structure of rear wheel to support cargo trailer Some years ago I used a rear carrier with a bundle buggy lashed on to carry stuff around.  I had a problem with wheel wobble.  I thought a rebuild as 4 cross (instead of std 3 cross) might help.  The guy in the shop where I bought the spokes noticed a cracked rim (actually both front & back).  After I rebuilt the back wheel 4 cross with a new rim, the wobble was gone.  Don't know if the 4 cross fixed it, as I don't know how long the rim was cracked.

I am thinking of building a cargo trailer, and am wondering if anyone has any knowledge on whether rebuilding a wheel to 4 cross for the additional stability it may bring (the old bike is long gone) is worth the effort for short trips with 50-60 lb of freight.  the trailer would be attached to the rear axle, not the seat post.

I would not bother. But then, I would not bother with 4 cross in the first place. Spoke count matters more - a 24 spoke racing wheel is just not designed to be used for load carrying. What I think is important is (in order) 32 or more spokes, a properly built wheel, a decent rim, and a decent hub. You can do a lot just with a properly built wheel because if the spoken tension is nice and even even a relatively low-quality rim will not be stressed past its limits.

I've carried a lot of heavier things and built a few load bikes and trailers over the years. Especially with a trailer, 30kg is not a particularly heavy load. For the rider, loads under half your body weight should be easy for anyone who rides regularly. Your main issue is likely to be lateral forces on the rear wheel, and the way to reduce those is riding style. I would leave buying a better rear wheel until after you have problems with your current one. Largely because you probably won't have problems with it. Unless it's a low spoke count wheel, in which case I suggest getting a second hand steel frame MTB and never using your racing bike for lowing a trailer if you can avoid it.

Also, FWIW, I found towing a trailer with 30kg of stuff on it quite hard on a fixie. If you're going to do that, at least make sure you have both front and rear brakes because stopping suddenly on a fixie is hard enough as it is, adding a trailer just makes it worse.


Junior vs women’s bike Hi just wondering if anyone could help, I’m looking to get my first road bike and struggling to find a  seasonable priced one (which isn’t out of stock because of Covid-19). I’ve found the Wiggins Rouen ADV Junior Road Bike - 700cc Wheel - 17" Frame and was wondering if this would be okay for a women of 5ft 3 160cm. Looking at the sizing it’s the same as a small road bike (c.17 inch with 700x25 tyres. Would this be ok or am I missing something? Don’t want to end up with an actual kids bike haha!! Thanks all :-)

This doesn't appear to be a current model--I can't find specs on this exact bike. This seems to be a house brand for Halfords, and I'm a little suspicious of a house brand, but that's just me.

The general advice given around here is that if the bike fits and you like it, get it. It doesn't matter who it was originally intended for. That said, this sounds like this bike is small for you.

A junior's bike might have lower gearing (junior racers have restricted top gears), although if this bike wasn't intended for racing, then maybe not.


Does the tire tread reduce the likelyhood of getting a puncture? I've been using the last year thickslicks to driver mainly inside my city and I usually tried to don't go through anything else but asphalt to prevent punctures.

I've been wondering if going through a rocky path (or something similar with lot of little rocks) with thickslicks (700x28)  and pressure around 100psi is more likely to get a puncture than the traditional wider and with tread tires that most MTB bikes have.

Example with no tread:

And with:

It depends. Tread pattern affects puncture probability in two opposite ways:

Slick tires often, but not always, have thinner rubber, which offers less protection.
Knobs are generally too thick to be punctured through and put some distance between ground and the flat parts of the tire, but on the other hand the part between knobs may be very thin.
Tires with grooved tread may be punctured because small pieces of gravel or glass get stuck in grooves and eventually dig through the rubber. This happens very rarely with slick or knobby tires.

In your case, you should be worried about pinch flats, which happen when the tire is pinched between a rock and rim. 28mm may be just enough for smooth cobblestone roads but is very narrow for rocky or soft terrain.


What are my options for installing a FD compatible with Shimano Sora 3x9 STI brifters on a frame with top-pull cable routing? I'm thinking about converting a 1994 Trek 820 to drop bars. I already have the bars, brifters, rear wheel equipped with 9-speed cassette, etc. lying around, and I can get some compatible brakes, so as far as I see, my only issue is the front derailleur, because of the different pull ratios of road vs MTB shifters.
My question is, do you know of a top or dual-pull road triple FD? If not, what are my options? There's the Problem Solvers clamp pulley, but I can't find it in stock in any shop that delivers to Austria
Edit: Seat tube diameter is 31.8 mm.

There are no top-pull Shimano road front derailleurs. (Edit: This was wrong, they've made FD-CX70 in a top pull variant. It's contoured for cyclocross doubles and it's 10-speed. 10-speed FDs on 9-speed chains can be tricky or impossible to adjust to be free of rub, alhough manipulating the cage may solve that.)
A few different companies have made clamp-on pulleys like that. Origin8 is another one.
A lot of cross bikes have a pulley mounted to a braze-on. You can get the pulley part an from framebuilding suppliers, dead frames, etc. They usually use an M6 bolt. The question then arises would just doing it with an M6 rivnut be strong enough. I think it probably would be, but it would be an experiment.
If the downtube is a diameter you can find a clamp-on housing stop for, I think that's the good way. Put a housing stop there and a BB cable guide on. The hole for the cable guide is easy to drill and tap, and many shells have one there anyway.
The other clamp-on housing stop way is get a 31.8 one and clamp it on the seattube under the FD, then do continuous housing zip-tied to the downtube looped down and around the BB. This is easy to do, but the upwards-opening housing makes it the worst option because water contamination will foul it.
Remember to add an in-line barrel adjuster to any of these setups.


What is the best way to improve my cycling distance over mountainous terrain? So for years I've been doing long distance biking from my home on my mountain bike, and recently I've been trying to push north into the Hudson Valley. However, even though I'm pretty decent at handling very long, non-stop bike rides, the mountainous terrain has made things extremely difficult for me to keep going past the first two bike path (especially since I have to already clear a good 10 mi. to get there).

Does anyone have any tips for improving the distance I can cover on my bike when it comes to mountainous terrain?

You and I are in a similar place.  I can do 150 km flat rides with no problem, but 1000 metres of elevation increase wears me out.

So the longterm solution is to practice by doing more.  I've set a climbing goal in strava of 50 km vertical for the calendar year 2017.  As of Jan 15 I have done 3,435 metres, which is well on track, but its summer here.

Technique helps - learning to gain momentum from any downhill or flat bit and then carry that momentum as far up the next slope as possible.  Don't coast down grades.

Pacing is a big thing too - working your body to a point that is not your maximum, so you can maintain a speed up the whole climb.  No point going mad for the first quarter and then needing a rest stop.

Equipment - climbing is hard work.  I have an unfashionable road bike with a triple front, and a low gear that's below 1:1   (ie 26 teeth on the front and 28 on the rear cassette largest cog)   Roadies look down on triples, but this is about YOUR performance, not theirs.   Many MTBs had triple chainrings too, but 1x have become more popular lately.

In short, you might benefit from adding bigger gears, so that you can increase your cadence while climbing.  Mashing is not as efficient as spinning up a steep grade.  This might mean changing your cassette for a larger one, or having a choice of rear wheels available.

Weight - If you're lugging 2 bottles of water up, do you need them?  Its hard to justify carrying stuff that you might need, but some things like pumps are non negotiable.  Are you carrying too much food?

On the same vein - your bike's weight.  I changed from a 20 KG steel MTB to a 12 KG aluminium road bike and my segment times all dropped by 10% immediately.

This image shows how much of your energy goes into different things as the slope increases.  This one is aimed at MTB riders, road is worse.

Timing - riding in the heat takes energy out of you.  Consider riding when its cooler, like earlier morning rather than noon or afternoon.  Also, looking at the local weather forecast for a nice tailwind could help your climb.

Training - Doing specific training to target climbing, like hill intervals where you go hard-out up a grade for 30 seconds and then 2 minutes of relaxed climbing.  Repeat 6-10 times.

Motivation - go out riding with someone who is better than you.   Track your progress on climb segments in Strava, to see your progress. Here's an 800 metre segment at the top of a climb, where I got a PR today.  You can clearly see a decrease in my times over the last 20 months.  A bit more work and I might get to half the initial time, which would be awesome!

Other than that - practice.   You can't improve without doing.


Hybrid bike how much should I inflate tyres Hi I just bought a hybrid bike btwin riverside 3. It has 28 inch tires and weights 15kgs. My weight is 75kg. How much should I inflate my tires. And how often should I refill?

For the correct tyre pressure, you should have a look on the wall of your tyre.

Obviously different tyre manufacturers will mould their tyres differently, but here is an example (one of my tyres, I have raided the flour cupboard to make the marking stand out!):

So we have: Max. LuftDruck / Inflation: 4.5 Bar / 65 PSI

These tyres are Continental, a German manufacturer, and the word LuftDruck means (surprisingly) air pressure.

Note that this tyre is on my offroad bike (26") so will probably show different values to those on your hybrid (I'd expect 75psi or thereabouts, but you should check).

For the frequency you should check the pressure: some people will say every ride, I generally go for every week or two for the bikes I ride regularly, every ride for those I don't.


Ways to lock my feet to the pedals, OR, Cycling shoe options for (really) wide feet I have very wide feet, like ridiculously wide. I found some data for Australian male foot sizes and I'm at the 80th percentile for length but the 99.7th percentile for width. I'm currently wearing shoes a size too long in extra extra wide, and they're still barely wide enough.

I've been road cycling for a while now, and I'm starting to take it seriously (looking for a club to join). I would like to be able to lock my feet into the pedals, but I don't know where to start. Old school around-the-toe straps are difficult because my regular shoes are too long, and as you might have guessed, off the shelf cycle shoes (at least the few that I've tried) aren't designed with someone like me in mind.

What options are there to lock my feet to the pedals so I can practice optimal pedaling technique? Some kind of shoes+clipless pedals approach is clearly the most common way to deal with this, but I'm willing to look at some more unusual or exotic solutions, whether that relates to the shoes, the pedals, straps, anything. Ideally with some kind of quick release mechanism because I'll be on the road.

As far as shoes go, this question is very similar, but it's over 9 years old and the linked pages don't exist any more. Plus, 9 years is plenty of time for more options to become available.

