 2x/3x system with gear levers and cables: I really do not think she will need the bigger chainring, and there is no routing for the front derailleur cable. If she starts to ride a lot and needs that second chainring I may think about it.)
Do you see any problem with my solution?
To avoid the chain being not linear when the smallest ring is used in the cassette, is it better to buy a 2x system? (Is smallest chainring of the 2x systems are closer to the right side, compared to 3x systems? I guess that would help to keep the chain linear.)

I'm a big fan of low gears (I run a 22 inner ring on my MTB despite being a fairly strong climber), but I'd say a 22 or 24t ring is too small to use as an only ring - it'll spin out much to easily on slight downhills or with tailwinds.
You can get 1x cranks for MTB that come as standard with a 30T ring, and aftermarket 28T rings - I'd suggest these would be a better compromise.
As another alternative, if you are doing a conversion anyway, perhaps you might like to consider an aftermarket e-bike conversion?


What's the smallest possible tube that will work with my bikes? I've seen questions concerning tube size but I haven't found anything matching what I'm trying to accomplish.  I want to buy a few tubes to keep around for trails-side emergencies when mountain biking.

My mountain bike setups (3 of them):

27.5, 27mm inner-width rims running up to 2.3" tires.
27.5, 30mm inner-width rims running up to 2.5" tires.
29er, 25mm inner-width rims running up to 2.35" tires.

So I'm aware that I can use as small as 26" tubes for all of these but how narrow is too narrow?  Would 1.1"-1.3" rated tubes suffice?  Keep in mind that I run tubeless and I just want to have a tube in my pack that will allow me to get back to my car if I run into more trouble than a tubeless repair kit can handle.

If you're going to buy a tube to carry, you'd be better off getting something that fits properly. You don't want to push the limits of your tube (e.g. burst it when you first inflate it) if you're a long walk from anything else, and the extra bulk/weight isn't much. Also fitting a tube at the side of the trail isn't easy especially in bad weather (and punctures wait for bad weather to catch you out). So I would buy one tube for both 27.5" bikes (e.g. a 2.2--2.5" width) and one for the 29",  then carry the right one rather than wrestle with a 26". You've got 3 MTBs so cost isn't an issue.

A tube for 1.3" width in a 2.5" tyre is stretched to twice its intended size, so it will be half as thick. If you're also stretching it in the other dimension it's even worse. (All slightly approximate).

That said, tubes are very stretchy. I've seen 24" tubes in 26" tyres. I've run slightly too thin tubes for months on end. In an emergency you can get away with pretty much anything that you can get to fit. But if you're planning, plan to do it right.


Selecting the right crank length What is the best way to determine the correct crank length for my height and more specifically my leg length?

I disagree with the selected answer as most of the provided links are simply opinion without any analytical backing.

In terms of choosing a crank length on the basis of performance, there is very little scientific support for there being any real discernible differences widely used crank lengths (160-180 mm).

For an overview of some of the scientific results, see this set of PowerPoint slides:

http://www.plan2peak.com/files/32_article_JMartinCrankLengthPedalingTechnique.pdf

As well, a good summary of the science, in a readable format, is available on the Cervelo website:

http://www.cervelo.com/en/engineering/ask-the-engineers/crank-length.html

Note that in terms of peak power output power output Martin and Spirduso (2001) found no significant difference between crank lengths of 145, 170 and 195mm.

This leaves the choice more as personal preference which may entail a number of details from fit to riding style and comfort.

Other SE questions covering this subject.

What is the effect of changing length of crank arms?
Why such a tiny difference in crankarm length?
diference between 170mm 172mm 175mm crank arm length on road bike.


First Hand Ride Comparison Vittoria Corsa G2.0 vs. Continental Grand Prix 5000 Clinchers 700X28 I currently ride Continental Grand Prix 5000 clincher tires (i.e. inner tube and not tubular) and felt a noticeable improvement in ride quality between that and my previous Bontrager R3s.
I am curious if anyone else here has ridden the GP5000s along with the Vittoria Corsa G2.0 and can provide pros and cons based on first hand experiences vs. product marketing or theoretical comparisons. I plan to run them with an inner tube, but even a like for like on tubeless to tubeless would work too.
The main concerns I have are:

Dry Traction

Wet weather performance - I have not had any issues with the GP 5000, but I always felt a bit weird that there were no treads down the middle of the tire. I know in reading people say that treads are just a like a placebo like effect as the compound is what makes the difference, but one thing I am liking about the Vittoria is the treads down all of the tire. This is why I really would like to get some feedback from someone who may have ridden both.

Puncture Resistance - I am not super worried about this as I try to be pretty careful on the road short of swerving into traffic to protect a tire, but I figure I would include this in case anyone else is curious.

Rolling Resistance & Feel - I know when I first went to the GP5000 everything felt smoother and I was about 2-3% faster for the same perceived effort from the R3s. What if any performance or qualitative benefits have folks felt that have ridden both.

You probably know the size of the tires will make a significant difference in the attributes you're looking for. If your GPs are wider than your R3s, there will be a difference in traction, puncture resistance and rolling resistance.
Another big consideration is if you are running a tube or not. If you are tubeless, both the 5000 and the R3 come in a 32mm size. I find the product lineup on Vittoria's website is confusing: online vendors list a "G2.0" while Vittoria only show a "Corsa" in their lineup. Assuming these are both the same, the Vittoria only comes tubeless in a 28mm. It will ride significantly differently than a 32mm, which will have better traction and fewer pinch flats, and many will contend lower rolling resistance (that's complicated). If your plan to continue to use a tube, you've probably seen you can get the Corsa in a 32mm.
Sounds like you've read other info about tread. Cars have tread to move water away due to a phenomenon called "hydroplaning" in which the car floats on the water. Bicycles do not go fast enough to hydroplane, so tread does not provide any benefit. If anything, it's probably worse. However, it does help with debris, though I'd be skeptical that the narrow tread of the Corsa provides any benefit. I have a bike with Grand Bois Hetres and I've noticed no traction benefit over my previous Gravelking or Pari-moto slicks.
There is a site called BicycleRollingResistance.com (BRR) which tests the rolling resistance and puncture resistance for many models of tires. The tester was disappointed in the tubeless G+ 2.0 and in their tests it was almost 4w slower than the tubeless GP5000 in the same size and inflation. The Continentual in it's tubeless configuration is the 4th fastest tire they've ever tested (all tests are conducted with a tube; butyl, I believe).
While I personally have not ridden the Corsa, I have ridden other Vittoria tires. My bike (recently stolen, sad face) was a Look 585 on which I ran Vittora Corsa Speed tires with latex tubes. They are the fastest tire ever tested by BRR and I found them to be a sublime revelation. I don't know if I was faster (though all my fastest Strava times were aboard them) but they ran incredibly quietly and smoothly.
I also recently had a chance to do a few test rides that had Vittoria Corsa Controls, in 30mm. They are a teeny bit heavier than the G2.0s, and about 1W slower according to BRR. I first rode a Cervelo R5/Reserve 50 and then an Open Min.d/Enve 3.4. Both were running the Corsa Controls. I was slow on the R5 and the ride was rough. I was fast on the Open Min.d and the ride was smooth. So in this case, the frames/wheels overwhelmed the effect of the tire, though often the opposite is the case. My point being that the Corsa G2.0 will not be so outlandishly bad or good that it will make/break a nice ride on a nice bike :)
I personally am considering the GP5000s or a Schwalbe Pro One TT. The latter is very fast according to BRR and I like that Schwalbe has a tire recycling program. However, the Schwalbe is only available in a 28mm so I may very well opt for the GP5000 to get a larger carcass.


