Lubricating an alfine 11 IGH hub I have an almost-new New-Old-Stock Shimano Alfine11 internal geared hub in the rear wheel of my bike.  Its on 300 km now, with a first oil change due at 1000 km and then yearly or every 5000 km after that.

There seem to be two ways to lubricate them

Remove the drain screw, let the oil all dribble out into a catch-bag, and refill.
Undo the entire guts of the hub and dunk it into a big jar of lube for 90 seconds, then reassemble.

Option 1 needs a 50mL bottle of oil, probably good for one change at a cost of $21 USD

Option 2 requires a Shimano kit with code Y00298010 which costs $115 USD and has 1L of lubricant.

That tin is 1 litre, so its twenty times the oil, so each oil change is 1/4 the price of a single bottle.

I will probably ride enough to need an oil change every 6 months.

What other reasons for choosing one over the other other than straight price?   Lifespan of the opened tin?

As far as I've discovered, the alfine oil is the same stuff in both the small and large jars.  So the large jar makes sense for high-mileage gearboxes, but you don't "break even" till you're doing your fifth oil change.

The downside is that the ongoing oil change intervals are "every 5000 km or every 2 years" so I don't know if the oil will spoil in the same way brake fluid spoils once opened.   I'm not prepared to risk that.

The Alfine 11 does come apart for repair, but it is not lubricated this way.  I understand that there's grease inside, and this oil somehow "feeds" the existing grease.

The proper Alfine Oil came in a bottle in a bag.  The labels are:

Instead you need to buy the proper Shimano TL-S703 tool, which is a bit of pipe and a fitting.  And you need a disposable syringe to fit the tube.  Instead, I built a replacement.

  The later version has a 50 mL barbeque syringe on it instead.  10 mL was too small.

In the middle is the bolt that normally seals the gearbox filler hole.  Its really quite short.
So I scrounged an old bolt that had the same thread.  Using a combination of drill press, a drill vice, and a small spirit level I drilled a tiny hole right through the center of the bolt.  This was widened out to about 5 mm using a series of drill bits.  Once that was done, I cut the head off just where the blind hole stopped.Then I flared the very ends of the holes using a larger drillbit.  This was to help the oil flow in better.
The two nuts are tightened together leaving the same amount of thread exposed as the original bolt.  Ideally this would be flush with the inside of the casing, but I have no way to tell.
The O rings were simply what I had around.  They are optional.

 Extracting old oil.  Later on I shortened the tube to about 30mm total.  A long tube was unhelpful.

Adding the charge of new oil.  Here this shows the short tube, and injecting with the hole rotated to the top.   Adding 25 mL with three separate shots was a bit silly, hence why V2 has 50 mL BBQ syringes.

To limit cross-contamination, I have a "clean" and a "dirty" syringe, each with their own hose and attachment.

The oil itself goes in a vivid translucent green when new, and comes out grey and stinkier.  The old oil is still viscous, and a 5000 km change interval probably  reflects shimano's cautious limits, same as tooth capacity counts for their derailleurs.

The oil's odour is hard to describe - its not like any motor oil I've ever used.  I'm also familiar with the tang of EP90 gearbox oil, and its as strong in smell intensity but otherwise different.

This gearbox oil smells waxy, with strong hints of vegetable.  I cannot think of any other fluid that smells the same.

An oil change takes HOURS mostly because the syringe can only suck the oil that has pooled at the bottom of the housing.   So going for a bike ride beforehand is a good idea to warm the oil and make it less viscous.

Disposal: I haven't disposed of the oil yet - not sure that it could go in an oil recovery tank.  The quantity is quite small that landfill may be a valid option.


SRAM Red 1098 Cassette "teeth" I noticed on the largest sprocket of my SRAM Red cassette, after every 8th tooth, the tooth is missing.  I looked at one on line and noticed the same thing.  What is the purpose of not including these three teeth on the sprocket?

In general, when you see oddly shaped teeth or variations on a cassette/chainring, its there to facilitate shifting (such as Shimano Hyperglide, and ramps/pins you see on chainrings/cassettes; see this link for some examples).

In this case, SRAM calls it their "Open Glide" technology. To quote them:
"OpenGlide tooth ramping allows for faster chain transition between cog postions. We employ OG on the radical OG1090 cassette for sure and higher shift speeds."

And here is a figure SRAM provides:

The marketing blurb from Art's Cyclery says:
"SRAM's open glide technology refers to the shift gates created by removing teeth at key spots on the cogs to facilitate fast, effortless shifting going up or down or under power."

Whether it actually shifts better or not is a matter of debate, but a quick search says that generally not. I'd guess SRAM also found that to be the case, because they don't do this on cassettes in their current product line.


What is the meaning of 11-32 cassette and 12-25 cassette? I'm willing to buy a 2015 Shimano 105 groupset and i have got 2 options in choosing the cassette, the first is 11-32 and the other is 12-25. I have  no idea what these numbers indicate and which one would be more suitable for me knowing that i'am still a beginner.

If you imagine a cassette, will have a bunch of sprockets on it. The current 105 range (which came out last year) will have 11 sprockets, the earlier 105 had 10 sprockets.

The notation you've noticed simply means that for one of these cassettes, the smallest sprocket has 11 teeth, the largest has 32 teeth. And the second cassette has smallest sprocket 12 teeth, largest sprocket 25 teeth.

So these numbers are basically the "range" of gears covered by a cassette.