Lake makes several shoes in wide widths. I’m particularly partial to their sandals for my wide feet (but depending on what kind of club you’re aiming to join, they may not be the right look).


Is it a good idea to switch to hub gear? I have a Firefox Roadrunner Pro. I wanted to know if it was a good idea to install an internal hub gear on it. I want to install it to reduce dust accumulation and oiling and to simplify the wheel-removal process.

I have been told the I would need to add a new chain tension-er and that would eat away the advantages of the hub gear.

And which gear hubs would give a better gear ratio than i already have with my SHIMANO TZ21 14-28T, 7 speed

No, it is not a good idea.

You'd be spending more than the bike is worth even for a basic internal gear hub (even assuming you got the wheel rebuilt for free using the existing rim and spokes, if possible), let alone buying a rear wheel with an IGH built in. You do need a chain tensioning pulley or horizontal dropouts, which while can be built more robustly than most derailleurs, still is more complicated than most people who want an IGH would deal with and eliminates one of the key advantages.

If you want better gearing, your best bet is probably to use a different freewheel (TZ71 is a 7 speed shimano freewheel - note that this is not the same as a cassette). If you want a lower gear, you may want to find an old 7 speed Shimano Megarange freewheel (or more likely, you'l probably have to go Sunrace these days). Any higher probably doesn't make much sense (Sunrace makes a 13t I think in 7 speed, but its not buying you much, with that style of bike - just spin faster).

Removing the wheel with an IGH on that bike would be about as complex as without it due to the pulley, so you're not significantly changing the complexity. Cleaning is about as difficult as well, with a chain cleaner like the Park Tool CG-2, and you still have to oil occasionally either way.

If you want an easier way to remove the rear wheel, consider getting a quick release wheel if you do not have one already (if you have a solid axle, you could try adding axle release).

But really, with a bike of that quality, you're best off just keeping it running and if you want to do any upgrades, just buy a better bike to begin with and then start upgrading it. If you want to run an IGH, look for something designed for it (likely, it will have horizontal dropouts - think something like Surly CrossCheck).


Raleigh Circa 2 Mens 2017 Hybrid Bike Raleigh Circa 2 Mens 2017 Hybrid Bike What are the exact dimensions (in mm) of seat tube and top tube of 16'' frame of this model (CR216MBK)?

The best I could find was Raleigh's own web site , and all they list is frame sizes and approximate leg lengths to suit.

If the supplier themselves don't list it, then you'll have to go measure one at a shop, or hope someone else here happens to own one and a tape measure.


Which rear cog should I remove if I want to add a 26 for climbing? I have an old road bike with 53-39 rings and 13-23 cassette. Although it's generally flat in my area, I like to get to the top of these hills where they put the radio antennas (without dying). Max slope on these is 15%, average 8% and I suffer a lot.

I have spare cogs, rear mech is Shimano RX100 and thought I can fit a 26T in the cassette Which cog should I remove from my current setup (13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23)? I guess either the 16, the 21 or the 23?

I'm already assuming body fitness can be improved ;) Thanks!

Edit: here are the gear ratios
http://gears.mtbcrosscountry.com/#700c/23I61I3909X700c/23I61I193X700c/23I61I15271X700c/23I61I15275

Report back (edit 2): I set 13-14-15-16-18-21-23-28 today. I just realized I have a 24 I could swap for the 23 to make a fairer gap, and I still have the 26 available. There is room for the 28T and didn't touch the B-screw. For now, it shifts fine standing, I have still to ride test it. I'll get back.

Conclusion - edit 3 :)
Went for a small ride with climb included. Setup is still very close to what it was, introducing the 18 as Grigory said and leaving room for a life-saving 28 (thanks Criggie for the tip).

Shifting is good, I didn't notice much change, but as ChrisH and Criggie pointed out, it probably is a bit irregular on the new cogs. So I will eventually look for a complete cassette.
Anyway, many thanks to all. I'll accept Grigory's answer as it addresses the original question with a better alternative to do what I intended.

The answer in terms of ratios might not be the same as the answer in terms of being able to shift. Taking out the 16 would be reasonable but then the shift ramps and pickup teeth wouldn't align. This issue will occur going from the 23 to the 26 whatever you remove.

You've got 8 gears in the back so I assume you've got indexed shifting. If you're using friction shifters it's not an issue as you can overshift then back it off.

Further reading from Sheldon Brown


Carbon crank with loose pedal thread I have a FSA Carbon crank where the thread/bolt for my pedal has become lose and wobbles.

In all fairness the crank has has 20,000KM on it. Can it be repaired, can I replace just the crank, or do I need to replace the entire crankset?

The FSA Warranty is 2 years on cranksets.

I would still contact them to see what they recommend.They might be able to repair, recommend a company who can repair or offer you a lower-cost replacement. You didn't say which crank arm it is but they may also be able to provide a replacement for just that crank arm.

I would also stop using the crank for now for two different reasons:

In the event this is repairable, you don't want to make the current damage any worse as it could tip things past the point to where it is no longer fixable.
You don't want to risk catastrophic failure of the crank where the threaded insert breaks completely out of the crank taking the pedal and your control of the bike with it.


Replacing bike frame on BMC Alpenchallenge AC01 I have a BMC Alpenchallenge AC01 IGH Alfine 8 Speed 2017 size small. Although the size is appropriate for me, I would prefer the medium, but the small was 47% off, so I bought it.

Now I have the chance of buying the medium size frame of the high end model. The frame is from the same year, but it came originally with Alfine 11 and comes with a carbon fork.

Do you guys think I can simply replace the frames without much hassle? I would guess I would only have to take the components from the small and mount them in the medium frame. I would really appreciate some opinions on this. Thank you very much.

If the new frame is the same frame model and year (the aluminum Alpenchallenge frame, that was used on a higher spec bike, and came with a carbon fiber fork), there should be no compatibility problems. Seat tube diameter, steerer diameter, bottom bracket shell, disc mounts, hub widths etc. should all be the same.

I note that the Alpenchallenge comes in both derailleur and internally geared hub versions. The internal hub version has a means to spit the drive side seat stay to install a Gates Drive belt and a eccentric bottom bracket shell. Obviously, make sure you are getting this version.

Other issues you might run into:

If the chain stays on both frames are not the same length you might have to get a different length belt.

You'll probably have to replace rear brake and shifter cables and housings as the run length will be slightly longer.

The medium size may have come with a slightly longer stem than the small, but that may not be a problem for you.

Don't forget to check for any special tools you might need.  Bottom brackets typically need installation tools, but I'm not sure about eccentric types.


Rear bike stand attached to the axle bolt: safe? Searching online I have found the following rear stand:

It is attached to the frame via the rear axle bolt (see the hole).

Considering that I often use rear panniers on my bike, would this exert abnormal loads on the axle, with possible risk for the bike and for me?

Edit: both stand and bike frame are in aluminum.

They're totally fine because you only use the stand when the bike is stationary. That way the stand only exerts a force on the bike when its stopped and parked.

There are possible issues:

If the stand acts as a washer under the axle nut, it can possibly interfere with proper seating of the nut.  Notice many nuts have a serrated or textured edge to help bite down a bit better.  A hard steel washer will reduce that bite.  This will permit the rear wheel axle to move causing brake/frame rub.
Rear weight - the stand adds weight behind the rear axle, so it contributes to unweighting the front and adding that weight to the rear wheel.
Trailer interference.  Most trailers clamp to the rear axle somehow.  A rear axle stand will interfere with any trailer clamp.
Pannier clips - your rear panniers will probably have a low clamp.  The rear stand may obscure or shrink possible hooking points.  On the other hand, the rear stand may offer additional new hooking points.  Deploying the stand may be difficult with a left-side pannier fitted too.

There are positives.  Your stand is near the panniers so it is closer to the Center of Mass when the panniers are loaded.  By comparison, a BB stand is more centered on the bike.

Personally if you don't care about weight, look for a dual-leg stand.  They're a lot more stable for loading the bike.  Downside they're heavier, require a chainstay bridge with a mounting hole, and can interfere with the cranks or lower chain stretch.


Replacement rear derailleur Recently damaged the rear derailleur on my old city bike - the derailleur is a Shimano integrated 6-7 SIS Max 28t - which is no longer manufactured. I can get a used replacement via ebay but was wondering whether something like a 6/7 speed tourney RD-TY500 would also work. Any thoughts?

Any 6/7 speed Tourney derailleur will be compatible with your shifter, i.e., it will index on a sprocket correctly for each shifter click.

Whatever Tourney model you get you want to make sure it can handle the largest rear sprocket you have and the total capacity which is the difference of tooth counts between smallest and largest sprockets plus  difference of tooth counts between smallest and largest chainrings. Longer cage derailleurs have larger total capacity because they can take up more chain slack.

Specs on the RD-TY500 SGS are here.


7 speed rear derailleurs for road bike? I recently broke my Derallieur in my Road bike and I am planning to get a new one online but I dont know exactly which one to get is for the rear Derailleurs of 7 speeds.
thanks

Pretty much it doesn't matter - as long as the derailleur is comparable in brand and general "shape".  The derailleur doesn't really care how many gears you have!  The two things that have to be the same as (or compatible with) your old one:

Cable pull ratio - each "click" of your shifter pulls the cable a certain amount, and the derailleur has to move by the correct amount per click.  So - if it's a shimano, get a shimano, and you'll probably be OK.
Capacity - if your largest tooth cog in back is a 32-tooth, no way is a "short cage" derailleur going to handle it.  On the other hand if your largest in back is 23 tooth, a "long cage" would work but would look VERY SILLY

So, with several caveats to boot - as long as it's the same brand (or compatible), and approximately the same physical dimensions, it should be fine; 7, 8, 9 speed really doesn't matter.  Post a close-up photo of the broken derailleur where we can read the model numbers/etc. and see the thing, and we'll give you a link where you can buy a replacement from :)


Lighter bike slower than a heavier bike, possible reasons? I have access to two mountain bikes, a lighter one (lapierre) and a Giant.
The maintenance I do to both is really similar, just tires and oiling the chain every few weeks. I always though that the lapierre was harder to ride but the other day I did an actual test. Before I set off I checked the tires and oiled the chain and did the same distance, at the same time and  similar weather and the lapierre was much more work and did a slower top speed and average speed, can anyone suggest any reasons for this and how can I fix it?