Center motor ebike costs more, is it worth it? I am 90% sure that I will buy an e-bike. Today one of my friends who owns an ebike strongly suggested that I should buy one with center motor, because they are more efficient and battery life will be longer.

Where I live ebikes with center motor costs three times more than ebikes I found before.

Will it worth to buy a center motor ebike even it is more expensive?

Yes, in general mid-drive bicycles are better than hub drive. There are technical reasons and economic reasons.

Technically, mid-drive can be more efficient as they can take advantage of the rear derailleur or internal-gear hub to work at optimal speed. Hub-drive motors can only be optimized for one-speed (although some 2-speed hub drives have emerged).

Furthermore, the pedelec sensors on mid-drive can be more sophisticated in measuring torque rather than just rotational speed. This is because their location on the bottom bracket makes torque measurement easier. Hub-drives usually rely on just a magnetic crank speed sensor. However, note that not all mid-drives measure torque - and some better hub-drives do swap out the bottombracket and put in torque sensors.

In terms of weight and balance, the mid-drive is better located. You want your weight to be low and in the middle. However, geared hub-drives are also getting lighter and smaller. Furthermore, the battery is often the heaviest component and so battery placement itself is critical. The best units have the battery behind the seat-stem or in the lower part of the main triangle.

Finally, there are non-technical reasons why mid-drive is better. There are only a few mid-drive manufacturers that are extant: Bosch and Bafang (I'm leaving out Panasonic, Yamaha, and Shimano mid-drives as they aren't commonly available outside Japan). This means if you get a mid-drive, you're getting it from a well-known company that has a strong reputation (Bosch much more so than Bafang). Your mid-drive bike above looks like a Bosch but it has its markings removed and the store website doesn't have any details -- so you might want to ask and avoid it if it isn't Bosch or Bafang.

Hub-drive motors on the other hand are made by a wide variety of companies. So unless you know the company's reputation, you are taking a risk. You're much more likely to get a no-name hub motor with a no-name controller.

Finally, note that the Bosch, Panasonic, Yamaha, and Shimano mid-drive systems all require specially designed bicycle frames (bottom brackets). This means that the bicycles are much more expensive. Bafang mid-drive and all hub-drives can be bolted onto any OEM bike frame so they are much less expensive.


Commuter bike for better performance: less weight, or internal gear-hub? Background

I commute daily to work, the ride is about 10 km each way, across the city. The path is mostly streets with intersections, and a few long cycling lanes. Some hills here and there: Strava cycling app says 'Elevation Gain' is 80m.

I'm currently riding a Trek Valencia hybrid bike (2011), it's getting a bit old, and I'd like to replace it. I'm looking for the same kind of acceleration / responsiveness / sporty ride, but possibly getting me to make less effort to get the same performance (or get earlier at work).

Options

I want hydraulic disk brakes, good quality gear set, and rather an aluminum frame.

I checked what local bike shops recommend, and I'm now hesitating between two options. Unfortunately, trying the bikes is not an option, as no shop has them in stock.

Stevens Strada 900 (2019)

product page

It has quality components and is lightweight. I'll need to add mudguards and a rear carrier though, so it will be a bit heavier than the announced 9.4 kg.

Gears: 2 x 11 Shimano Ultegra R8000

Cube Editor black'n'purple (2019)

product page

This one looks interesting to me because of the belt drive. This would make the rides smoother, and avoid loss of efficiency in the long run.

Gears: Alfine 11 gear hub

Questions

I read posts with figures about the gear ranges of both systems, but I'm having trouble getting a clear picture. Some articles: stackExchange post, internal gear rations measurement, this post and that one.

How likely am I to get in situations where the speeds of the Alfine 11 gear hub don't switch correctly anymore?
Are the 2 kg less from the Stevens likely to make a noticeable difference in terms of energy efficiency?
Will any of the bikes above provide a range of speeds comparable with what I currently have (mid-end 3 x 8 derailleur)? I had the opportunity to try a bike equipped with a Shimano Nexus 8 gear hub, and there were definitely not enough 'high' speeds. This would prevent me from riding fast enough on flat lanes, or downhill.

Or to summarize, perhaps: more lightweight bike with derailleur or Alfine 11 gear hub, which would you recommend for my use case?

Any input and tips appreciated.

Thanks,

P.S.I also read the answers to How to improve my performance on a commute? and will probably follow some of the recommendations in there, like getting clipless pedals.

When you use your bike every day, reliability is as important as weight.
I use 2 bikes, with a train ride in between. The bike I use at my work town rarely gets maintained. I take it home 2 times each year. The only things I do regularly is pump the tires and lubricate the chain. Even then it keep riding as good as new. The derailer bike I had here before that needed a lot more care.

The things I learned over the past years:

The simpler the better. If the terrain is flat enough to get by with a bike without gears, do so. 80m elevation is on the edge, and depends on your physical condition. If you feel the upper gear on a Nexus 8 is not large enough, you're riding quite fast (35Km/h+) already. I ride a bike with an Alfine 11, and have no problem doing 35 in 8th gear. Another thing is adjusting your style to spin faster (85+RPM), which generally is also better on the knees.
No front shock absorber. The good ones are too expensive, and the other ones too heavy and crap
No V-brakes or cantilever brakes. At least hydraulic rim (Magura) or disc brakes
Mudguard!
A rack to hang bags (I am very happy with bags like this). No backpacks for me.
A IGH is a lot more carefree then a derailer.
being able to shift at red lights is very handy
The lights have to be driven by a dynamo and fixed to the bike (battery lights get empty or forgotten at the worst possible time)
No NuVinci. It is heavy, and you can't shift when stationary

So I would not use either of the bikes you suggested, but something like this or this

I don't have an opinion on chain vs belt. My girlfriend has a bike with a belt, and that tends to stay cleaner then the chain on my bike, but I don't know whether it is worth the extra expense.