You might imagine that a large range (e.g. 11-32) is good, as it would give you lots of teeth to climb steep hills, but also a small cog which you can use to power downhill. And this is correct, but there is also a flip-side. A larger range of sprockets means that there can sometimes be a jump of a few teeth between each sprocket, which can be less smooth when changing gear. Hence, if you don't actually need the large range, a smaller range would give you a smoother ride.

As regards which one you should choose, it's not really down to whether you're a beginner or not, more to do with how good a climber you are. If you feel you might struggle going uphill, a 32-tooth sprocket is probably going to be a good choice for you.

The other thing to remember is that, when you're thinking about gears, the cassette is only half of the story, the other half being the cranks. The number of chainrings, and the number of teeth on each chainring, will also affect the gear range and smoothness. But that's probably a different question...


Cyclocross frame size vs. road bike frame size I'm in the market for a used cyclocross bike to use as a winter bike, and so I've been browsing craigslist.  I generally ride a 56-58 cm road bike frame, so I turned down an otherwise good deal because it was a 52 cm frame.  The seller told me that a 52 cm cyclocross frame was comparable to a 54 cm road frame.

Is that statement true?  And if it is true, how is that so?

Bicycle sizing may vary by bicycle type, region, manufacturer, and material. And measurements typically are of a length of the frame (usually bottom bracket to top tube: How do I measure the size of my bicycle frame?). So it would not be surprising if this statement was true.

Depending on the geometry of the frames, two bikes may have different "sizes" but actually fit the same size rider well. It is possible that cyclocross frames tend to have a smaller measured sized.

Here is a post that goes in depth... and is ultimately inconclusive: http://www.bikeforums.net/archive/index.php/t-138316.html


Would the shimano freewheel removal tool be roughly compatible with a Sram/shimano cassette? I have a bike with a sram Cassette and a bike with (i think) a shimano freewheel. According to https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43506/38471 and other sources, in text atleast the two tools to remove them seem similar. If I were to get the smaller tool would it be reasonably compatible with both? I may need to remove the freewheel perhaps only once and I am seeing if I can use the same tool for both.

I understand that officially they need two tools. But they seem to have very similar parameters, hence the question.

The freewheel tool is of a smaller diameter to a cassette tool but the splines don’t fit the cassette lockring because the spline dimensions (width) don't match, as seen in this photo of the freewheel tool viewed through the back of a cassette lockring. The lockring is resting on the tool without engaging:

So you can’t use one tool for both, and modifying one to do so would be ineffective, I expect it would slip under torque.
Whilst it might be possible, depending on tool & lockring tolerances, to hammer the freewheel tool into a cassette lockring, I wouldn't do that myself; the correct tool doesn't cost a great deal and saves damaging tools/parts.


Can I upgrade a Norco Yorkville for a 260 pound rider plus cargo? Hello I have a 2017 Norco Yorkville. I was breaking rear spokes so bought a better rim with tougher spokes. Now my suspension seat post is wobbling.
What else can I upgrade on the bike for a 300 pound plus load? I could trade up to the next level bike but prefer to stay with this one.

Aluminium 7005 frame, 21 speed (3x7) with rim-brakes and suspension seat post.  https://www.norco.com/bikes/city/hybrids/yorkville/yorkville/   With a MSRP of $369 USD its above a BSO, but still an entry-level model.

One solution for getting the load off the bike is to tow it in a trailer.

This would be overkill if you're carting around a waterbottle and a pocket of keys, but if you're loading the bike with 20+ kilos (44+ pounds) of stuff then moving it to its own axle could help.

Downside, trailers aren't cheap, and they will slow you down while riding.


How To Choose A Proper Sprocket Combination For A Road Bike Cassette? I guess you have to have at least a couple of cassettes in your arsenal for different occasions. Can anyone please advise on how to choose a proper cassette depending on a trip. What can influence the decision process of choosing the right cassette for a trip? Road/weather conditions? Forecasted elevation gain (taken from the Strava for example)? Anything else?

By "proper cassette" I mean the appropriate sprockets combination. There are a lot of different combinations from 11t to 32t. So you have cassettes like 11-23 or 13-28 or any other.

Also I have to note that I'm new to road cycling so I don't have my own "style" of riding and this part of equation is totaly irrelevant for me.

Thank you for sharing the experience!

I doubt many people would change cassette based on occasion, but I suppose it is possible - it isn't too onerous a task to swap a cassette out. But certainly I (and I suspect others too) will fit a cassette once and it will stay on the wheel for its lifetime.

I think the key thing with a cassette choice is basically how close (in terms of number of teeth) adjoining sprockets are to each other.

In one of the extreme cases, where each sprocket has one more tooth than the last, this gives a really smooth riding experience. But the flip-side, of course, is that you have only a small range of gears. If you are riding in varied terrain, this can be a problem.

Cassettes with sprockets as large as e.g. 28 are actually quite a recent thing (for road bikes), as technology has improved. These improve the range of the cassette significantly, making climbing easier, for example. The downside is that sometimes there is a 2 or 3 tooth difference between adjacent sockets, and the "changing" experience is not so smooth.

Again in terms of the range of gears, having larger sprockets at the back can also have advantages at the front - for example you may be able to get away with a double chainset whereas a few years ago, you'd have bought a triple.

So essentially, having a large sprocket (28, say) will give you flexibility when climbing.  Having a small sprocket (11, say) will give you an advantage when travelling on the flat at speed (sprinting, if you like). Whereas a cassette with a small range will give you a smoother experience when actually changing. How much smoother is open to question, however.