I took a bunch of pictures of both bikes first the slower Lapierre then the two bikes and then the giant here
http://imgur.com/a/G1MST#7

Tyre pressure is for both bikes on the 30s

I think tyre size is 26" (not sure) tho, as you can probably see from the pictures, they are the same size

Edit: very similar tires (if anything the giant has more grip), suspension exists and set to as stiff as possible on both (the test was performed on road),
As for different gearing I have no idea how to check
rider position feels very similar
Will take pics today and these tests are done on roads (ie while commuting)

My measurement was done using strava but also I felt it was harder to ride and thought I might have been slower

Cheers

If you're measuring via Strava, keep in mind there are a lot of factors that can play into your time.  Unless you're averaging many rides over time on each of those bikes, thing like wind, clothing, what you ate, etc, can all play in to the time you post to Strava.


Is it safe to ride with one missing chainring bolt? I have a double chainring on my road bike but one of my chainring bolts has broken so I'm left with only 4 out of the 5 I'm supposed to have. Is it safe to ride? (just until replacements arrive)

As long as you don't take your bike on a long strenuous ride or torque the snot out of it, you should be OK. Make sure the remaining 4 are properly tightened. Normal commuting should be fine.


Can I setup my road bike, mountain bike, and fat bike with the same set of shoes with MTB SPD cleats? Can I setup my road bike, mountain bike, and fat bike with the same set of MTB SPD cleats?

Basically I have 3 bikes with VERY different cranksets and Q-factors that range from 148mm to 164mm to 230mm.  I have the same Shimano MTB SPD style pedals on each of the bikes.

Is it reasonable to expect that I won’t have any ill effects from setting up my shoes on one bike and using the same shoes across all bikes? Or will I have knee issues from having my body aligned differently on each bike’s crankset due to the difference in Q-factor / stance width?

You don't say how long you spend on each bike, and it makes a difference. Many people only spend long enough on one of their bikes for Q factor to be an issue. The other issue is how sensitive you are to fit.

Personal experience: I've got a tourer and a hybrid (MTB BB, noticeably wider) with SPDs (and sometimes on the hardtail which is also wider than the tourer).  I use the same shoes on all of them. Switching from one to the other, the clipping in takes a little getting used to, which indicates the change. I haven't had knee trouble from switching (though I have had a little trouble recently which I blame on finding my saddle lower than it should have been just after a 330km overnighter). But I tend to only go up to about 70km on the MTB (road-riding to the trails for example) and these days do less than that on the hybrid (though it's fine up to 70km as well). Generally I seem to be fairly easy to fit once the bike is big enough.

Realistically the distance between your feet will change by (very nearly) that much whether you're clipped in or not. All the cleats will do is prevent you compensating by angling your feet. That may even be a good thing.


Is there a guide available for determining pedal/cleat combinations? I bought a Kona Coiler mountain bike at an estate sale, and the sellers didn't have any information about the pedals on it. I'm looking to buy some shoes and cleats, but I'm not sure what to buy because I haven't been able to identify the proper cleats for the pedal.

When I've ridden mountain bikes in the past, the pedals were the "egg beater" type, which these pedals definitely are not.

If someone can identify the pedal type from the photo, that would be helpful. Even better would be a link to some sort of guide I can use in the future to identify pedals and match them to the appropriate cleat.

Here are the pedals in question (the nickel is there for scale):

Those look like Shimano mountain SPD PD-M545 pedals:

Looks like a pretty good match to the picture on the Shimano site, but if you don't see a Shimano logo on them, they could be third party compatible pedals.

The cleats look like this:

I'm not aware of a guide that compares all pedal styles, but there are not that many pedal types in common use and most styles are different enough from each other that you can easily tell the difference between them.


Pitted Cups - Can I get away with this level of pitting? I have two bottom bracket cups that I'd prefer to reuse (finding Avocet Bottom Bracket cups even on Ebay is hard!). I have purchased a replacement Avocet spindle of the correct size. I'm wondering if I also need to replace the cups. The condition of the cups is better than the condition of the axle. The pitting in the picture is only on one side of the cup - I tilted to cup to catch the light so that the picture would take - and it's not on the side of the cup that is hidden from view in the picture.  Here's a picture of the cups. What do you think?
edit: They are French threaded bottom bracket cups for an Avocet/Ofmega crankset that was known for using their own taper. The French threading is the real issue, and it's well known to be a problem. Now people use ISO aka BSA, British, threading, or, less commonly, Italian threading, both of which are non compatible. Additionally reaming and rethreading to those standards is not an easy option. You would have to add material and then do that.

My life has been such, living in this corner of the world, where it simply hasn't been an option to buy new.  And growing up here in a world before internet, if Lakeside Cyclery or Sears didn't have it, you weren't getting it anytime soon no matter the cash-flow. So...

One can often at least ease the pitting with the use of fine steel wool, fine grade sand paper, or a rotary tool spinning a ball-shaped grinding stone or felt cloth wheel & polishing compound.  It's always best to be conservative so I'd start with the steel wool first, and if I feel the benefit would out weigh the risk of damage that wrecks the piece, I move up the list I've put forth. I'll add here for general knowledge sake that regarding grinding or sanding a finish onto a work piece, the technique i advise is reversed.  One would typically start with more aggressive measures and work down to the finest finishing techniques. In fact that's what we'll end-up doing here---i finish a deal like this with #0000 steel wool.

I've had decent results getting pitted cone nuts and wheel cups into shape.  I define decent results here as grinding and rough feeling hubs spinning smoothly and quietly.  Reports from others whose bikes I've worked on reporting, "that wheel's still running great!" months after repair and repacking.  The times I've had occassion on my stuff to do this repair, ride for a few hundred miles and then dissect the hub, there hasn't been any real hints that it was doing more damage (wheel spun smooth, no appearance of unusual wear, the bearing balls came out looking quite the same as going in).  Anyway, this is obviously not as ideal as replacement, but I'm confident your cup will do fine for some time after this.  Quite frankly, cleaning and repacking a hub or bottom bracket with good clean grease (and new bearing balls if at all possible--there a dime a piece or less) is probably the chief reason for these successful out comes.

Here's a few tips:  Take locking pliers (ie: hemostats) or a needle-nose pliers and from a pad of steel wool (#0000--very fine), rip or cut a 2.5 cm wide strip. Fold and roll this strip to a general shape of a cylinder. Grasp with the pliers the ends of the cylinder causing it to bulge into a hard, round tip. Continue to hold this shape while working it aroun the inside of the cup. I go all around the cup, working the pitted area a little more.  Same technique if sandpaper required. No lower than 220 grit.  Care should be used to not involve tip of pliers into the cup. Also, prior to repacking CLEAN! out the cup or hub of all grit or steel wool fibers.
If you use the rotary tool, practice before hand and just barely touch the cup. I only do the pitted areas with this and then finish whole piece with fine paper then wool.
For cone nuts I'll have a thick piece of steel wool over an axle spacer, and with the race of the cone nut, I pinch the wool into the spacer hole and turn.
There've been times that I've paused in this endeavor only to find the pits were growing larger and more appeared where the already stressed metal had flaked away under the addition abrasion applied.  If you note this i would stop and just proceed with repacking and new bearings.  There's not a great deal of thickness to a cup (as compared to a cone nut)which makes it much tougher and riskier to hand-machine a cup's race smooth again.
Get er done.


What bike is better 2010 Trek FX 7.5 or 2015 Trek FX 7.2? My budget allows for maxing out at $500. The LBS sells the new 2015 Trek FX 7.2 for $450. I also found an excellent condition 2010 Trek FX 7.5 for roughly the same price. Assuming the used bike is in excellent condition with less than 300 miles of use, should I be worried about the 5 year model difference of the two bikes?

I'm upgrading from a 2008 Trek Navigator 3.0 that is too cumbersome for longer rides. I ride trails with the kids, charity rides, and occasional commuting.

These are the specs as specified by Trek's website. I realize the 2010 FX 7.5 has better specs but should I be worried about their age? Or with these bike components is usage more important than age?

2010 FX 7.5

Frame: FX Alpha Black Aluminum
Fork: Bontrager Nebula, carbon w/Clix dropouts
Wheels: Bontrager SSR w/Clix
Tyres: Bontrager Race Lite Hard-Case, 700x32c
Shifters: Shimano Deore trigger, 9 speed
Front derailleur: Shimano Deore
Rear derailleur: Shimano Deore LX
Crank: Shimano M443 Octalink 48/36/26
Cassette: SRAM PG950 11-26, 9 speed
Pedals: Alloy body w/alloy cage
Saddle: Bontrager H2 Flex Form
Seatpost: Bontrager Nebula
Handlebar: Bontrager SSR OS, 25mm rise
Stem: Bontrager SSR, 10 degree
Headset: Aheadset Slimstak w/semi-cartridge bearings, sealed
Brakeset: Avid SD SD-3 w/Tektro adjustable reach levers

2015 FX 7.2

Frame: FX Alpha Silver Aluminium, DuoTrap S compatible, rack and mudguard mounts
Fork: High-tensile steel w/lowrider mounts, CLIX dropouts
Front hub: Formula TK31 alloy
Rear hub: Formula FM32 alloy
Rims: Bontrager AT-750 32-hole double-walled alloy
Tyres: Bontrager H2 Hard-Case Lite w/puncture resistant belt, 700x35c
Shifters: Shimano Altus EF51, 8 speed
Front derailleur: Shimano M191
Rear derailleur: Shimano Acera M360
Crank: Shimano M131, 48/38/28 w/chainguard
Cassette: Shimano HG31 11-32, 8 speed
Pedals: Nylon body w/alloy cage
Chain: KMC Z7
Saddle: Bontrager SSR
Seatpost: Bontrager SSR, 27.2mm, 12mm offset
Handlebar: Bontrager Low Riser, 25.4mm, 15mm rise
Stem: Bontrager SSR, 25.4mm,10 degree
Headset: VP, semi-cartridge bearings, sealed
Brakeset: Tektro alloy linear-pull brakes, Shimano Altus levers
Grips: Bontrager Satellite

At the level of bike you are looking at (2010 Trek 7.5 FX), most of the components will be easily found at your local bike shop or online. At this level, most manufacturers will use standard components which are easily obtainable, mostly because using any non-standard components would end up costing more, as they would only be produced in low quantities. Also, because they use standard components, and many other bikes use the same components, there is a big market for replacement parts, which means that finding replacement parts should be easy and inexpensive.  Assuming the used bike is in good condition, you shouldn't be worried about being able to find replacement parts when the time comes. As you move up to more exotic/expensive bikes, you'll start to see more unique parts that may be harder or more expensive to replace on older models.