Taking tighter lines I recently switched from a flat bar hybrid type bike to a drop bar endurance bike. I have noticed huge improvements in speed and climbing, but I feel like I lost a lot of confidence in handling. Granted, I am going much faster when I take turns, but I am afraid that I'm going to lay my bike down at higher speeds. Part of this comes from going from a 700x42c semi knobby tire to a 700x28c slick. Is this normal? What can I do to improve my confidence short of taking a turn too fast and laying my bike down? How do I know I'm taking a turn too fast?

Technique: as I'm heading downhill, I start to plot my line. I swing wide to set my approach. As I enter the turn I put my inside foot up and slightly point my knee. My outside foot is down and I press my weight down on the outside. I can hold my line until right before the apex, then I feel the need to let go. It's something about the extra effort needed to hold the line through the apex that really scares me. This is while moving at between 30 and 40mph.

The bike goes where your eyes are looking. I have no idea why this works, but it is amazing when applied.

The key is to always be looking as far ahead through the corner as possible, when you start turning in you should be looking at the apex, once you have reached the apex you should already be looking past the exit. I've passed cars and motorcycles and taken many downhill KOMs using this technique, while on 23c tires!

If you watch any motorcycle race or go to any motorcycle class/school, their eyes are always ahead of the curve their on. This takes a lot practice to get down especially when your cornering confidence isn't very high.

I have a very similar cornering technique to what you described and I have the same problem you described, where I can make it to the apex just fine, but need to bail out when I get there, this is because I haven't properly sighted through the corner, almost every time. (I watched someone crash in front of me just last week doing this, they saw gravel on the outside of the apex and went right for it, instead of looking at the exit)

I find that slick tires (assuming you're cornering on asphalt) offer much more surface area and therefore grip than semi knobs. The knobs decrease rubber contact with the ground and tend to deform when cornering. (I learned this both the hard way and easy way).

I prefer to decrease my tire pressure when cornering in order allow the tire to deform to the road surface and therefore have more contact with the ground.  I use this to determine tire pressure. This also allows more absorption of small bumps. A very hard tire will bounce over everything and when you're bouncing, you are no longer in contact with the road surface.

You can also utilize different lines through a corner in order to achieve a different exit through the corner. The fastest line through a symmetrical corner will always be a symmetrical line, but it won't always be the safest. A late apex works great also

As someone quoted in the "rules," practice is the best way to increase cornering confidence, well...and maybe a little bit of fearlessness.


Are bike frames galvanized I'm sorry for the stupid question, but I have a primer that works on steel but specifically says to avoid galvanized metals.  I don't really know how to tell if a metal is galvanized or what use-cases warrant galvanization.

Are steel bike frames typically galvanized?

Bonus question: how do you tell if a steel is galvanized? Is it that weird blotchy look that steel water pipes typically have?

Thank you

I've never heard of a galvanized frame. Galvanizing involves dipping steel in molten zinc, which I'm pretty sure would mess up the heat treatment state of the steel tubes.

Frames are just painted to protect from corrosion.


Need to replace tire on Dahon folding bike I bought a Dahon Vitesse D8 two years ago and it's lasted extremely well so far. Recently, the rear tire got a puncture and as my tires both looked pretty worn, I thought it might be time to look into getting replacements.

I was looking to get some tyres for cycling on roads and occasionally on gravel/canal paths. but I'm now a bit overwhelmed with the amount of tyres available. Could anyone suggest what I should be looking for in a tyre?

The Dahon Vitesse D8 site says it ships with

  KOMMUTER, 20" x 1.75"

tires.

Any tires of those dimensions will do the job.

The applications you mention suggest that a tire with a small amount of tread would be better than a slick (no tread) tire.

The mind boggling array of tires you see is because the suppliers are all trying to distinguish their products, when they all do pretty much the same job.

I recommend taking your bike to your LBS and fit whatever tires they suggest, provided they have tread.


What is wrong with my bike? Where is this sound coming from? My mountain bike has 3 sprockets in the front and 7 in the back. Whenever I use the center sprocket in the front there is a clicking sound. I cannot identify exactly where it is from, I don't see the chain contacting anything it shouldn't so I assume it's sections of the chain "clicking" into the sprocket teeth at certain points in the rotation. I have no idea if this is accurate, it's the only logical explanation I have at this point.

I just adjusted my front derailleurs min/max limit and shifting cable. So it should be set-up correctly. I have non issues in the lowest and highest front gear. Would anyone know why my bike makes sound while using the middle front sprocket?

If you have ruled out contact between the chain and the front derailleur, check the wear on the chainring. You may be getting 'chainsuck', where the chainring teeth hold on to the chain links as they try to peel off the bottom of the ring and carry them up until chain tension pulls them off. Often triple drivetrain bikes gets ridden in the middle ring more than the inner or outer so it makes sense this ring will wear faster than the others.

Inspect the chainring teeth, thin, pointy or sharkfin shaped teeth indicate advanced wear.

If your chainring is worn, you probably have a worn chain and cassette also. Check the cassette sprocket teeth for signs of wear also.

The best way to check a chain is with a wear gauge, these are not very expensive. If you have to replace the cassette and one or more rings you should replace the chain as well anyway.


Is there water in my forks? Hi I bought a used downhill bike with a 2009 Marzoochi 66RCV fork. I hear a gushing sound whenever I compress the forks. At first I thought it was oil but am just wondering and don't want to ruin anything. Is there anything i can do besides taking apart the fork. Thank you for any answers.

I would say it is most likely oil moving through the valves. If you are concerned about more water getting into the fork you could clean out your fork seals with a piece of old camera film.

Given the year of the fork, I suggest taking it to your local bike shop. It cannot hurt to service your fork and support the people that support riding in your area!


Is it legal to pass a car on the right when that car is turning? So I've been poring over the bikes SE, and as a recreational biker and an automobile commuter, I'm naturally most interested in topics addressing how bikes interact with automotive traffic.

In one particular question I noticed that it's legal in some jurisdictions for a biker to pass cars on the right at an intersection in order to move ahead of them.

This really surprised me, and it brought up a related question: is it legal to pass a car on the right when that car is making a right turn?? (In other words, a bike passing a car in such a way that if both maintain their intended path, they would collide.)

That may sound like a stupid question, but I have actually seen this twice in the last year. In one instance, I was the driver and I could see the bike approaching from behind at a distance. As I slowed to make my right turn, I glanced back at him and I could see that he was not slowing down. I slammed on the brakes and narrowly missed him as he whizzed by me on the right. I was in the right turn lane, he was originally directly behind me in the same lane, and there is no bike lane on that street.