In terms of what cassette a beginner should use, I would say it is dependent on how strong a cyclist you are. If you are less strong, and will be climbing, then it is almost a no-brainer to go for a large-range cassette. Similarly if you're a strong rider, going to ride flat time trials, then it probably makes sense to get a small-range cassette. And unless you are a good, seasoned cyclist, it is unlikely that you will see any advantage of an 11T ring over a 12T ring - frankly you do a very small amount of riding in top gear.

One last point to explicitly address your mention of weather. As far as cassettes go, weather is irrelevant. You'd do other things related to weather (for example drop your tyre pressure in the rain) but you wouldn't change cassette.


Help please to identify my Tandem I have just purchased an old tandem, but don't know the make or year.
Can anyone help me to identify it.
The frame is steel and it has a frame number of 452599.
There are no decals fitted but I attach a photo of the front tube casting where a decal was probably fitted to indicate the make.
The wheels/rims are 26" x 1.3/8" and the rear has a Dunlop Motorette tyre fitted (still holding air).
The front handlebar has "Il Primo Milano" on it.
The hubs/brakes are Sturmey Archer (Front has a number 10 5 6 on it)
There are four sprockets on the back hub.
The derailleur is a Benelux Super 60
The seats are marked Iscaselle.
From what I have been able to look up on the derailleur, it suggests it could be 1950's or 1960's but that is all I have found.
Many Thanks![Frame Number
!Frame

!Derailleur![Tandem 2
]3

Probably not a Claud Butler or a BSA, as the headbadge is the wrong shape.

The name on the handlebars and use of Benelux and Iscaselle suggests Italy (and Sturmey was big in hub brakes everywhere, so may not be British-made).


I need to replace a cassette for CS-HG500-10 but want to go XT My bike has a CS-HG500-10 cassette which has reached its EOL after 7400 km (I didn't think that changing the chain, unless absolutely necessary, was something good). It's the 11-34 version, I-CSHG50010134.
https://www.bike-components.de/de/Shimano/Kassette-CS-HG500-10-10-fach-p43864/?o=100330-universal-11-34
Is it possible to replace it with an XT cassette, like the Shimano XT CS-M771-10, I-CSM77110134?
https://www.bike-components.de/de/Shimano/XT-Kassette-CS-M771-10-10-fach-p24985/?o=300330-silber-11-34
Also, could I replace it with an 11-36 version, instead of 11-34, without changing anything else? That would make it a bit easier if I'm on a steep climb, right? Or would it not be beneficial?
Both require the same CN-HG95 chain, which indicates that they're pretty much compatible.
Or would anyone recommend against that switch from CS-HG500-10 to CS-M771-10?
What tools do I need, to be able to replace the old one?

The reason I need to change the cassette is because I replaced the old chain with a new one, and that new one was constantly some sort of jumping when I put a bit stronger pressure on the pedals. At first I thought that I somehow misaligned the gears, because I did a thorough cleaning of the bike on that day, but all the attempts to get that jumping fixed failed. Then I realized that it may be because the length of the new chain was shorter, it may be that the cassette became worn out too much. I had the old chain in my backpack, so I replaced the new one with it and the problem went away.
The chain has 108 segments and this is how they compare in length due to wear:

A Shimano 10-speed MTB cassette is a 10-speed Shimano MTB cassette. There is no functional difference.
The differences will be only in the weight or the durability (the rate of wear) due to different materials.
And some possibly very minor differences in the construction like whether the sprockets are rivetted together or not. Mostly irrelevant to most users.
You can use whichever version you like.

There are many Q/As about changing a cassette here. You need a cassette tool with a wrench and a chain whip. It is pretty simple.
A torque wrench would be a bonus, the required torque range (say 30-50 N.m) is pretty large so can be guessed by feel. It must be pretty tight.


Switching from hybrid to road bicycle For nearly 3 years now, I have been using a 21-inch hybrid bicycle (Fuji Absolute 1.9D).

My use of the bike is primarily for aerobic exercise. I ride about 20 kilometres in the morning for about an hour.

Now I'm planning on switching to a road bike. The purpose of use remains the same -  aerobic exercise.

I ride only on tarred roads.  I don't go off the road.

Now, my questions are:

Am  I making the right decision?
My bike dealer tells me that the size of the road bike should be one less than a hybrid. That is, if my hybrid is Large then my road bike should be Medium. Do you agree?

Thank you.

Road bike sizing seems harder to get right than more upright bikes. Your dealer may be right, but only as a starting point - that's a good size to test ride first. If your dealer wants you to buy the next size down without trying it first, you don't need a new bike, you need a new dealer.

You have to think about your goals. Road bikes are more aerodynamic and therefore more efficient. So you'll get less exercise for the same distance, or go further in the same time. You may want to go further if you enjoy it more.


Shimano 7400 crankset Can I use shimano 6700 chain rings on my shimano 7400 crank set?  I am upgrading the drive train and would like to keep the crank if possible.

See this answer.

So long as the BCD (bolt circle diameter) and bolt pattern (4 bolts, 5 bolts) matches up between the cranksets, you can swap rings between cranksets.

For example, if you have the Ultegra compact and got the Dura-ace regular double, the BCD's will be different and you can't swap them. However, if they are both compact or both regular doubles, they will have the same BCD's and you can swap the chainrings.

Some may complain about possibly different chainring widths, but in practice between 10 and 11 speed you wouldn't notice the difference (if there is any).


1962 Schwinn: what model Last week I bought a old bike from a going-out-of-business sale at my local bike shop.  It's a 1962 Schwinn but the seller didn't know the specific model.  Judging by this 1961 catalog and this 1962 catalog, it's a Hornet -- the other models seemed to have had a different style rack -- but the 1961 Hornet had that iconic Schwinn tank on the front.  Was the tank removable?  Assuming the rack is original, could this have been some other model?