Sram X5 RD limit screw A RD was recently lightly smashed in. I straightened the derailleur hanger "by hand" and now it is "good enough" with some chain rub on the cogs. I set out to readjust the rear gears but am facing the following problem: no matter what I do, the chain is never prevented from dropping between the cogs and spokes at low gear ratio.

I took a closer look and while the high limit screw rests against a wide platform on the body of the RD, the low limit screw seems to resist against the thin wall of the parallelogram!

My hypothesis is that the parallelogram is bent and "too open", so a suitable repair would be to bend it inward a little so that the screw makes contact. But that sounds too sketchy - why wouldn't there be a platform for the screw to resist against? Am I in error?

You're quite correct, the limit screws rest against the thin metal of the parallelogram arms, and these have been bent in your case. Good catch.

It is the same design on my SRAM X7 rear mech, and presumably in many other designs as manufacturers balance cost, weight, and perfomance in normal use.

My Shimano RD5700 has the screw resting against a slightly stronger looking position, closer the the root end of the plates they rest against where the plates would be stiffer. This looks like they would be more resilient to the kind of bending damage you have suffered, however I once replaced a Tiagra RD where the screw had punched through the metal of the mech and become inoperative/irrepairable. So that failed in a crash too.

You could say someone used the mech in a situation 'beyond its design capabilities'. If you can bend it back so the plates are straighter, the limit screws should work again, and the geometry of the mech may even be a little better. The next question might be whether the bending damage and re-alignment will significantly weaken the part, leading to failure and more expensive repair balanced against cost of replacement now.


Have you built your own components? I got a commuter rig from a mailorder mike operation and would love to replace the stem with something I've made.

I am getting into some CNC/casting/woodworking was curious if people have fabricated their own parts. I've always wanted to at least mockup my own parts in wood.

But I wonder: has anyone gone the next step to either cast parts in smelted aluminum or CNC'd them out of billet aluminum? Or even kept the part wood and placed the proper metal fittings into it so that it could function like it's metal counter part?

I know it must sound like like I'm taking crazy pills but I can't seem to get this idea out of my head...

There are people who are making custom parts for bicycles, also stems in particular. Whole bicycle frames as well.

But it is a non trivial craft that takes time, practice and determination to master properly. Not to mention that failure of some parts can cause serious injuries, so tread carefully.


Securing sliding bar grips without hair spray? I have some Bell anatomic handlebar grips that tend to slide (rotate) on the bar. I've read that using hair spray is useful, but tends to be rather permanent. I'd like to make the grip tackier but not a permanent application. Would any of these techniques be worthwhile?

a strip of masking tape on the bar, or run along the inside of the grip?
a modest swipe of honey in the grip before application?
a segment of innertube between the two?

Anything else I should consider?

Update

I have rubbed the inside of the grips out with an isopropyl soaked rag and rubbed down the handlebars of two of the bikes and this has helped a lot. Some advice I got from my favorite LBS mechanic was specific to the black tooth finish on my SKS bars: his advice was to wrap bars with a bit of electrical tape. I will try that, as the grips on the black bars are a bit firmer, but are still not great. Thank you for your answers!

Update

A single wrap of electrical tape on the black SKS bars was just the trick! I did a spread spiral with the tape, and was able to twist the grips on in the same direction as the spiral. (No hair spray has yet made it to my shed.)

Wipe the bar with isopropyl alcohol. It evaporates completely and will leave dry rubber against a clean bar.

If they slip and slide after more than about 24 hours left alone, the you may need to replace the grips (assuming they're not new).

The high alcohol content is what makes hairspray effective, and using isopropyl alcohol cuts out the sticky residue of the hairspray that is made up of its remaining content.

A grip left on its own will bond to the bar after some time, even if installed completely without any additives, so you still may need to cut them loose when it's time to change them.

Alternatively, use either a lock on grip, or a wire twist to secure a loose grip without lock ons.

As for honey, masking tape, or adding a piece of tube, it would be very difficult to install them, honey would be more permanent by far than hairspray, and there are better alternatives.

Hairspray, btw, is not permanent. It's just difficult to remove without a compressor or damaging the grip.


Washed my bike with water and muc-off only, now my brakes are weak I took part in my first bike event at the weekend, a very muddy "gravel" ride which by the end had my bike covered in mud! Rather than put it straight in the car, I took it to the muc-off tent and cleaned it with a little of their spray (mainly on the chain/cassette/crank), water, and a soft brush. When I got home I applied wd-40 to the aforementioned parts only.

Riding it today I noticed that my disc drakes were much weaker than they were before. Given that I haven't used any soap, or applied oil to the rotors, am I right to think that this should improve with use and that I haven't ruined my pads? They're only a couple of weeks old!

Thanks :)

No, they probably will NOT get better without help.

The cleaner that you used is probably the problem. Maybe WD-40 overspray too; that stuff gets everywhere and it only takes a bit to ruin your brake pads. BTW WD-40 is usually NOT the best choice for ANYWHERE on a bike.

Disc brakes are great in a lot of ways but they have a couple vulnerabilities. One of these is that the pads can be contaminated and then the brakes don't stop well. Although you can soak disc brakes in mud repeatedly and they'll be fine, a drop of a solvent, cleaner, or lubricant can ruin the pads permanently.

No matter if they're "mechanical" cable-actuated, hydraulic with mineral oil or DOT; bottom line, the brake pad material is super sensitive to fouling. I got brake fluid on my (metallic material) pads years ago and brought them back to life by removing them and soaking in various solvents including alcohol and acetone and scrubbing with a toothbrush. Another time I got an unknown contaminant on organic pads, tried the same technique and... all I got was a bunch of contaminated solvents and another trashed toothbrush. I even tried sanding the pads and they still didn't work.

So, you can try the remove-soak-scrub-sand technique, or go buy yourself some new brake pads.

Just make sure the braking surface on the rotor is CLEAN before you put in the new pads.


Should I get wider tyres/tires for my tour if I'm not going to go off-road? I'm going to do a ten-day long tour down the west coast of New Zealand. I'll have some luggage in rear panniers, but no tent (staying with friends and in backpackers accommodation). There'll be a fair bit of uphill and downhill on some days. But I don't forsee that I'll hit gravel - I'll likely stay on sealed roads. Of course, it may rain (as if that isn't obvious).

My bike is a steel framed road bike, and I currently ride with 23mm tyres. Because it's an older bike I can fit wider tyres on, which some recommend for touring, but I wonder if it's worth it? In the context of my tour, if I went to 28mm tyres what would the advantages/disadvantages be?

I have seen fully-loaded tourists ride successfully with lightweight racing bikes (of years ago) on what were then called 7/8" tires (which is 22.2mm).  I've also seen them lay their bikes down in the parking lot at lunch and have the tires explode.  (Don't ask me what mechanism was involved, but it happened at least 3 times in a week among a group of maybe 20 on the lightweight bikes, among a larger group of about 200.)

As a commuter/tourist I favor wider tires (I currently ride 35s), for the slightly smoother ride, better handling on rough pavement, less frequent airing up, and better weight-carrying ability.

But the main question in your case is whether the tires can simply carry the weight, at full pressure, without compressing too much.  Load up your bike (with dummy weights if necessary), sit on it (or have a friend of the same weight do so), and see how the tires look.


What makes the bicycles in Amsterdam suitable for riding with jeans on? What makes the bicycles in Amsterdam suitable for riding with jeans on?

The Dutch are known to wear regular clothes while cycling rather than cycling specific clothing.

In cycling forums, people often say that jeans are uncomfortable for cycling especially in the rain. When jeans are wet, friction increases which can cause chafing and increase the wear and tear on the jeans and the saddle. The Dutch must have a way of wearing jeans comfortably since regular clothes include jeans. Cycling friendly pants tend to be silkier and thinner so that friction decreases, and more flexible so that there's less pressure on our perineum. Even with a saddle cutout, the seams on jeans can put too much pressure there.

I'm thinking that these are the possible factors:

Saddle height
Saddle setback
Upright posture
Cadence
Power
Coasting percentage
Saddle shape
Pants sold in the Netherlands tend to be more cycling friendly such as
jeans with softer seams
The commuting times are too short for the discomfort to develop

Also, can you have a fast or powerful human powered bike that's jeans friendly? Like hybrid, cyclocross, MTB, and road bikes.

Someone who's into fitness and speed, bikes to work, and wouldn't want to carry an extra pair of pants would be interested in getting that answer.

In places where there are lots of bikes, most people who are riding them are making short journeys purely for transport. For a short ride of a few kilometers, it really doesn't matter what you're wearing. Any clothes that are comfortable to wear in general will be comfortable to wear on a bike for fifteen minutes.

People who are riding longer distances, pushing harder and aiming for fitness rather than just getting from A to B will start to consider clothing that's more oriented towards exercising and people who are going even farther and pushing even harder will start to wear cycling-specific clothing.

I see this exact thing when I cycle at home in Oxford. If I cycle directly into town, most of the people I see on bikes are just wearing whatever clothes will be appropriate at their destination. If I take a more circuitous route around the outskirts of town before heading into the centre through an area where not many people live, I see a lot of people wearing "general exercise" clothing. If I head away from town, out into the countryside, most of the cyclists I see are wearing clothing designed specifically for cycling.


Looking for ideas - Decent cheap 26" 1 1/8" suspension fork for 1996 Trek 950 mountain bike Goal:

Replace rigid fork with short-travel suspension fork for under $200 (used OK, switching to threadless from threaded OK; standard 100mm QR axle preferred but 15mmx100 through axle OK; V-brake mounting bosses preferred but disk-brake-only OK)

Seems like short travel (e.g. 60mm) will be needed to fit A2C; has low-end fork suspension technology advanced enough that a recent cheap air shock would be better than a 15+ year old used fork like maybe a Judy?

My bike:

1996 Trek 950 mountain bike; 26" wheels, cro-moly frame, original rigid chrome fork using 1 1/8" threaded headset.
Trek tech manual says geometry is designed for axle-to-crown race (A2C) distance of 408-430mm, but I would be OK with up to 440mm.
Tech manual link: http://www.vintage-trek.com/Trek-Fisher-Klein-Lemond/1996specmanualTrek.pdf
Bikepedia link: https://www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?item=50637

Honestly, it seems that you want too much of everything at the same time: cheap, good, compatible with your depreciated frame suspension fork. You might reconsider your constraints.