In an earlier incident, I was walking my dog when I saw a car and bike collide under nearly identical circumstances. The biker was not injured badly but he did wipe out. I found myself sympathizing with the driver more than the biker. The driver was obviously not prepared for somebody to pass her on the right at 15MPH while she was making a right hand turn from the right lane.

Was his bike maneuver legal? Does the driver owe a biker that right of way? And if a driver hits a biker in this scenario, is the driver legally liable?

Is it legal? That depends on the country's traffic laws and on the exact layout of the intersection. The traffic laws that I am familiar with (Denmark, Austria) indicate that the bicyclist you describe was wrong to overtake a right-turning car on the car's right side.

If there is a bike lane that extends through the intersection, then AFAIK the cyclist always has right of way. The car must wait until it can turn without blocking any bikes.

If there is a bike lane that stops before the intersection, or
if there is no bike lane then the cyclist must place himself in the proper traffic lane. If he wants to go straight, he may not be in the right-turn lane.

As a driver, what I usually do coming to a stop at an intersection is to place my car so close to the curb that no bikes can pass on that side. Safety benefits:
If they want to go straight, they can safely overtake me on my left side.
If they want to turn right too, they must line up behind me and turn after I have turned.

As a cyclist, I always operate under the assumption that I am invisible, because too many drivers neglect to look for bicycle traffic. (They often neglect to check for any traffic, but that's irrelevant on this site.)

The above presumes right-hand driving.


Road bike shipped with one of the brake cable heads disconnected from the brake lever Is there an easy fix for this?  From what I can see, looks like I have to remove the handlebar tape, and route the cable from the handle bar through the casing etc like new.  I got the bike from the "direct" "bikes" store.  Did not expect this.  One of the brakes is working and the other has this issue and no action.

You probably won't need to unwrap the bar tape - simply release the inner wire from the pinch nut/bolt on the brake, possibly pull off any end cap crimp, and pull the wire all the way up and out.

Retwist any loose strands of brake cable so it lies flat.  I suggest you use a drop of superglue now on the very end to keep it all together.  When set, carry on.

Then squeeze that brake lever, peer down the hole and feed the glued end through the brake's stop, and then into the inner cable.  It may go easy, it may take a very long time to get it in the hole you can't see... there is no guarantee that the holes line up.

One trick is to use another length of brake cable, and feed it up from below temporarily.  Then when you see it come up into the brake lever, use that end to guide the proper brake cable into the unseen outer.

If you can't get it within 10 minutes, give up and unwrap the bartape on that side.  It should unwrap from the middle so its not too bad.  You'll probably need some tape to close it up again when done.   It may help to very-slightly dirty the bar tape before unwrapping, so you can see where they overlapped.  Perhaps a pencil dragged across the underside of the bars where it can't be seen.

When you do get the wire through, remember to seat it in the brake's pinch bolt, and adjust the brake as required.  And test before riding.

Good luck!


How to set up a Kickr Core to work with my Garmin, dynamically change "elevations" (resistance), etc I recently got a Wahoo Kickr Core indoor direct drive trainer. I already have a Garmin Fenix 5X and a Garmin 820. (I use Training Peaks for my workout information.) I have no idea what to do now. I guess I want to connect them probably using ANT+. Do I want to connect both Garmins to the trainer, or just one of them?

How do I change the resistance? Do I use the Wahoo App on my phone or one of the Garmins? Is there some way to make the trainer simulate one of the rides I did last summer based on data saved somewhere in one of the Garmins?

The goal is to find some way to ride the trainer and have something simulating a "real" outdoor ride: hills, changes in resistance, etc. I'm not at all sure how to do this, or if it's even possible. I don't really want to subscribe to Zwift or Trainer Road at this time. I'd rather just get on the bike and feel like I have the ability to control the resistance or that it's changing it in some logical way.

Are there Youtube videos, a website, or something similar out there I could learn from. My searching has found lots of videos on how to connect, but not what to do with them after they are connected.

Yes, you can do this with your Edge 820.

You need to pair the Kickr Core to the Edge 820 using the sensor type “Indoor Trainer”.

Menu > Training > Indoor Trainer > Pair ANT+ Bike Trainer

You can “re-ride” a previous activity recorded on your Edge 820 indoors - the Kickr Core will adjust its resistance based on the elevation recorded in the activity.

To do this, choose

Menu > Training > Indoor Trainer > Follow an Activity.

If you don’t have a ride you want to repeat indoors, you can create a course in Garmin Connect and use “Follow a Course” in the Indoor Trainer menu.

This web page at Garmin support gives the steps to connect the trainer to the Edge 820.

This web page at Garmin support gives the steps to follow a course or activity on the Edge 820.

This video from Garmin shows the process of pairing with an Edge 520 and following a course - it's not exactly the same as the Edge 820, but similar.

You can't do this with your Fenix 5X, however.

You can use the Wahoo Fitness app on your phone (connected to the trainer by Bluetooth) if you want to control the trainer manually.


Please help identify this bicycle It says C.N.C on the body of the frame, dut  on the dropout theres "vitus" logo. Either way its french bycicle, but who built it?

Here is a bike with the same logo (looks to be older than the bike in the original post) and information on the brand.

Cycles C.N.C. is a fairly obscure French brand that hand made exquisite custom bicycles for over fifty years, starting in the 1930’s.

later

C.N.C. began life in 1936 as The Societe Fletcher-Ducret, owned by Raymond Fletcher. It was a small shop in Paris located at 112 Boulevard de la Chapelle. They had a small retail trade, but made most of its money making special frames for many French professional riders.  Most of these custom bicycles were re-badged with the make of the company that sponsored the riders’ teams. Fletcher also suppied the top riders of quite a few of the eastern-bloc countries in the 50s through to the 70s, including Russia and Poland.

No one seems to have any idea of what the abbreviation stands for. It is believed that the Special-CNC frames were the very top of the range, possibly custom frames, hand-brazed by one of the top three builders employed by the company.  One of these builders was Rene Andre, a noted “constructeur” and contemporary of Rene Herse who also built bespoke bicycles under his own name.
DJCATNAP.COM

In another article:
classicredezvous.com

Comptoirs National du Cycle
Warehouse and workshop  at No. 42 Boulevard de Bercy, Paris

...cycle empire being owned by the firm Ste Fletcher-Ducret, which also owned the brands Chalpait and Thomann... though these two were later used to market the firm's 'everyday bikes'... was one of the capital city's cycling gems in the 1940s through to the 70s and, to a lesser extent into the 70s and 80s. The company is still registered, but no longer trades in bikes."


Could you please help me identify my father's bike? My father left me his old bicycle and I would like to restore it.
The unique thing I know is that it comes from Switzerland and that maybe it should include a license plate.
Unfortunately I haven't found anything online. The info I can read from the bike are:
Brand: RICO PF;
Saddle: WITTKOP;
Gear: STURMEY ARCHER;
Brake: DURALCA
I posted some photos. I hope it could help. Thanks!