The real star here is the Bendix Red-Band hub.  They re-popped those racks and most of the original type parts for this for something like 30 years.  I've seen new racks like that as of about 10 years ago they kept making.  The part that really shows the age of this though, is that hub.  If that's an automatic 2 speed kickback, that dates it between 1960-1964.  So that would put it right in your estimate.  I take it there isn't anything on the other side of that chainguard?  I'd say it could very well be a Hornet.  Those tanks are removable, and someone could have done just that.


Busted Dept store Mongoose Shifter - Scrap or Fix My wife convinced me that we should buy bikes (2x$100.00) @ a dept store. I found a Mongoose (which I can remember used to be decent) and within 6mos I broke the bracket that holds the shifter in place (not sure on my lingo here).  It says it is Shimano, but I don't know if I would be better off trying to replace it on my own(I am a smart DIY guy but have no experience w/Bikes), taking it to a bike shop, or just looking for a used Trek hybrid on CL?
Please advise.

If it is easy to get the bike to a bike shop, it is worth asking the shop the cost of a replacement.  It is not likely to be more than a few dollars.  Otherwise take the old bracket to the bike shop to get the replacement to match.

If the bike shop is able to do the replacement on the spot, let them do it and watch how it is done, otherwise it is not hard to do yourself and will save you the time of having to collect the bike.

This you will be left with a cheap bike that you can ride.   You may still wish to buy a better bike, but will have the time to find a good one.


Can I intentionally overfill my hydraulic brakes to adjust contact point? I have a bike with SRAM Apex hydraulic disc brakes. They do not have contact point adjustment, but I want the lever to firm up earlier in its travel. Can I just overfill my brakes with fluid to adjust contact point?

If so, what would be the best way to do it? I do not want to overdo it and be unable to fit the pads and rotor back in.

No - that would lightly pressurise the system all the time.

From https://www.sram.com/avid/setup-guides/hydraulic-brake-setup

  Note: The Contact-Point Adjustment DOES NOT move the pads.

Instead you want to try the reach adjust, and try tweaking the caliper mounting bolts so the caliper is aligned how you want it.


"Creaking" noise from headtube/handlebar I have a steel frame (Columbus steel, made by Dancelli), and when I put weight on the ends of the handle bar, I hear a creaking noise from the headtube. It might not be the handlebar because I tried applying force on the headtube while holding the top tube and I heard the same creaking noise.

I can't pinpoint where the noise is coming from ... is there a way to find that out and fix it?

Many thanks!

With the old style headsets this symptom was generally due to the handlebar slipping slightly inside the reenforcing tube that surrounds the center on most bars.  The tube was glued to the bar, and eventually some of the glue would fail, allowing the two to move relative to each other as you rode and the bar flexed.  In very rare cases the bar would actually slip within the tube, but in most cases the sound was harmless and would eventually go away -- appearing after a few months of use and then disappearing after a year or two.  Tightening the bar clamp usually did not help.  Bars without the reenforcing tube, of course, did not exhibit this behavior.

One would also occasionally get creaking of the stem within the steering tube.  Also harmless, and usually quieted by slightly tightening the stem bolt.

I've never studied a threadless headset real closely, but presumably, given the number of individual components, there are all sorts of things that can slip slightly relative to each other as things flex.


Disadvantages of Riding Larger Frame Sized Bike than Reccomended Frame Sized Bike I unconsciously bought a bike which's frame size is larger than recommended. (My height is 163cm bikes frame size is for people 174-190cm) (I dont have any problems with reaching ground with my feet when I stop)
Bike is BMW M Cruise bike's large frame

My question is will this bigger bike cause orthopaedic problems and will it really differ my handling if I go for a proper sized bike?

Thanks beforehand

Actually knowing if a bike frame is the correct size based on height is nearly impossible, they are best guesses. When looking at fitting a bike there are so many different things a fitter will look at.

First lets look at what changes on the bicycle when you change frame size:-

Top Tube (TT) - this is normally measured as a theoretical as this tube is not normally straight, see the below diagram. This determines how far you have to stretch on the frame
Head Tube (HT) -  this determines how long the steerer is, this is how far down the stem could be mounted as a minimum, but also usually means that they can be mounted higher as well, simply the longer this is the higher the bars tend to be.
Seat Tube (ST) - this determines how low you can get your saddle, and how high - the longer the seat tube the higher your saddle can be as a minimum, and the higher as a maximum.

So lets look at what all this means for you.
If you happen to have short legs and a longer torso/arms, this could mean that a larger frame could be better, as the length of all the tubes increases. To break it down. The top tube length will help as the reach will increase, and usually no one has short enough legs to need seat post all the way into the frame.

If you happen to have very long legs and a short torso, its actually more difficult to size and then fit. This is because you have a short reach, which means you need a smaller frame size, but you need to have all of the seat tube out of the frame, this in conjunction with a short head tube means you will have a larger saddle to bar drop (great for the pros, horrific for those not flexible enough, or used to it!).

Having a frame too small and large also has an effect on handling, a larger frame is more cumbersome but much more forgiving and much less twitchy. A smaller frame the opposite is true, much "flickable" and maneuverable, but with the downside of being twitchy.

This is before we even get into the micro adjustments like stem length, angle and position; saddle position and angle etc etc. Which all again have an effect on handling and comfort e.g. a long low stem makes the bike feel great at high speed, but like a bus at slow speed.