Compatibility comes first, otherwise there is not much sense in getting a new fork. You'll need something for 26" wheels and with a straight 1⅛" steering tube, which is not what modern forks offer. I would say the majority of aftermarket suspension forks are for 27.5" or 29" wheels and likely to have a tapered 1⅛" - 1½" steering tube.

Then you have two remaining exclusive options in the requirements space.

Cheap — find a new OEM fork for entry-level bikes. There are decent chances to find something for 26" wheels, with V-brakes and straight steering tube. But such a fork is not likely to turn out to be "good" in terms of suspension performance and longevity.
Good. Go for a hunt on vintage market or consider having a modern fork with all mandatory upgrades it brings with it. Neither option would be cheap. For example, a new MRP Loop SL for 26" and straight steering tube costs USD 800+. Add to the price the front wheel change (through axle), front bake change (disc brakes).

Yet, finding a used old fork still looks more promising, and there is always a chance to find a deal.

On the last compatibility note, the 60 mm of travel is something not commonly seen for MTB these days, even on entry level forks. There is e.g. Lauf Carbonara gravel
fork, but it is not something you'll want; besides, it is not straight steerer neither for 26" wheels.


Trick or tool to help line up 48 splined crank arms Besides eyeballing it and comparing the line to the seat tube, are there any tricks to getting 48 splined crank arms perfectly aligned? I must have spent a solid 15 minutes looking at them from every angle until I was satisfied.

If your bearings are decent, just take the non-drive pedal off and let the pedal weight pull the other side down, or slowly let it fall from slightly off center. This is how I could tell with my Bullseye cranks, besides hopping on and trying to pedal it. If that doesn't work then I'd try tying a heavy weight or looping a paint can around one of the pedals close to the crank.

You're looking for a 7.5 degree distance, so on 185mm cranks that's 24mm or nearly and inch of diference between splines. Weighting the opposite side enough should make it clear. I then took some nail polish and marked both the crank and axle so I didn't have to play this game again.


Kids bike front wheel falls to the side while on kickstand My daughters bike's front wheel doesn't stay straight when it is on the kickstand. Our other 2 bikes only slightly go to the left but her front end "falls" to the left like something is loose. Hopefully I'm explaining the problem enough.

EDIT: Visually I don't care. It just never used to do that. And my daughters say it seems to feel shake/wobbly now. They don't like to ride it because of that.  The bike does not fall over while using the kickstand.

Bicycle handlebars and fork are supposed to turn feely, so the fork turning to the side the bike leans is not a problem.

It may be the angle of the fork, weight of the bars or the angle the kickstand put the bike at that make it do this more than other bikes.

You can check the headset bearings (the bearings that the fork turns on) are loose by holding the front brake on and rocking the bike backwards and forwards. If you can feel the fork moving in the frame the bearings are loose, of you cannot feel any movement that are fine.


Panniers and handlebar pack I am planning to tour and would prefer highly visible panniers and handlebar packs.  Also waterproof.  Do racks come with panniers? Suggested brands please?

Racks generally do not come paired with panniers, although there are some exceptions. Waterproof panniers are widely available. There are some high-vis panniers out there, and some that have reflective patches.

We generally avoid specific product recommendations here on bicycles.se, but Ortlieb is a standby pannier maker.


Bladed spokes on drive side, regular on other side Yesterday, I checked out a Cannondale Synapse with Mavic Aksium wheels. One strange detail caught my eye - the rear wheel had bladed spokes on the drive side, and regular, cylindrical spokes on the non-drive side.

Is this a feature or did the shopkeeper mess around with the wheels?

Your first, and possibly best, place to start researching is the Cannondale website.  It appears that 2 models of the Synapse, the Synapse Carbon Disc Ultegra and Synapse Carbon Disc Ultegra DI2 come standard with Mavic Aksium Disc wheels.  You could then refer to the Mavic website to get the specs on those.


diamondback cobra 24 rear brakes squeal horribly what can I do to at least tone it down diamondback cobra 24 rear brakes are squealing loudly all the time it doesn't matter if it's wet or dry and the brakes are lined up perfectly and appear to be new. The brakes are not marking the rim.
This bike has V brakes.

Often this is the result of poor "toe-in." As the wheel turns while braking, the brake pads' mounting posts flex slightly and the pads buck against the rim and bounce back, causing the squeal you're experiencing.
The fix is to adjust the brake pads so the frontmost end of the pad is slightly closer to the rim. This makes it so that the pad is pulled square with the rim as it makes contact. The pads' post should affix to the brake arm with a bolt and a dished washer. Loosen that bolt, rotate the pad slightly, and retighten. Repeat for all the pads. This bike has V-brakes, and this can be tricky to get right.


Windshield on a bike I'm doing a bunch of work on my bike today, and had an idea. My biggest speed killer especially downhill is air resistance. I have a mountain bike but I only ride on the road.

I've been looking at my bike and it would be fairly easy to attach a piece of curved perplex from above the front tyre to a few inches above the handle bars. Motor bikes have little screens like this above the handlebars which seem to deflect the air over the riders head if he puts his head down, so for example I could smoke a cigarette on my last motorbike without the wind bothering me much.

Has anyone done this? Or is there some reason it would be a bad idea?

Update:- After quite a bit of messing around and testing it coasting down a hill with and without. I found that going downhill it does increase speed and comfort. However it's in the bin as totally unsuitable for the tropics since I am an aircooled gadget and when cycling hard into a headwind when I need airflow the most I don't get the same cooling as I do without it.

So it was a total success in terms of the question (downhill) but no good for other reasons.

Windscreens are more about rider comfort than decreasing air resistance. I would think particularly with the upright riding position of a mountain bike that your hypothetical installation of a windscreen would increase air resistance, unfortunately, by expanding the area of mass that would push against the air.

The common advice for getting more aerodynamic on a bike boils down to get low and small. This is why cyclists trying to hit speed records always duck down while gripping drop-style handlebars. They also wear tight-fitting clothes, use specially-shaped helmets, get a bike that is engineered specifically to cut through the air quite efficiently, etc.

So I'd conclude that if what you're looking for is not so much maximizing your possible speed but rather getting the wind out of your face, there's nothing inherently wrong with installing a windscreen. But if you try pushing into a head-on wind, I'm sure it would take a lot more effort from you.


What derailleur hanger do I need for my Merida Speeder 200? My rear derailleur hanger on my Merida Speeder 200 (2019) is slightly bent, resulting in bad shifting across the whole range.

While I found an explanation on how to bend the hanger back I want to buy a spare one in case I need to replace it.

However,  I found a lot of different hangers online. Which one do I need?

I contacted Merida and they told me that I need this hanger which has Merida product ID 2311004627.

Some other links to the same hanger (no affiliation):

cicloscorredor
cicliserino
ebay


Is SRAM road 11-speed 11-42 cassette compatible with Shimano MTB 11 speed? I know that SRAM has adopted Shimano specs for chains and cassettes so they should be interchangeable but before I buy, I'd like to confirm. Are these cassettes interchangeable:

SRAM PG-1130 11-42 - marketed for NX (MTB) 1x11 and Apex (road)
1x11
Shimano SLX CS-M7000 11-42 11-speed

Yes.

Same number of speeds, same range, same Hyperglide II freehub body compatibility.


Fix rust on front wheel How do I fix and prevent this rust on the front wheel?

The rust shown is purely cosmetic.
Rust removal / Cleaning needs to be done with care. Even with the rubber seal, theres a chance of getting contamination into the bearings.  I would use a small wire brush and gently take the worst of off, then spray the surfaces with WD40, a silicon spray or other water repealant/lube spray. Not too much as you don't want it in the bearings. Oil or grease can also be used but be careful not to leave too much on - apply and wipe with cloth to remove excess.
If the bike is stored outside or in a damp location you may want give the metal surfaces a quick squirt regularly- especially after washing the bike.


How to use a stirrup pump on kids bikes - no space for chuck? My last bike experience was about 56 years ago. I now want to inflate the tyres of my grandchildren's bikes. I have a steel stirrup pump (floor pump) with presta and schrader orifices in the chuck. I'm in the UK, where everything seems to be schrader. I'm assuming the schrader orifice is the hole without a poppet.

Problem:  the chuck is too big to enable the lever to be extended when connecting to the valve on the wheel. (For an adult bike, the lever in the neutral position would be at right-angles to the valve. In the working position, it would be inline with the valve.)

Question:  I read about "flexible extenders" in relation to kids' bikes. (In the old days, this thing lived inside the handle of a straight pump.) I'm wondering if a schrader flexible extender would do job? For example:

http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/HalfordsProductDetailsLiteView?addToBasket=true&addToBasketSource=1&cmTagValue=8&storeId=10001&langId=-1&catalogId=10151&categoryId=273923&productId=922475&TB_C_ID=productdetails&width=830&height=440&dialogType=AJAX&dialogTitle=Halfords+Schrader+Bike+Pump+Adaptor&openedFrom=Browse+PDP

If the above monster link fails, this link might work:

https://bit.ly/2EW7b4P

If the answer to my question is "yes", do I simply push the left-hand end shown in the link into the schrader hole in the chuck, and extend the lever?

Sadly no - that short hose would have been used on an old-school frame pump, and yes, it would have been stored in the handle.  The host/pump thread is not the same size or pitch as a schrader.

The threads are not opposites, so that hose won't go into a schrader chuck.

Compare the end with these adapters - see how the brassy one looks like another schrader valve, and the topeak one looks larger?

Your other option is to simply lean the valve stem over a bit, and see if that gives you room to flip the lever.  The valve stem may tear off, more likely if its an old tube.

Or since its the same as a car tyre, take the bike down to the local service station and use their air bowser to fill the tyre.  Not sure about your location but here most fuel station air pumps would fit fine on any little wheel's valve stem.


Super Heavyweight Biker keeps destroying Dutch bikes So I've had two Dutch style bikes and I keep breaking the spokes on them. The last time I had a custom wheel built using good components by a well known shop here (sapim and mavic components)... the spokes loosened after just one week. Even the shitty stock wheels I had on before lasted for longer.

I'm basically giving up on Dutch bikes and having other people built parts for me or repair my bikes. It just seems that I'm so far off the scale (literally) that no one has any experience with building working bikes for people my size (370 pounds).