Rico was a bicycle manufacturer from Switzerland (Wallisellen, a town near Zurich). Rico PF means "Rico - Paul Fries".
You can check some badges on the swiss auction sites, to try to pinpoint the production year. For example:
https://www.ricardo.ch/de/a/rico-velo-rad-marken-schild-wallisellen-1070171586/ (in the description it says it is from the 60s).
Good luck with your search and please keep us updated!
Addition 1: Duralca is a brand that at the time was owned (and founded) by Jacob Caironi, a Swiss cyclist (more info in german here ). The company Duralca (the name coming from from Duraluminium - Caironi) dissolved in 1972 so your bike is unlikely to be olderyounger than 1972.


Cosmetic or structural damage to Carbon Crank Arm So I have a carbon fibre SLK Light Crankset and I managed to scratch up the right crank arm and the end has chipped off. I was wondering whether this is structural damage or cosmetic damage. It has been bugging me for the past few weeks now and I just need some confirmation and reassurance, The OCD really kicked in because it happened in such a stupid way. Really thankful if anyone could help me out!

A lot of carbon cranks are running around like that. It's almost certainly harmless. If you can dig a fingernail in and feel jagged fibers that might warrant smoothing it down or filling it in and sealing it, but for the most part it can be ignored. Some people use something like heli tape to protect that area. That's reasonable if you're doing the kind of riding that causes impacts here to begin with. If it's bugging you, you can get an opaque protection sticker to cover the damage.


Does a fat tire ride softer than a skinny one at the same pressure? Fat tires are associated with good bump absorption. Is this due to their fatness, or is it due to the low pressure with which they can be used?

If I pump a fatbike tire to 120 psi (yes, that would be absurd), will it still absorb bumps better than a 23mm tire at the same pressure?

After reading the answers here and becoming more curious, I found this article, which agrees with @Daniel.

to briefly summarize it, they found that at the same tire pressure the narrower tires deflected more and had a lower stiffness (force over displacement)

A curious finding is that a difference of 1 bar (14psi) makes more of a difference that a 5mm tire change. I suppose the problem becomes that with a 23mm tire there is only so much room for compliance. Additionally, they found that tire width had very little effect on small bumps (8mm in this test) and that the main factor was tire pressure:

  at this point it seems that for bumps smaller than the tire diameter, the shape and size of the bump is driving the stiffness more than the effective width of the tire itself.

That article also links to another article which discusses the sensation of tire stiffness as an expression of hoop stress, which they call casing tension. To me, this seems like a much more logical explanation as to why a wider tire will feel stiffer at a given pressure (again agreeing with @Daniel). I would suggest reading the article, but I did my best to briefly explain the end result. Essentially, the equation for hoop stress is based upon wall thickness, diameter, and pressure.

  Wall thickness = the thickness of the tire casing

  Mean diameter = the tire size
  [cross sectional area of tire]

  Pressure = the pressure the wheel is inflated to

Maintaining a constant casing tension and wall thickness we can solve for pressure and see that the pressure is inversely proportional to the diameter.


Name in English of different parts and tools What is the name in English of the part that has a set of dented wheels and goes attached to the center of the back wheel of a bicycle?

What would be the name(s) in English of the tool that allows to remove these dented wheels so that I can replace a broken spoke?

I have had bicycles all my life, but now that I left my country of origin buying tools and parts using a language that is not my mother tongue is a bit challenging sometimes.

(If anyone can provide the same names in French that would be even better).

We have a terminology index here that should help you with the more common names. Please feel free to suggest anything that is missing (we do try to keep adding things that are missing)

Unfortunately it doesn't currently have the things you're asking about. The part you've shown is a freewheel, and the tool is called a freewheel remover. You also need a chain whip to hold it in place while using that tool. (edit: no you don't). Note that there are several different types of freewheel removal tools because there are different types of freewheels. See this blog post, for example.

Also, modern bikes tend to use cassettes rather than freewheels. The difference is explained here by Sheldon Brown and here's a picture from his site showing the important bits:


Can you inflate a completely flat tire? I haven't used my bike for almost a year and I need to start riding it again, but it appears I have a flat tire. I don't think there's something wrong with the tube cause I haven't used it for a pretty long time. It just won't inflate. The tire has a  Schrader Valve. I use a pretty old pump so maybe that's the case? I'm not really sure.. So is there any way I could inflate it again without getting a new tube or tire?

You can easily inflate a completely flat tire (provided the tube is still good). Usually, when a tire is completely flat, you have to press the back of the tire so that the valve doesn't recess into the tire so your pump can be attached properly to it.

With a presta valve, you can use your mouth for this (well, on a clean tube, since the valve stem isn't spring loaded), but with a schrader valve you have to use a pump.

If it still won't inflate, check the tire and tube for damage and replace accordingly.


Does a helmet-mounted light affect the safe functionality of the helmet? I am currently testing a bunch of lights for my (slowly) upcoming head lights review. Several of the lights can be mounted to a helmet using a mounting strap, like this:

I'm wondering if having a light mounted on the helmet impacts its effectiveness in protecting from impacts. It seems that if the light hits the ground first, it might cause the rider's head to torque at a weird angle, or rotate the helmet causing the rider to hit their head when they might not otherwise.

Is there any research or data on this, or are there any anecdotal accounts of helmet lights affecting helmet safety?

I found something on the homepage of the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute. They have an article about bicycle helmet lights, listing the pros and cons of them:

Summary: Lights on bicycle helmets can be useful, but must have a breakaway mount.

Especially about the breakaway mount:

The importance of breakaway mounts
The first and most important rule for mounting a light on your helmet is that it must break away readily when you crash or catch an overhanging obstacle. If it does not, you risk having your neck jerked when it snags on the pavement or tree. Besides jerking your neck, that can add to the g's of the shock to your brain when you hit pavement.

Although there are no studies mentioned how dangerous it is when the light does not fall off during a crash, some manufacturers test their lights to break away during a crash:

Only one helmet manufacturer we have spoken to provided their lab test levels, Uvex, proving that they actually have an internal standard. And the light manufacturer Jet Lites has a standard requiring their mount to break away when loaded with a 5 pound weight.

This shows that it is important that the light falls off during a crash, but unfortunately most manufacturers do not care. Which seems to be a problem:

Some manufacturers use hook-and-loop straps to hold their lights on. We have seen some that wrap through the vents and under that seemed unlikely to detach when they should have. But again, there is no standard for that.