The key points for you as a rider, are the points of contact with the bike and ensuring they are in the correct position. This will affect the overall comfort of the bike. i.e. while a stretched-out, super-low position might be fast, for a prolonged period it can be uncomfortable. And the converse is also true, an upright comfortable position may suit, but this can be slow.  The aim here is to find the compromise of comfort, speed and handling.

  (I dont have any problems with reaching ground with my feet when I stop)

This is only important in so much as ensuring when standing over the top tube you can put both feet flat on the floor.


Which threadlock on bottle cage bolts? The bottle cage bolts on my bike (carbon frame) tend to unscrew easily. Instead of tightening harder (I stopped at ~2Nm), which could damage the bosses in the frame, I am thinking of using threadlock on the bolts. It should be safe as the bosses are made of metal and it's not going directly on carbon. The question is: which threadlock is best suitable for this kind of job?

I have some blue one (Loctite 243), but if purple (Loctite 222) is better, I am willing to buy some.

Loctite 243 seems like the best bet, but 222 could work.
From https://www.henkel-adhesives.com:

LOCTITE® 243 is a general purpose threadlocker of medium bond strength. This threadlocker secures and seal bolts, nuts and studs to prevent loosening due to vibration.
LOCTITE® 222 is a low-strength threadlocker that allows the adjustment of screws including countersunk head screws and set screws. Good on low-strength metals which could fracture during disassembly


Non standard disk brake post mount I like my Vanmoof B5, but one thing I find very poor is the braking performance. The bike comes stock with 140mm rotors and no-brand mechanical brakes.

I thought I'd upgrade the brakes, going quite a bit overkill for a commuter bike, purchasing a Shimano 180mm rotor for the front and Shimano SLX hydraulic brakes. With this kit, I also purchased a SM-MAF180 disc brake adapter.

How ever, when I mount the rotor and the adapter, the rotor still appears to be approx. 20 mm "too big".

Below is an image of the stock setup.

Does this fork have a non standard post mount, or have I just purchased the wrong adapter?

Mountain bike forks will normally direct mount to fit a 160mm rotor. The 180mm adapter you purchased will add 20mm to rotor size - so should (might) work with a 160mm rotor. You would need an adapter to increase 40mm rotor size ir you want to go to a 180mm rotor.

You could try a 203mm adapter or drop back to a 160mm rotor - either might work but I have not had experience with this setup.

Looking at the post mount, I would be a little concerned the mounts are up to the forces a 180 rotor could generate and would be checking the specs from the fork manufacturer.


Best downhill braking method to avoid overheated rims? I recently had one of my rims get really hot on a downhill. I had a problem with my front brake, and I had to use my rear brake only...

I did short, hard stabs instead of lightly dragging it.

I ended up walking much of the way once I found that my rear rim was too hot to touch.

I know that it was a worst-case-scenario, but I just want to confirm that I managed it the best way I could.

EDIT: To clarify, this is road-specific, not trails.

The power output from braking is linearly dependent on speed and braking force. To reduce heat buildup, you have to reduce either one of these. The options are:

Descend very slowly. This is boring, but works.
Descend so fast that air resistance takes most of the force (the force depends roughly on second power of speed). This is the idea behind the advice to brake sharply for corners: You go faster between them, which lets the rims cool.
Increase your air resistance. A big flappy wind jacket slows you down by a surprising amount.
As you already found out, dividing the load between two rims helps.

Too hot to touch isn't necessarily too hot for the rims and tires. Also, one thing to do is to reduce tire pressure before big descents, the temperature will increase it back. Jobst Brandt's posts on descending also touch the subject: http://yarchive.com/bike/descending.html


What should I expect from a GPS logging device? During the last years I do a lot of mountain biking tours. To record this tours I currently use my Android phone and a GPS tracker application. I'm happy with it, but the problem is, the battery life is not long enough for whole day trips.

So I thought about buying a real GPS tracker device. I don't want to use navigation or routing but just tracking. So my problem is, I don't really know what are the important technical specifications I should look for.

For example: Is it important how many Gps points a device can store? I read values between 10'000 and 20'000 but how many do I need?

There are lot of similar questions like the kind of GPS module, the method to define the height, etc.

I need the device for my mountain biking tours. This means no cities or things like that, almost all offrode. The duration can vary from 1 hour to the whole day, but I don't think it is a problem if I have to reload in the evening.

I had a small tracker for a while and after faffing with it for a while sold it on eBay. So I may not be the best person to answer. But here goes.

You need to decide on the basic parameters:

what is the longest ride you want to log? (distance)
how long will that take? (time)
how often do you need to log? (I find that every 10m is necessary in urban areas because there are often a lot of route choices, 100m is fine for offroad and every few kilometres is ok for touring).

That tells you how much battery life you need and how many data points you have to store. I'd expect that the data points answer will be less than 10k. Battery life is what mattered to me in the end - I was uploading every few days and recharging when I did it. What ended up killing the idea for me was the lack of display on the thing. I wanted to be able to see how much battery life and memory it had left without plugging it into a computer. It couldn't do that.

edit: for single-day use note that there are only 80k seconds in a day, and most small loggers need a second or so to take a reading. So a 30k point GPS could log every single second you were on your bike each day. More reasonably, logging every 10 seconds means at most 8600 points in 24 hours. So a 10k point logger will be fine.

I think more important points will be GPS reliability, robustness and how waterproof it is. If you have to tape an antenna to the top of your helmet to get reliable reception that will suck, and likewise if it stops working because you went over a bump or through a creek. So I suggest looking at those features rather than focussing on battery life or data points. Work out where you want to mount it and run from there (in a backpack is quite different from in a pannier or handlebar bar, and different again from under the seat or on the handlebars.