From reading online it seems that the only working solutions have been 29er Mountain Bikes with freakishly large tires or cycles from this company in the US called Workman. I'm just wondering if there is not a middle way, I can't see myself using one of those riding the streets of London just yet. Even though the potholes here probably are comparable to offroad usage...

Any suggestions? One thing I have not yet tried is basically getting a full on Tandem hub and back wheel with 40 or maybe even 46 spokes.

I'd appreciate input from the few riders my size that I've seen on here.

My experience is with load bikes rather than people who are loads, but the principle is the same. A tandem rated wheel is your best bet, and possibly a heavier frame. Unfortunately most Dutch bikes are built for tall Dutch people who are generally not that heavy. 370 pounds is about 170kg, which is heavy. Pacific Island rugby player heavy.

What I would do is another custom wheel for your current bike, but with everything focussed on the weight. You can get hubs that are rated to a lot of weight, and Rohloff for example rate their hubs for tandem use even with only 32 spokes. But you should try for more spokes, I think, like the DT Swiss 540 Tandem with 36 or 40 spokes, or if your bike will take it the Halo Dozen with 12mm axle. Pair that with a heavy eyeletted rim like the Velocity Chukker or Mavic 719 and get it put together by someone who builds a lot of wheels.

Getting a custom wheel built with exact components can be mildly annoying, and not necessarily cheaper or better than finding a decent bike shop and letting them recommend something for you. That way you get their warranty. I suggest a load bike shop like Practical Cycles (found via google, I've never been there or to any part of the UK). If you do that and they get it wrong, it's on them to fix it. The magic words are

  fit for purpose  The goods should be fit for the purpose they are
  supplied for, as well as any specific purpose you made known to the
  retailer before you agreed to buy the goods.

(italics mine) Which incidentally means you should be able to get a complete refund for your current wheel if they can't fix it.

When we had this problem with a customer at the bike shop I worked at we first re-tensioned their existing wheel, but it broke more spokes the same day he got the bike back. Luckily he came back, because we were at least the third bike shop he'd been to, and even though I said "look, this probably won't work but I think it's worth trying" I wouldn't have been surprised to have him disappear. So we put together the heaviest duty rear wheel we could find, a downhill MTB hub we had in the shop with a 36 hole Chukker and somewhat oversize spokes (3mm straight gauge instead of butted just so it looked stronger). When I built it I took extra time to get it exactly right, and ran over it again after a test ride. He rang a few months later to say he hadn't had any more problems and just wanted to tell us.

(editing in some comments)

My feeling is that you can spend a lot of time and money trying to avoid just paying for something that will work.

The derailleur wheel is dished it's not as strong, as Rohloff discuss here and this Rohloff fan page might help :).

Use a 26" wheel in whatever frame you have as you will be using disk brakes so it's easy. A slightly smaller wheel is slightly stronger. Also, look closely at the rear wheel of this thing. That's a 9 speed 20"/406 wheel with 36 spokes that I threw together the night before I left on that ride. Normally it had four large panniers plus stuff on the rack, but a band is more interesting to look at. It was still going strong several years later when it was stolen. Smaller wheels make everything easier. If I could suggest a 406 wheel bike for you I would


How to: Sram 2x10 to 1x10 I'm thinking on converting my Sram transmission 2x10 to 1x10, this is with a single chain ring.

My biggest doubt is how to prevent cross chaining, do I need to get a special chain or how do I prevent the excessive wear out and grainy feeling when I'm in the biggest cassette ring.

If it's a mountain bike, you could use a chain guide like this one. The rollers keep the chain aligned on the chain ring at all times and the rear provides tension as it normally would.

NB: I'm not necessarily recommending this one in particular, just it or something like it. I have no experience with this particular model.

I'm not sure if they make anything comparable for road setups. I wasn't able to find anything with a quick Googling.


Drilling and cutting rack mounting bracket arms I bought a rear rack so I can finally switch from backpack to pannier. My bicycle is 28" so I picked a rack that can cover 26-28" with "adjustable height screws".

Upon trying to mount it, I realized that the mounting bracket arms are too long for my frame.

Going back to the store and trying to replace the rack, the guy at the store tells me this is the norm and that I should just cut the arms to the length and drill the new holes for attaching them to the rack myself.

Since the part of the world I'm living in isn't exactly known for an amazing customer service, I just wanted to ask if it really is the norm or if the guy just blew me off, and I should go to the store again.

Thanks!

I've got a very similar rack and avoided cutting the arms only by using one screw per arm instead of the two in your first picture (at the rack end). Crossing the arms over and using one screw per arm shortens the effective length still further. You might need to bend them a little bit they're definitely designed for that. I actually ran with only one arm on that rack on one bike, as the left arm interfered with the brake unavoidably. On my similar rack the arms are stainless steel and cutting/drilling seems like a bit too much effort (my drills are probably not sharp enough).

I've fitted about 10 racks across 6 bikes. Nearly all have needed some sort of modification, or fittings swapped between racks.


Why shouldn't I care what model/make/year my bicycle is? We often get questions on bicycles.stackexchange about identifying a bicycles manufacturer, model, make, and year.  Often these questions are downvoted or closed -- usually with a comment attached to them that it's not necessary to know the exact model/make/year of a bicycle if you want to fix, repair, or ride your bike.
Why should owners not care about the model/make/year of their bicycle?
Especially when it comes to less expensive bikes (aka BSOs) and BMX bicycles?
This is intended as a canonical question that we can point closed questions to.
Also see

How can I tell what year my bike was made?
What is the purpose of a serial number?   (generally not helpful for identifying a brand/model)

The problem with the question is not the owner's interest in the answer - it is clearly there. The problem is that the answer has almost no value for the community of this site:

most generic bikes are hard to identify to begin with
most successful identification will be based on a photo which cannot be used to answer the same question again because questions and answers are centred around searchable text and tags.

In total, there is too little to gain from answers for the community in the short and in the long run to make them worthwhile. Hence, they should be banned in my opinion.


What's the best way to secure helmet straps? On every helmet I've worn there is always some extra length to the straps that run through the buckle that secures the helmet to ones head.  Most helmet's these days come with one or two small rubber rings or something similar in which to loop the extra length on the strap.

Is there a better way to do this than the ways I've tried?  The most obvious way is to simply cut the slack off but I'm not really after that.  I'd like to see how others finish their helmet straps to be the most comfortable around the neck and the least intrusive.  Below are pictures of:

unfinished straps

method 1

method 2

I've been riding with method 1 and method 2 for awhile.  Is there a better way to secure the straps other than cutting?

Following the advice of those who commented: I came upon this solution.

Cut the access length (about 1 cm), leaving enough for adjustment
Melt the ends of the straps with a torch
Use electrical tape to wrap the ends tightly so they resemble 'method 1' but without the excess length.


Sharing bike trainer between 11spd and 8spd bikes I have an 11spd 11-30 cassette both in my bike and in my direct bike trainer.
My girlfriend recently purchased a road bike with an 8spd 11-34 cassette. What are our options for sharing the trainer? Our bike sizes are fairly different (54cm vs 44cm).

(I guess this is "easy" but not sure if practical): Swap the trainer cassettes every time: I put on the 11spd and use it, she takes it off and puts the 8spd cassette before using the trainer.
Keep the 8spd on the trainer. Will the 11spd bike work with the 8spd trainer? Maybe in ERG mode with no shifting?

What other options would you recommend?

The 11 speed shifter, derailleur and chain will not shift properly with the 8 speed cassette.

As the number of sprockets in cassettes increased, the spacing was made progressively narrower, and chains were made progressively also. Your 11 speed shifter/derailleur combination will not move the chain far enough to shift properly on an 8 speed cassette.

If you leave the shifter in a single gear it will run, but you'll have to mess with the indexing to get it correct on the sprocket. You'll then have to re-adjust the indexing when you go back to the 11 speed cassette.


Sunglasses for commuting? I've recently started commuting via bike to work (6.5mi each way), and am looking for advice on gear... specifically sunglasses (which I find useful to prevent dust in eyes and to help block the ample sun).

Currently I'm using an expensive pair of Oakleys (not meant for riding per-se), but I'm wondering if I should get a specific pair of glasses that are preferred by riders.

Any suggestions on brands or even specific models would be nice.

If you don't want to spend lots of money you can still get the most relevant characteristics in a pair of safety glasses.

You can find these at just about any hardware store and they:

wrap around,
are impact resistant,
block UV,
don't look half bad
come in clear and tinted (and are cheap enough to get one of each usually)


When or how often should I replace my bike helmet? I’ve fallen a couple times, but no serious damage is visible on the helmet except for a couple divots here and there.

Should I consistently be replacing my helmet after a certain amount of time?  After every relatively serious fall?

Helmets should be replaced roughly every 5 years and after any crash where your head makes contact with the ground.

Helmets will crumble, compress or otherwise deform in sometimes hard to see ways when you hit the deck. The structural integrity of the thing will be massively diminished after even a relatively tame fall. This is one area where you don't want to mess around much.


Are modern clipless shoes and pedals that much better than toe clips and straps? I've recently returned to cycling after a couple of decades, and I'm trying to get familiar with the current gear and components.

I still use toe clips and straps on the pedals on my 1990 Trek road bike.  But clips and straps are so far out of fashion that you wouldn't even know that they used to be common.  I can hardly find a mention of them anywhere.

Why have the modern pedals and and shoes so completely replaced the old-style clips and straps?  Are they really that big an improvement?

Clipless pedals hold your feet more securely and release easier than toe-straps and clips. As you are probably aware, it is possible to to tighten straps to the point where they must be released before the foot can be removed from the pedal. A properly functioning clipless pedal will always release the riders foot.


Cracks on the side of fairly new tire Today I noticed that the sides of my rear tire has these cracks

The tires have been installed last June, and since then have always been used at the proper pressure (initially at the low end of suggested range, in the last 3 months in the upper end). The bike is stored in a shed or, when I go to work, in an underground garage.
Is it normal to have these cracks? I have always seen them on rather old tires.

They may have been stored improperly (e.g. near a heater/source of ozone) or been old when you bought them. Also, if you wash your bike, you might be washing away some of the protectants in the tire from the manufacturer. That being said, this wear does happen relatively quickly depending on the conditions.