Source: http://www.bhsi.org/helmetlights.htm


Replaced left crank arm but still comes loose? A few weeks ago I bought a new (albeit cheap) self assembly bike from a local store, this bike to be exact http://tinyurl.com/gw77p9t . After about two weeks use (one and a half hours of cycling on pavement five days a week) the left crank started to creak, came loose and eventually fell off. I cleaned the crank and applied new grease which stopped the creaking and prevented it from falling off but the crank still came loose so as to make cycling uncomfortable. I then bought a new crank arm (this crank arm http://tinyurl.com/zz3mjzr ), took off the old crank, cleaned and greased again only to find the same problem. I can't imagine what else the problem could be, any suggestions?

A loose crank arm can damage both the bottom bracket and the crank arms. In your case, since you've run the crank arm til it fell off the bike, it is likely you ruined the bottom bracket. If your crank arm is loose, immediately stop and tighten it.

You will need to likely get a new bottom bracket and possibly yet another new crank arm. Replacing a bottom bracket requires a special tool (bottom bracket tool) and a compatible bottom bracket (which will typically be marked on the bottom bracket itself). You may want to leave this job to a bike shop.


Does cycling without stretching make you shorter? My brother said recently:

  You need to stretch after you cycle or you will become shorter.

I am very sceptical about this and a simple Google search doesn't bring up anything in the affirmative.

My question is, is it true that cycling without stretching afterwards is linked to height loss?

Everyone gets shorter during the day as the spine compresses under the influence of gravity.  This is then reversed as you sleep at night.  Yoga and stretching that improve core strength and posture can counter this effect.  However it is not clear that cycling will make the effect any worse - in fact the extra exercise may actually help!


Frame dropout cracked, what can I do? (Allied Alfa Disc / carbon) The frame thru axel hole/dropout cracked while using my wahoo kickr trainer.

Is this crack dangerous?

If it is, what can I do?

A crack, unfortunately, is a crack. That’s dangerous no matter what the material. You could contact Allied to see if you have any options in terms of warranty. However, if you didn’t secure the bike properly, I would guess that they’d offer a discounted frame at most. You could find a carbon repair shop, e.g. Calfee and Ruckus Composites are two well known ones in the US, and there may be others local to you. From one price list I remember seeing, dropout repair was more expensive than tube repair, so I’m not sure what the most economical option is. However, that can most certainly be repaired.


Why such a tiny difference in crankarm length? Why are there only 170 and 175mm lengths for the crank arms of MTBs? I would have guessed that touring bikes would benefit from far longer crank arms than those, suitable for mountain riding.

MTB crank arms usualy come in 165, 170, 175 mm. Some people (usually PROs) can have access to more fine grained lengths (e.g 167.5) or ever smaller sizes such as 160mm.

The reasons for such "micro-optimization" are:

clearance

Today MTBs for trail riding need to have a lot of front and rear suspension and very low bottom brackets. This makes it easier to hit rocks with the pedal and that is not desired.

Also note that ground clearence problems are in addition being solved with very thin pedals (thin pedals also solve other issues).

So, saving 5mm from the cranks and 5mm from the pedals may not seem enough but it can actually reduce the times you hit the ground.

Note that downhill specific bikes will usually have 165mm cranks.

proper fit to rider height

A short rider (with short legs) will pedal more efficiently on a 170mm crank than a 175mm one.

Thus small MTBs usually ship with 170mm and medium ones with 175mm.


Seat clamp tolerance Manufacturer specifies a seat clamp/collar size of 36.6mm. I was wondering if a 36.4mm clamp will work?

How much tolerance is there with a seat clamp?

0.2mm on seatpost clamp will make no difference!
The tolerence is small maybe 1-2mm. a 0.2mm difference is pretty much how far the clamp moves when you tighten the binder! maybe even more.
Youll see how far it moves when you take the binder off the frame and tighten it a little. the clamp goes smaller basically clamping down. so in practice it clamps the seat tube down onto the seatpost tightening all in its place. long explanation, I know but thats the just of it.


Did the Giant Trinity A1 come with a derailleur hanger? I am putting a bike together and have it all apart but don't see the derailleur hanger anywhere.  Did I lose it or did the bike not come with it?  If it didn't come with it, why not?

Thanks.

The rear derailleur hanger on the Trinity was not replaceable, it was part of the frame and was there at the time of production.

If there is no hanger on the end of the rear drop out then it has likely been either:

purposely removed (to make a single speed or fixie, possibly for track racing);
sheered off in a crash (or deformed and then removed); or
not an authentic Trinity frame.


Changing the Crankset on a Stevens Cityflight I bought my first used Roadbike a few months ago, after some intensive riding the shaft was displaced a few mms to the left leaving the right side with less tooth-length which subsequently lead to the wear out of the teeth on both the shaft and the crank arm. Long story short, I need a new crankset.

I have a 2009 Stevens Cityflight, which has the FC-S500. This crankset is very hard to find online. I am considering some other choices, the question is :
are cranksets standardized so that any set is mountable on any bike, at least when it's from the same manufacturer? If the length of the shafts, and diameters of bearings do vary where can I find the compatibility

First, you should be sure that the crankset is actually worn -- cranksets last a long time, and some teeth will look like they are worn (but they aren't) due to aiding shifting.

The bearings aren't in the crankset itself -- they're in the bottom bracket, which is pressed/threaded into the frame. In your case, your bike has a Hollowtech II bottom bracket, and you can use Hollowtech II compatible cranksets (or change the bottom bracket type, and use some other crankset).

When choosing the crankset, you do have to have bottom bracket compatibility, crank lengths, and if the crank clears everything on your frame when installed -- for example, most mountain bikes will have interference if you stick a 50 tooth crankset on them because the geometry of the bike is not setup to take this.

I'd suggest just going to a local bike shop to make sure you do need a new crankset, and chances are they'll have some Hollowtech II crankset that will fit your bike anyway, if needed.

Another reading of your post suggests that the splines on the bottom bracket (thing the crankset goes onto; contains the spindle which the crank arms rotate about) may be worn (is this what you mean by shaft?). In this case, you'll need a new bottom bracket and crankset. I'd leave this work to a shop if you don't want to buy the tools (bottom bracket tool, big wrench, crank puller, etc.).


Headwind when riding in a loop I (think) I know the answer to this, but I wanted to get others' takes on it.

Riding a loop with no wind, vs. riding the same loop with wind (such that half the loop, you get a headwind vs. tailwind for other half).

Does this equal out, or does the wind version use more energy/power to maintain the same overall time?

I actually don't mean keeping the same speed over the whole loop, but the same time around the whole thing. Thus I'd expect speed to drop while heading into the wind, and increase the other way.

If the effect of wind resistance was linear with respect to speed, then yes, the forces would balance out. That is to say: if pedaling into a 20 mph wind was only twice as hard as pedaling into a 10 mph wind, the forces would balance.