Why do I never get DOMS (delayed onset muscle soreness) from cycling but I do after walking? I'm in my late 30s but never in my entire life did I get delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) from cycling. But even walking at a slow-moderate pace (less than 6 kmh / 3.7 mph average) for 2-3 hours gives some DOMS.

I climbed 20% percent hills going all out, I went on long rides at moderate pace, I went on short, full throttle rides, I tried climbing the local hills in the hardest possible gear, I tried climbing standing for 10 minutes straight, I am capable of maintaining 95% max heart rate for 20 minutes and 85% max heart rate for one hour. Max heart rate of 182 was measured by monitoring it for a few years and I'm able to reach it when sprinting at the end of a hard climb. Never, not once, did any of that result in even the slightest amount of DOMS. If it matters, I currently weight 70kg at 1,74m (154 lbs, 5'8) which is stable for a few years.

When someone mentions DOMS in the context of cycling, to me it's like saying 1+1 doesn't equal 2. Please enlighten me.

Let’s look at the definition of DOMS:

  Delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) is the pain and stiffness felt in muscles several hours to days after unaccustomed or strenuous exercise.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_onset_muscle_soreness

If you cycle all the time, but rarely walk, then walking more than typically (e.g., a couple hours) could result in DOMS. Cycling and riding use your leg and hip muscles differently, especially in regards to range of motion. Cycling is a very constrained range of motion, compared to walking, especially when it comes to the posterior chain.

DOMS manifests when you use your muscles in ways you are unaccustomed to, this can mean what muscles you use and/or how strenuously you use them.

This is why I suggested in comments to ride at a high intensity for a period longer than you are accustomed to if you wanted to experience DOMS from cycling.


torque specification on headset I was wondering why there is a torque specification on the steer tube end of the stem for mountainbikes.

The torque specification that goes to the handlebar is reasonable, after all handlebars are often made of lightweight materials and depending on the construction and the stem pressure distribution I might run in danger of crushing/cutting it. But the steer tube on mountainbike forks is usually very very solid aluminium, there is no way I could crush it. So why do some stems have torque specifications on the steer tube end?

We all easily understand the problems of under tightening a screw or bolt - if is too loose, things move, it ends badly and we know why. Most of us also know that too much torque can damage the components, and in extreme cases strip the thread of the fastener.  What many people do not understand is that bolts stretch when torqued. At the correct torque the bolt is elastic or springy, and is this elasticity that holds things together under vibration.

An over torqued fastener can be stretched too far and loses elasticity long before it breaks or threads strip - at this point, the bolt may not continue to hold the surfaces tight under vibration, and can work loose. As the bolt has been stretched beyond its elastic ability, it will not return to its original size and essentially stuffed - however you cannot see this visually. Here in lies a big problem - it came lose, things come lose because they were too lose, so people assume it needs to be put on, just tighter. Unfortunately, that over tightened bolt (which is now stuffed) will only hold if it is over tightened even more.

On cheap bikes with lots of steel (very forgiving material) and excess weight, its never a real issue - you can give a gorilla a power bar and not do much damage. The use of things like titanium and aluminium rather than steel for fasteners, along with the desire for weight savings means these components are designed with fine tolerances - hence its easy to over do it and the correct torque becomes critical.

Essentially if you bike is not a chain store special, over torquing will damage something - hopefully just the bolt that is easily and cheaply replaced. If you torque a bolt up to specification and it does not hold reliably, replace the bolt - no matter how tempting, do not over tighten it.


Redmond bikers: Can you ride all year long? I'll move to Redmond, WA in a couple months and since I was about to buy a bike, I have a few questions to see if I still should.

Is it possible to ride all year long for both commute/recreation (I like XC and trail)? I'll probably be living just a few miles away from work. Is it too cold on winter? I've been there a couple times, and know Redmond's breeze/rain (and the fact that its there 200+ days a year).. does it make it to cold to ride?

I used to ride a lot, but haven't done so in a long while, and I recently started wanting to ride a LOT! Would it be worth to buy a bike here (im in Guadalajara, Mexico) or should I wait the few months and buy a bike over there? I was thinking on a Rockhopper Comp 29er Int (which has pretty much the same specs as the american RockHopper 29er Pro, which i can get here for about 1500 with a paint job that I absolutely loved (similar to the one in the link but with green instead of gold).

Thanks!

EDIT:

As per suggestion I add that by too cold I mean your throat hurting when breathing, stiffiness on joints (specially hand, even with gloves), ice burn, not being able to ride without goggles, etc. oh and a little bit of water is ok, but not getting to the office completely soaked

...just speaking up for the Local Bike Shop - if you are moving to Redmond permanently then it may make sense to have a bike with a warranty and the support of the LBS for when/if it goes wrong.

Also consider the mudguards situation - I know they are unfashionable but they are handy for the commute. Since Specialized bikes are designed for sunny California where nobody could ever imagine needing mudguards, you may want to also post a question on what people recommend.

You will only be cold if you get clothing that is not up to the job. You know the drill - baselayers, as many layers as you need on top and a breathable jacket. Overshoes and neoprene gloves optional...


Disk Brakes on Nishiki Pueblo I have a Nishiki Pueblo and I am looking to put disk brakes on it.

My problem is that I am not sure which disk brakes fit on my bike.

Thanks in advance.

for what I see online about your bike, you don't have fitting for disc brakes.
You could upgrade to better V brakes, or Cantilever brakes, even idraulic Magura rim brakes, if power is what you are looking for, but disc brakes won't fit on your frame.