In any case, tire cracks are not a big deal -- they don't affect the structural quality of a bicycle tire significantly. Replace the tire when you get punctures (which will likely happen before the cracks in the sidewalls and stuff become a problem) or you have structural damage (e.g. bulges in the sidewall). You can use armor all or something to help prevent cracks though.


Spoke Tension Guidelines Generally what should the tension be for spokes in wheels built up from scratch? For the front wheel? Should the tension be different for drive-side/non-drive-side spokes in the rear? Should tension run differently for different cycling applications E.G. mtb, cyclocross, pavement, touring, etc...

The rim manufacturer should have this information.  It depends a lot on the number of spokes, if the holes have eyelets (metal grommets) and the material of the rim.  Lower spoke count wheels need more tension.  Generally eyeleted wheels can handle more tension.

As for symmetrical tension, that also depends.  If the wheel is asymmetrical then your tension must be asymmetrical as well.   Most multispeed rear wheels are asymmetrical.  Many front disc (mtb, cyclocross, and even road wheels) are asymmetrical, although some are not.  "Quick Spoke" for the iPhone is a spoke length calculator that also provides relative tension information.

TL;DR Check with the manufacturer.


What is the best aero position in a mountain bike? I'm familiar with TT and road bikes with aero bars. However, I don't know what is the ideal aero position for a normal MTB (no aero bars).

I did some search and found these pics.

Hands on the middle of handlebar mimicking position on road bikes:

Source: www.cxmagazine.com

Hands on grips, leaning forward:

Source: www.solobike.it

I asked the question because my training program says "maintain aero position for x time". Wanted to make sure I'm doing it right.

Caveat: As mentioned by @R.Chung if you are uncertain, it is best to seek clarification from your coach.  You are after all paying for their services.

Short Answer

Bike positioning is always a compromise between goals, flexibility and ability. There are different aero positions and each will have different strengths and weaknesses (see my suggestions section).  I suspect the exact aero position isn't too much of a concern to your coach, rather s/he is likely interested in getting you to do  efforts in a more closed position to get you prepared for riding in an aero position during a race.

What follows is a more detailed explanation.

Why train in an aero position for XC racing?

As previously stated, I suspect the coaching exercise is to get you used to working hard in a closed body position. All aero positions will get the trunk of your body lower (to reduce your frontal area, making you more slip  through the air with less effort). Similar to road racing,  XC racing can also be a game of marginal gains.  If you can cut more drag on long flat sections than another rider, you might be able to pick up a position or maintain your positioning with less effort.

While aero positions can be useful in a race, a closed body position also affects your pedal stroke and your sustainable power output (typically reduced power) as you will be recruiting your muscle groups differently due to a different hip and back posture than you spend most of your riding hours in.  If you never train in this body position, it won't be an efficient position for you to ride in come race day.  Furthermore, spending time in this position it will also require you to hone your the stabilizer muscles needed to maintain that position.

In all likelihood your coach is trying to give you some training time in this type of position.  The exact aero position chosen will likely not matter too much, as long as you have a closed body position so you can train muscle recruitment and stabilizers.

Some Suggestions

My suggestion (confirm with your coach) would be to try a variety of positions (the two you found pictures of is a good starting point), but stick to one aero position per interval effort.  Then in each successive effort try a different posture. This will let you get a feel for how your body works.

In the two pictures you included, the first aero position one will have the lowest frontal area (aka fastest) as your arms are tucked in, but this will make the bike less stable and is likely not a good choice for rougher terrain.  The second position you show sacrifices some frontal area for stability.  Both have a reduced trunk angle, so both will work on your ability to recruit pedalling muscles while in a closed trunk position.

As a side note, you can also use the training time to find the best aero body trunk angle.  If you go too low you will lose more power than you save in reduced drag, too little of an angle and you may still be working too hard against the wind. Keep an eye on the transect between power (if you got it), speed and heart rate to try and find the best compromise for your current flexibility and training.

The "right" compromise is very rider specific and can change over time with training.


Switching from 118 link chain to 114 link chain - problematic or no big deal? My (trekking) bike has 9 gears (9 sprocket wheels at the rear wheel / Shimano Acera). I just wanted to replace sprocket and chain. I correctly bought a 9-speed chain but the length is wrong. My old chain has 118 links and the newly bought chain 114 links.
There are two reasons why I'm wondering whether I can still use the 114 link chain on my bike:

because I have it already
because 118 link 9-speed chains seem to be in short supply

So, what happens if I just put the 114-link chain on the bike? I assume this will make it necessary to readjust the gearing. Or is this not possible at all?
What are my options?

Bonus question: is there a qualitative difference between 114 and 118 links? Or is it just a different length and that's it?

Sometimes the length as provided (114, 116, 118) happens to be the exact length needed, but the norm is to size it down by removing some number of links.
The optimal length is determined by the size of your big back gear, your big chainring, and your chainstay length, with some length added on top of the minimum those factors will allow depending on the derailleur in question. If you go too short you can break your rear derailleur, derailleur hanger, chain, and/or or frame by shifting into a gear combination that overextends the rear derailleur.
Nine-speed trekking bikes can be outliers for chain length. The usual scenario for this is a 48t large chainring, 34t or 36t cog, and long chainstays, i.e. 450mm+. That bike setup being a mainstream entry in some regions is basically the biggest reason 118 link chains even exist. It's very possible you can't get away with 114.
Kindly request to buy a cut-off segment of new 9-speed chain from a bike shop plus two two-piece master links to splice it in, or Shimano pins if it's a Shimano chain and segment and if you're confident with that. (More finicky). It's not pretty but will be fine. In practice the SRAM and KMC two-piece links work with whatever 9-speed chain (except Campy) without issue, don't worry about that part.


Did I choose the right bottom bracket? This is my bicycle.
I mounted a new Thompson 124mm bottom bracket (the narrowest of this kind I could find) and a new single-ring sqaure-tapered crankset.
When set as in the pictures, there is a thread sticking out on the left side, the whole thing is visibly asymmetrical and yet the chainline is still offset by about 5mm (chainring should be even closer to the frame).
I can't push the crank any further onto the spindle.
Did I choose the right bottom bracket and crankset for my bike or should I replace some of those parts? Is it possible to make something sensible out of it?
Links to the parts I bought (website is in polish):
bottom bracket
crankset
If you need more clarification from my side feel free to leave a comment.

I'm only dimly aware of Thompson bottom brackets, but:

The visible thread on the spindle isn't a concern or a sign that something is wrong. My understanding is that, like Ashtabula/one-piece/American bottom bracket shells, the shell widths found on different Thompson shell bikes can have some variance due to either low tolerance or lack of real standardization, and the BBs have the threaded length to accomodate that.
It looks like the chainstays are in the 490-500mm range or perhaps longer. The front chainline being out by 5mm on a bike with chainstays this long is likely to be inconsequential. If there's no roughness or noise when pedaling, it will be fine.
This appears to be a coaster brake and/or internally geared hub. If so and if the cog has offset, make sure it's flipped out. If it's not offset and if it's the normal three-notch type, and if you wanted or needed to make the chainline better, getting an offset cog can buy you a few mm.


Is the max pressure on tubeless rims specifically for tubeless, or do they apply to tubed tires too? I have a set of ZTR Rapid rims that are tubeless compatible, but I never run tubeless tires on them. They have this list of maximum pressures on the side of the rim:

Since the limits are dependent on tire size, I assume that the rim is structurally sound enough to withstand at least the highest pressure listed. And since I've never seen pressure limits of any sort on traditional rims, I assume that it's somehow specific to tubeless tires. But that's an awful lot of assuming...

So my question is twofold: Why the different limits for different size tires? And are they specifically for tubeless, or do they apply to tubed tires as well?

As for rim strong enough for highest.  The force the rim must take is both psi and size.  If you have twice as many molecules pushing 1/2 as hard the total force is the same.  It is not exactly force on the rim bead but the force on the tire to pull it off the bead.

Here is a reference where they give different pressure for tube versus tubeless.
Hutchinson tires information  See question 7.
I just bought some Pyranha 2 CX tubeless and the pressure on the box is different from the pressure on the tire.  Box is clearly the tubeless pressure as it is in the tubeless mounting instructions.

It is a lot about how the and where tire engages rim.
On Stans (ZTR) the bead is shallow so you get more tire evolved in the adsorb rocks side.
On Stans I would assume they mean max pressure period until you see a different pressure listed for with tubes.  Their story is with a more shallow rim you need less pressure. See the diagram in this literature that standard rim with tube engages differently.
Comparison of a standard bicycle rim to a Stan’s BST Rim

How the different rims do UST varies.  And how they cross to tube varies.  Some have more of a dual type of engagement and some are designed just for UST.

ztr_rim_specifications

  Stan’s rims are a tubeless design and care must be taken when using
  tubes.

If you want to go both ways then don't go Stan's.

Stans has great support - you should try and contact them.

See the two diagrams below.  The first is a Stans and the second a Mavic.
In these examples the Mavic has a separate groove for UST - a tube tire will be on the outer part of the rim.
According to DWGKNZ the Mavic will seat on the outer even tubeless.
Still you have different designs and some are designed for tubeless only and some fro both ways.

I am learning from comments from DWNG.
UST is a tighter standard than I was aware. The bead must have a specific design.
UST tubeless-tire system
There are still variations in the implementation.
Some rims will cross over better than others.


Identify my Motobécane racing bike I bought a Motobécane last year (pics below), and now that the bottom bracket is broken, I really need to know the model of the bike, to help me change that piece.

It would also be helpful if someone could redirect me to the Motobécane catalogs of the years 82, 83, I can't find them, and I suspect my bike is from this period.

Technical specifications:

frame color: green and black (How customizable was that? I think they didn't sell the same colors each year)
frame: tubing inexternal 707, "trainer" (I don't find the appropriate info about it)
brakes: Weinmann
derailleur: Sachs - Huret. 12 gears
Wheel: Maillard
Bottom Crank: ?? width of the shell: 74mm. From this page http://sheldonbrown.com/vrbn-g-n.html, the old french ones have special dimensions. Also on Motobécane, they are swiss type (left-threaded). I don't know if this is a cotterless one, shimano octalink, or if I can put something more standard?