But this is not the case, as @Daniel mentions. The effort to overcome the 20mph wind is more than twice that needed for the 10mph wind. If we simplify your loop into an out-and-back (half directly into the wind, half with it at your back), say the wind is a constant 10 mph, and that you cycle to maintain 20mph, you can get an intuitive idea of how this works.

With those assumptions, for half your trip you would be fighting a 30mph headwind (10 wind + 20 from your own speed). The second half the "headwind" would be only 10mph (20 from your own speed - 10 from the wind). This is compared to a day with no wind, in which the whole trip would have a headwind of 20mph. The jump from 20mph to 30 requires much more energy (what is the last time you hit 30mph?) than the energy saved from dropping from 20 to 10mph.

Drag varies as the square of velocity. This means that velocity is the dominant factor in the equation (as opposed to drag coefficient).

From wikipedia:

  For high velocities (or more precisely, at high Reynolds number) drag will vary as the square of velocity. Thus, the resultant power needed to overcome this drag will vary as the cube of velocity. The standard equation for drag is one half the coefficient of drag multiplied by the fluid mass density, the cross sectional area of the specified item, and the square of the velocity.

For an excellent treatment of the forces affecting a cyclist, see Rainer Pivit's article. The graphs are especially helpful.


Compatibility between 4700 Tiagra 10 speed shifters and GRX RX400 10 speed derailleur I want to build myself a drop handle bar touring setup bike.
GRX RX400 seems like a good budget option. Bikeradar mentioned this groupset to be on same level as Tiagra. Gearing range on this groupset is as per my need. 11-36 in back and 46-30 in front.
Reason why I want to use Tiagra shifters and not GRX shifters (ST-RX400) is because GRX shifters are for hydraulic disc brakes only>. I have never installed
or operated hydraulic disc brakes on STI shifters and I'm not sure how complicated the process of resizing the hose will be, so want to stick with ST-4700 rim brake compatible STI shifters.

Looking at Shimano's Compatibility Document one can see that indeed, Tiagra ST-4700 brifters are compatible with their rear derailleur model RD-RX400.
Can't blame you for wanting to stick with rim brakes.  Although hydraulic disc systems are not as complicated or difficult to work with as it may seem, there are some negative aspects that (IMHO) make a quality rim break quite competitive with disc brakes.  From a cost stand point--both initial and continuing maintenance-- rim brakes have a lock on value.  The relatively minor edge on performance disc brakes have is a fairly costly one.


22 to 11 speed conversion? I have a bike equipped with a SRAM 22 speed groupset (hydraulic) and was thinking about converting it to a 1x11.  I like the simplicity of the 1x11 system and the potential weight savings from removal of redundant components.  Is this conversion possible and if so, what steps would I need to take assuming I possess all the required tools?

It's as easy as removing the front shifter, shifter cabling, front derailleur, and changing your crankset from a double to a single.
If you have a brifter, you can remove the derailleur cable and figure out some way to keep the brifter from flopping (jb weld, etc) if you don't want to replace it with a brake lever.

The major expense will be getting a single crankset.
(Depending on your crankset spider and desired front gear, you may be able to keep your old crankset as described in comments below.)

Tools you'll need aside from the usual allen wrenches and screw drivers will be a crankset puller and pedal wrench.

Note the weight savings are minimal. You'd save more weight by not having a cheeseburger for lunch.


Is my carbon frame done? I have a carbon trek Emonda bicycle. Today, my rear derailleur got caught in my wheel. As a result, the rear derailleur is bent, the rear derailleur hanger snapped off, the chain got twisted and the right seat stay got scratched.
Is the scratch on my right seat stay too dangerous to ride again? It goes about 1-2 mm at the deepest part of the scratch.

I would not ride that frame as-is.
Whether it is repairable or not needs a hands-on inspection by a competent carbon fibre frame repairer in person.  So you need to strip everything else off the bike and send/take the bare frame to someone who can advise professionally.


My rear derailleur won't shift after up after 3rd cog I just got a MTB bike thats been sitting in a garage for a couple of months.

I tried the bike and found out that the rear derailleur(Shimano) wont shift after the 3rd cog . It shifts up to the 3rd cog just fine but after that the shifter wont click and i cant get it to move any low.

Tried playing around with the limit screws and the barrel adjuster but no luck.just want to know what might be causing the problem and solutions.

Thanks

From your description it's likely that the pawl responsible for upshifting is seized and not engaging properly. The reason it would be able to shift the first two gears is because for the 1-2 shift the pawl face engages with an edge of the ratchet wheel instead of a tooth and since the trigger moves far enough that you can shift over two gears at once the 2-3 shift is possible using the same mechanism.

To fix this you would need to remove the cover and clean out the old grease using a solvent or degreaser, or even something like PB Blaster or WD40. You'll probably need to move the pawl back and forth to work the old grease out from around the shaft the pawl rotates on. Once the pawl is moving freely (ie, it snaps back against the teeth without hesitation) apply some fresh grease and put the cover back on.

This video describes the problem and fix, at about 1:08 you get a clearer shot of the upshift pawl and ratchet wheel. Most shimano rapidfire plus shifters use a variation of this design, even if you have a different model than depicted in the video you should still be able to clean and regrease the mechanism the same way.


How to get the tyre back on to the rim easily? What is the best/easiest way to get the tyre back on to a rim after removing it to fix a puncture for example?

Some tyres can be really hard to get back on to the rim. I don't like using the tyre levers as I usually end up pinching the inner tube and making another hole. I can usually do it with just my fingers and thumbs but it takes a lot of time and effort (and sore thumbs).

Note, this is for a 26" mountain bike wheel with inner tube.

I always use levers to get the tire off. Never to get it back on! You'll most likely pinch the tube if you do and have to start again.

The Schwalbe Marathon Plus tires are one of the most notoriously difficult tires to get on.
 This youtube video shows you how to do it without levers and without hurting your hands or getting blisters.

You only need two toe straps or a similar strap, to push the tire bead into the well of the rim on the opposite side to the last bit of tire you're trying to get back onto the rim. As you'll see from the video, just keep working the tire bead into the well of the rim on the opposite side and you'll get it on, no problem.

This was a saviour for me, since before that I'd get blisters and sore hands and it could take me an hour to change the Marathon Plus. Now it takes me a little over 5mins, with no blisters or sore hands.


Bormio (Italy) to Annecy (France) multiday bike tour I'm planning a cycle tour from Bormio (Italy) to Annecy (France), estimating about 80km / day.  Has anybody done this?  Any recommendation for routes, preferably taking in cols / passes along the way.

The most direct route between Bormio and Annecy goes through Switzerland, which has a network of national bike routes which consists mostly of well maintained side roads. One option is to cross the border to St. Moritz, take a combination of these routes to Geneve and ride to Annecy from there (take the shortcut route over Mt. Saléve instead of flatter one). I rode the route 4 some years ago and I strongly recommend it. There is a Swiss cycle route map that shows a list of recommended climbs and shortcuts, which is great for changing the route on the fly.