New to the bike world need some input So I bought this road bike for 40 bucks and I’m thinking of upgrading the drivetrain since it feels a little rough
I just have no idea how to, this is the bike: https://imgur.com/a/WECRvWB
And this is the group set I want to get : https://imgur.com/a/KigTINl

Looks like a nice, well maintained bike, however its 1980's or 90 era geometry means its not worth pouring money of a new group set into making it better.
From a learning experience on bike maintenance you may be better to get the bike running smoothly by working on what you have, replacing bits that are worn might be a better starting point. If you dead keen on the new group set, be aware its still an old frame so the geometry is 'wrong' by todays standards.
My approach to this bike would be :

Service headset and wheel bearings, clean and lube chain and lube shifter and brake cables. Check the tires for damage, and brakes are working well enough. Get out and ride it before spending more money.

If I was enjoying the bike, and it was still a bit rough....

Check derailleur hanger alignment
Check Bottom Bracket for wear, replace if needed
Replace shifter and brake cables - probably inner and outer, but could be convinced to keep outers if they not showing signs of age.
Check chain for wear, if worn, replace chain and rear cassette.
Check chain rings - from picture they look OK, but hard to tell.
Check the wheels are true.

All these things are covered on this site in various questions, and Parktool has a great "how to" site for DIY maintenance. You will need some tools, but a you can get bike tools kits that are good enough for a careful DIY mechanic, containing all you will need, especially for this era bike, quite cheaply.


Where can I buy a wide range of used bike parts online? Does anyone know of a reputable website that sells a wide range of used and second hand bike parts and components?

I'm helping a friend rebuild an older commuter bike and we are having trouble finding compatible components. There are a couple of local shops that carry used parts, but not having any luck there so far. I know of an Ebay seller that sells used ski equipment; I'm wondering if, likewise, there is a website for used bike parts. I'm basically looking for a larger inventory than my local area.

Loose Screws Small Bicycle Parts has a decent selection of small parts.


Cadence meter for the Shimano Ultegra Flight Deck 5601? Is there a cadence meter available for the Shimano Ultegra Flight Deck 5601?  Or is there a good alternative option for measuring cadence without changing the flight deck setup?

The Shimano Flight Deck computers use 'virtual' cadence. There are switches fitted to the shifters that tell the computer which gears you have selected. The wheel sensor tells the computer how fast you are travelling. The computer works what your cadence is from there.


Where are my barrel adjusters for my shifting cables? I have a Devinci Caribou I and I was trying to adjust the front derailleur. I got the top and bottom stops adjusted right, but it seems that it doesn't downshift correctly from the biggest cog to the intermediate cog.  From reading on the internet, I've seen recommendations to adjust the barrel adjustment to fine tune the derailer. Only problem is I can't find the barrel adjustment.  The shifter cables come right out the side of the brifters, and there's no adjustment there. They go through the frame, and come out near the bottom bracket.  On the cable housing there's something that can be turned that seems like it could be a barrel adjuster, but turning it creates no changes in derailleur position.  This turnable part of the cable housing is present on both shifter cable. There is functioning barrel adjuster for my rear brakes, but this is quite different then the possible barrel adjustment for the shifter cables (and it actually works).  Can anybody help me out finding my barrel adjuster?  Here is a picture of the model that I have, although it's hard to see any of the cabling in this picture.

Looks like there's an adjuster in-line, right before the cable enters the down tube.


Lubricant spill on disc brake As the title suggests, I was lubricating the gears and chain, and I accidentally dropped some of the oil on the rear brake disc. I didn't notice it then, and took the bike out for a spin. That's when I noticed the rear brake was acting funny. Problem, there is oil all over the disc, and maybe on the brake pads too. Any suggestions to solve this?

Clean rotor with detergent, dry, clean with meths. Replace pads.
Some people have methods for degreasing pads but i find none of them satisfactory.


What is this pumping nozzle called? My local bike shop have one of these green nozzles that anyone can use to pump their bike. They say that only companies can buy those, but I would really like such for my blue compressor.

What I like about this type is that there is no tap that needs to be flipped like so many pumps have.

Does anyone know what such nozzle is called and perhaps online shops that allow for end users to buy such?

It's just a standard schrader head.  Locking heads are only needed for hand- or foot-pumps as you can't secure the head on while pumping the pump manually.

Any well-stocked automobile parts store will have a schrader head for an air-compressor that doesn't require a locking head.  Schrader valves are the same valves used on your automobile tire.

For example, my local part supply store has this kit for $14.  Just walk into a car parts store and ask for the tire-inflation attachment for your compressor.

Note that if your bike has a presta or dunlop valve, you'll need either an adapter or a different head.

Also, be careful when using an electric air compressor to inflate your tires. Your bike tires are very low-volume and it's easy to over-inflate and burst them. Set the pressure on the compressor as low as you can and don't trust the low pressure cut-off to react quick enough to save your tire.

In this case, your specific compressor (the Scheppach HC16w) has a maximum pressure of 8 bar (around 116 psi) and does not have a storage air-tank. Be careful when pumping up low-pressure tires (like regular bicycle tires) so that you don't over inflate them.  You may have trouble inflating racing or road bike tires (100 psi+) and may have to top them off with a track pump.


Large vs small stack & reach I'm looking at getting a new bike, but struggling with the most suitable one given the different geometries.

Given a particular torso angle, is there an optimal stack & reach? A large S&R would see the arms stretched out further in front, while a smaller S&R would see the arms pointing more down toward the ground. If too small, the knees would hit the elbows and if too large, one would struggle to take weight on the hands, but is there a parameter that would dictate the "correct" sizing?