[EDIT: As suggested by @Blam, I took the bottom bracket out.
First mistake: shell width doesn't correspond to the red line on the pic, but less, so width should be 68mm, I'll double check on the bike.
The Brand is Stronglight, french brand, but the threading is the normal one (left-threaded on the right side, and right-threaded on the left side).
The axle is 120mm long, tapered square. Like this model: http://www.ebay.com/itm/VP-Components-Bottom-Bracket-120mm-Square-Taper-Unsealed-Bike-NEW-/311359596201?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item487e7a66a9

But anyway, I'm still interested in knowing the model of this bike, and/or finding the Motobécane catalogues of years 1982-83]

Important Note: The rear wheel is not the original (was broken). I also changed the part of the crank where I put the feet when I bought it (maybe I shouldn't have...).

Sorry if it looks quite dirty, I didn't have time to clean.

Pics:

I don't know the exact model (probably is Trainer as shown on the top tube decal) but it was likely built sometime right around 1984, most likely 1984-1986 judging by the parts. The brand was known as Motobecane for most of their history. They went bankrupt in 1981 and were bought by the Japanese (Yamaha or Suzuki, I forget which) who relaunched the brand in 1984 as MBK (like many other French bike companies, they made more than just bikes - see also Peugeot).

The other giveaway is the Sachs-Huret rear derailleur. Sachs and Huret were separate companies - one German, one French - prior to 1980. In 1987 they introduced an indexing system to keep up with SIS which had come out the year prior from Shimano and was a massive hit. In the late 90s the combined company was bought by the American SRAM company. The shift levers look to be friction so that dates them to after the Sachs/Huret merger but before the advent of indexed shifting.

It is an entry level bike. The big giveaway is the tubing decal which says "Hi Tensile". Hi Tensile (or Hi-Ten) is the lowest grade of tubing used in bikes. Pretty much the same stuff used in Huffy and other department store bikes. That said, not all Hi-Ten is created equal and there are actually some Hi-Ten frames that ride quite nicely even if it's far from being the lightest tubing. Nicer level Motobecanes of the era would have been made using Reynolds 531 or various grades of Vitus steel tubing.

As you've probably discovered by now the bottom bracket is a regular taper with English threads. Most French bike companies stopped using French threads in the late 70s/early 80s much to the relief of bike shop mechanics everywhere!


Replace my 28 x 1-5/8 x 1-3/8 tires with beefier ones for flat gravel trails This is my first post!
My wife has a great old aluminum hybrid bike that works very well on paved roads. We are now doing more backcountry flat gravel trails and I don't want to replace the entire bike.
Can you please tell me what size of tires I can buy to replace the current 28 x 1-5/8 x 1-3/8?
Thank you so much!

Tire sizing is a very funny thing. The size you list could be on one of two different rim sizes, either 622 or 635 (https://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html). The tire should have another marking on it after the size you listed, something like 622-32. That tells you the actual rim size. Hopefully it's 622 as that is much more common. You may be able to fit a wider tire, but that depends on the design of the bike frame. You can look to see the spots on the frame where the tire comes closest to rubbing. If there is extra room, you should be able to fit a wider tire.


Problems with brake discs I recently bought a new bike. It is a Scott bike with disc brakes. The bike went in for it's service and now it has problems braking. As soon as I pull the brake leavers the front brakes makes a loud squeaking noise. The front brake disc is a blueish color from trying to brake.

The back brake works perfectly. I took it back to the people who serviced it, and they were unable to solve the problem. Do you know what the problem could bee and how to correct it?

It sounds like your brake pads are contaminated with detergent or petroleum (oil) products. If so, you need to replace them.

This is a common problem, which can be solved by washing the brake rotors with IPA, and replacing your brake pads.  It sometimes happens that a pad will get contaminated by chain lube or other common bike lubricants during the washing process of a bike service, and should be no big deal to fix.

As this is something that any shop worth 2 cents should know, they are either incompetent, or dishonest with you.


Can I put 700x32 tyres on my Avanti Blade? I'm kitting out my 2006 Avanti Blade for some touring in Tasmania, and the tyres need replacing. Currently they've got some 700x28's on there, but I want to go a bit thicker for touring in case I need to go off road at all. The bike is similar to this.

Will the frame handle these in the 32's?

Cheers,

James

If you've got 28 mm tyres on there already, you should be better placed to tell than anyone who hasn't already fitted 32s.  Just check that there's a few mm clearance at the sides and top/front (in theory you only need 2mm extra either side but you need a little spare room for flexing, different tyres coming up a diffewrent size etc.).  From Sheldon Brown's width table you can see it would be a rare rim that couldn't fit 32s if it could fit 28s, and he admits the table is rahter cautious anyway.


New bottom bracket, asymmetric cranks I am seeking help for a "dilemma" I have with my upgraded bike.
I have an old KTM Ultra Line (2004) that I have upgraded with a new chain wheel (FC-M590 48.36.26t), a Shimano BB52 bottom bracket (previously a Shimano UN26), Shimano Deore XT M772 Shadow (long cage) rear derailleur, a new freewheel body and a Sram PG990 cassette.

Having a bottom bracket shell 68mm wide, and a band type front derailleur, I have installed one 2.5 mm spacer on the left side, and two 2.5 mm spacers on the right side, as specified by Shimano's installation instructions.

Before the upgrade the bike was fitted with a square taper bottom bracket Shimano UN25 ( 110 mm axle width ).

Restoration work continued with new ball bearings for both front and rear hubs, and new cones and axle for the rear hub. Then I brought the bike to a local bike shop to replace brake and shifter cables, adjust the new chain (KMC X9) and check the wheels.

Then the mechanic told me he had to swap the spacers on the bottom bracket because otherwise the chain line wasn't centered and that should have put more stress on the rear derailleur.

When I went back telling him that the two cranks are now asymmetric with the rear crank far more near the frame than the left crank, he told me that the chain line it's that matter and I should not worry.

Yeah I should not worry but I feel the difference on my legs (using cleats on the pedals) and after just 20 km my left leg began to hurt.
What am I suppose to do? I will try to swap back the spacers as per Shimano's instructions, how can I judge it that put some stress on the derailleur?

I have taken some pictures and videos, here: https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AE3dvdm3sIVKh9c&id=9BC36237EA980F31%21136&cid=9BC36237EA980F31

Put the spacers back in and see how it feels. If it feels better and your gears a shifting well enough for you, leave them in.

As @Daniel says, chainline is not as important as some believe. In a perfect world, you get the chain line right and never, never, ever, cross the chain. But just like the movie, sometimes you just have to cross the chain, and hell does not freeze over.

New MTB's are going to 1x11 (and 1x12), and the cassettes are wider than 9' or 10's. If chain line was so critical, these 1x11 would never work.

If your chainline is badly out, you may have problems getting shifting to work as smoothly as it should, your chain may wear a little quicker than it would, and the little cogs on the derailleur may wear out a little sooner. Notice the word may, and its a a very small if it does, and very debatable.....


Pros/Cons of Bar-Ends? I've always heard "never use barends" and they're banned equipment for some of the local clubs/group rides.  A number of people on-line swear by them though.  What's up with that!?  :-)  Why would I NOT want them?  When do I want them?

(Running with @sixtyfootersdude comment from Upgrading straight handlebars to drop handlebars)

Bar ends are typically banned from group/club rides because of the potential to hook another rider when riding in a tight group.  Because a flat MTB-style handlebar is wider than a drop bar, adding bar ends increases the likelihood of snagging another rider.  (drop bars still can cause crashes though, which I've seen first hand)

On the plus side, adding bar ends gives you more hand positions to choose from (similar to using drop bars).  This is very important on long rides (e.g. touring) since your hands can go numb and possibly suffer nerve damage if you keep them in one position for too long.  Some people find the hand position on bar ends more comfortable too.

Papuass has been injured by a bar end in a crash.  My experience is the opposite: the bar end protected my hand from sliding along the pavement at high speed, saving me a fair amount of skin.  So it can go both ways.

If you're not doing group rides where bar ends are banned, I would definitely consider trying them for the sake of having more hand positions.


How much cable can I pull with a brake lever in another custom mechanism, and how can I achieve it? I am not sure if this is the correct community for the answer, but since this part is about a bicycle part, I thought it's okay. If this is better posted in physics, or anywhere else, please let me know.

I am working in a custom mechanism for a cosplay prop (which is not relevant here, if you want to know, it's the blades from Attack on Titan). I need to pull a pair of pieces, that work in a lock mechanism. They lock themselves around the piece that goes inside the mechanism with springs, and the way of freeing the object is pulling from them, with the same mechanism as a brake lever.

The matter is that I need that pieces to travel back about 2 cm, which is the length of the pieces, and I don't know if it is posible to pull that length of cable with a simple brake lever (long, I suppose) that I can buy. Would it depend on the length of the lever? The tyoe of lever? The angle? All of them?

I believe a typical V-brake lever (so called long pull) has enough action to pull 2 cm of a cable.

V-brakes are known for they greed for cable length - e.g. if replacing cantilevers with V-brakes one needs to replace the levers as well.

EDIT: I may be wrong - see this thread: What is the actual cable pull of brake levers?
There it says that long pull has the action of 14 mm which is not enough for you. A solution for you would be (depending on how technical/machinist savvy you are) to use the brake lever to engage another lever that increases the advantage of the cable pull.

Since one picture saves 1000 words...

This contraption would increase the pull of the secondary cable by the ratio of the arms of the extra lever at the cost of increased force required to engage the brake lever. Of course the extra lever can be in any shape and the distance between the rotation point and the cable attachment point determine the arm lengths.

I hope you get the idea.


Can I use 53-39T chain rings with compact cranks? I have shimano 105 5700 compact  crank(50-34T).
Can I use 53-39T chain rings with compact right arm.

When you're matching chainrings to a crank, you need to match the bolt pattern (i.e. are there 4 bolts, 5 bolts) and the bolt circle diameter (BCD) measured in mm -- the diameter of the circle which all the bolts lie on [or equivalently, the center-to-center distance (C-C) of adjacent bolts. Multiply this (in mm) by 1.701 to get the BCD for 5 bolt patterns, 1.414 for 4 bolt, etc. -- its just a simple exercise in trigonometry to figure this out].

Compact cranks have a 110 BCD with a 5 bolt pattern while a regular road double has 130 BCD 5 bolt pattern.

There are some 53t and 39t 110 BCD chainrings, but they are less common than those sold in 130 BCD. As pointed out by ojs in the comments, Stronglight and TA (among other manufacturers) do make them.

Note that you will also have to adjust the front derailleur (and check everything is within spec for the front derailleur) if you do this swap. And you defeat the point of buying a compact double in the first place.