One caveat is that Switzerland is an expensive country and staying on Italian side of the border might save significant money. Border crossings inside Schengen area are more or less a non-issue.


Frame with a tapered headtube - fork compatibility I've seen a couple of different questions that have touched on this topic but after having read the answers, I'm still not confident. I'm doing my first bike build and so far I'm just trying to put together a parts list of compatible parts.

My frame has a tapered headtube, which is confusing me. The exact specification is as follows:

Tapered headtube.
Headset: VP, 1-1/8"-1.5"(46mm/56mm).

From this I assume two things: That the headtube is tapered and that it comes with a tapered headset to match.

Now, can I fit a fork with a standard 1-1/8 steerer into this setup or do I need a tapered fork to match it? I'm a little confused, I've also noticed there's a massive lack of tapered forks on the sites I've checked compared to the straight ones. I'd also seen people reference to an adapter that allows a straight for to be fitted in a tapered headtube but I wasn't sure on this either.

Finally... more of a general question - would I be able to consider any fork (tapered or straight, whatever the answer is to the above) or do I need to think about anything else? Anything related to Geometry etc...? I've read this can also be a factor but it seemed a bit contentious.

I know similar questions have been asked before - apologies, I'm still not confident...

Thanks

The 1-1/8"-1.5" measurement actually refers to the diameter of the fork steerer tube that the bearings will accept, not the headtube of the frame. Your frame therefore expects a fork with a 1-1/8"-1.5" tapered headtube. You can use a straight 1-1/8" steerer fork with an adapter for the lower bearing.

Other geometry considerations are the axle-to-crown length and the rake. It seems that some road forks don't have a axle-to-crown length specified but are generally the correct length for a ISO 622mm wheel. Small differences in length will not make a difference to steering geometry.

If you are looking for an MTB suspension fork, you need to consider wheel size and travel. I think there are a couple of dropout spacings used in the MTB world as well.


Will cycling off-the-trainer with the trainer's steel skewer damage my bike? I recently bought a cyclops trainer. It is annoying to switch the skewers. I know the steel skewer that came with the trainer is heavier and stronger, but I don't know if it will damage my bicycle off of the trainer.

I do know that riding on the trainer with my normal skewer will wreck the normal ones.

No, using a "trainer" skewer on the road has no negative impact on your bike or safety. The skewer which comes with a trainer is mecahnically and functionally identical to the one that came on your bike, with the exception of the shape of the "heads" on the trainer skewer. It is actually identical to one of the original skewer designs. The reason that one comes with the trainer is because most bike manufacturers have changed the shape of the skewer "heads" that come on the bike to be more aesthetically pleasing. With the side effect that the skewer that comes on your bike is unlikely to fit securely into the clamp mount on your trainer.


Hybrid bike - would like to switch to a single front chainring, what are my options? I have this bike (19" size):

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/motobecane/elite_trail_x4.htm

I'm doing some things to it to simplify it and reduce its weight for my city commute I've been doing for about two years. I've replaced the front suspension fork with one that's fixed and of the proper geometry, and this helps in both areas.

Next, I'd like to focus on gearing and save both complexity and weight. It's currently setup as it came from BikesDirect, so this means:

Crankset:
SUNTOUR CW9-XCC 28/38/48T
175MM(18~23")ALLOY BLACK CRANK

Front Derailleur:
SRAM FD-3.0-A1 TOP PULL

Rear Derailleur:
SRAM RD-X4-A1 SILVER CAGE

Cassette/Chain:
CKHC 11-32T-8spd / KMC Z-72

I'm considering replacing the entire crankset - but in the meantime, I'd like to go from 3 chainrings to 1. I don't use the largest ring at all in my commute, and I find myself using the granny gear in a couple specific situations, and the easiest half of my middle ring. Typically, my bike just stays on the middle ring unless I'm doing a serious climb (which happens once on my commute). Basically, I don't need speed on downhills as I'm not racing anyone so I'm typically using the brakes to moderate my speed on big downhills anyways. I need a decently easy gear for a small portion of my ride (getting up the Manhattan bridge) but otherwise it's very level riding.

My questions:

Is there a single-ring option that would give me a 2/3 of my easy gear and the easy 1/3 of my middle gear that I could direct swap onto my existing crankset and remove the other two chainrings entirely?
Is this setup safe (1x8) if I remove the front derailleur and shifter where if I shifted to the extremes of my cassette I wouldn't drop my chain - and if not - do you recommend something to go on the front to help hold it on without having to keep the front derailleur?
If #1 isn't an option, is there a crankset I could switch to that would make this setup possible?

Thanks!

Edit:
in a brief spin around the internet, I found some single-chainring options that I have no idea of compatibility:

https://www.bikeparts.com/BPC394186/raceface-evolve-ss-crank-175mm-nw32t-black-9-10-11

https://www.bikeparts.com/BPC169250/sram-gx-1400-1x11-bb30-crankset-32t-x-sync-175mm-red

Seeing as I have an 8 speed cassette, and the first one says 9/10/11 and the second is a 1x11, I'm not sure how compatible these are. Help?!

I suspect you'll be buying a whole new crankset. You may also need to upgrade the bottom bracket as there's not much choice of upgrades if you're starting with square taper parts.

My hybrid had a very similar drivetrain, including suntour cranks/chainrings which were riveted together.

You've already got a fairly wide ratio cassette for an 8 speed (I run the shimano equivalent) so you might struggle to get the range you need. Perhaps something like 11-34 (the widest range I've seen on 8 speed) with a 32-36 tooth chainring would do it. 8 speed casettes are cheap and consumable so swapping out to get the extra bottom end might help you. The alternative of going for a full 1x9 system would of course mean a new shifter and probably cable.

You should probably make up a spreadsheet of all the gear ratios you have/use and those you'd get in your 1x8 suggestion. And you can try running just in your middle chainring to see how much too hard 38 is.

The actual weight saving though, on a hybrid which probably has a heavy frame, is unlikely to be worth it, every assuming better/lighter cranks to go with the reduced chainring weight.


Replacing Giant Defy 4 2013 alloy steerer fork with Giant carbon steerer fork I am planning on making the above replacement.

The original fork is the composite fork with alloy steerer, however the replacement (from Giant) has a carbon steerer. Can I still use the same original headset?

As other have stated you should be able to use the old headset providing it is in good condition. If you are swapping forks due to an accident then replace the headset even if it feels smooth. Your alloy steerer likely used a "star fangled nut " to apply the headset preload. With a carbon steerer you need a expandable plug that is made for use with carbon steerers.