I'll try to add an image soon to help clarify if needed.

Cheers!

I think what you are getting at in your question is: is there and optimum bike geometry for any given rider and riding position or style? Yes, there is, but stack and reach are not the measurements used to specify bike fit per se and they are not the only frame geometry parameters that affect bike fit. Seat tube angle is also important as it affects where the seat is located.

The basic measurements used in bike fit deal with the three contact points on the bike: feet, butt and hands:

Saddle height above bottom bracket
Saddle horizontal set back aft of bottom bracket
Horizontal saddle to bars distance
Saddle to bars vertical drop

If you know what those are for a rider you can pick a frame with stack, reach and seat tube angle that will allow seat, seatpost, stem and handlebars to be positioned and adjusted to get that fit.

Of course, that is not the whole story. The steering geometry that is influenced by wheelbase, chain-stay length, head-tube angle and fork trail are big factors in bike selection as well as cockpit geometry.

I think because stack and reach, along with other frame geometry parameters are published by bike manufacturers people thing they need to find 'their' preferred or optimum stack and reach. I would not pick a bike that way. The best advice is to test ride an array of bikes at a number of different stores and let bike store staff give you some advice on sizing and fit. See what feels best for you.


SRAM X01 Eagle (12speed) in 11speed transmission: it work? Well, I intend to use an SRAM X01 Eagle (12speed) rear derailleur in a 1x11 transmission (with a SRAM X01 "non-Eagle" 11speed trigger, cassette SunRace 11s 11-46, SRAM PC XX1 chain).
Will it work perfectly?

To quote Art's Cyclery:

"Eagle drivetrains are not backwards compatible in any way (the exception being SRAM’s direct mount cranksets, which will still require a new Eagle chainring)"

and VitalMTB:

"SRAM will only make the Eagle chainring in the direct-mount style at first, and we were told it's the only Eagle component compatible with their 1x11 drivetrains. No 11-speed products will work on Eagle."


wedge/saddle rail mounted bags interchange A variety of manufacturers make snap in wedge bag mounts. The mount attaches to the saddle rails and the bag snaps into the mount.  Does  know which brands if any interchange?

I have not found a quick connect system that works with different manufacturers, but have found a bag that I can easily swap between bikes without needing to buy two bags.

I use a Topeak Aero Wedge Medium saddle bag and have found on their support website (store.todson.com) that you can buy extra "fixers" to put on each of your bicycles. The medium Aero Wedge saddle bag carries a couple tubes and my compact pump. It has the quick connect and a single velcro strap which goes around the seat post. Very secure.

I have not had any problems with the Wedge saddle bag when mountain biking (I don't go off many jumps but lots of cross country, single track and rough terrain).

After about 4 years, I did have the thin plastic slot thingy (official term I think) on the bag become brittle and crack. I found the replacement on the store.todson.com website and did not need to purchase a new bag, as such I still recommend the Topeak Wedge bags.


Cyclocross Frames and Disc Brake Compatibility? I'm looking for some guidance on how to determine if a certain disc brake is compatible with a certain cyclocross frame.

Specifically, here is my particular situation.  I have an extra set of Spyre TRP brakes (and wheel set with matching rotors).  I'm looking to get a carbon frame direct from a Chinese manufacturer and build a bike, preferably from Dengfu since they seem to have a very good reputation and have been around for quite a while now.

Originally I was interested in the FM286:

http://dengfubikes.com/Cyclo_Cross/112.html

But that frame is not available in the size I would need until another production run can be produced, which will be about a 3 month wait.  Dengfu does have their older cyclocross frame available in the size I'm looking for, the FM059:

http://dengfubikes.com/Cyclo_Cross/110.html

I'm really not concerned with the 50 gram weight difference, but I would prefer the FM286 due to the newer style front derailleur mount.

Anyhow, my question is how universal is the compatibility of disc brakes to frames?  Would the Spyre TRP Cs fit both frames in the front and the rear?  I notice with the older style frame (the FM059) the rear caliper mount is on the bottom of the seat stay, but on the newer frame (the FM286) the rear caliper mounts are towards the rear of the chain stay.  Does this matter as far as rear caliper compatibility?  Please advise, thanks!

There are two (ignoring flat mount for the moment...) main standards in use for disk brake mounting systems, IS 51mm and 74mm Post Mount (Disk Brake Mounting Standards - Bikeman). Both of the linked frames appear to be using 74mm Post Mount on both the frame and fork since the brake mounting lugs are parallel with the plane of the wheel. TRP Spyre calipers default to post mount, so your calipers would bolt up fine on those mounts (on either frame) barring any manufacturing defects.

The main disadvantage of having a brake mount on the seat stay (outside the rear triangle) is that the caliper will interfere with standard racks, necessitating the purchase of disk brake compatible racks that are usually slightly more expensive. Moving the mounts to the chainstay (bringing the caliper inside the rear triangle) makes the frame compatible with a wider variety of racks if that is something you're interested in.


Replacing Sora crankarm so I accidentally screwed the wrong side pedal into my left hand crankarm on my Giant Defy 3 2014, and I have been looking to buy a replacement part myself and get a mechanic to install it.

I am wondering what would be compatible with the original Sora groupset components? I haven't been able to find just a crankarm, so I am looking to buy a crankset.

I can get a Shimano Sora Double 3550 9 Speed Chainset for 40GBP.

Would other 9 speed cranksets work?

What other left hand crankarms would be compatible?

Thanks.

If you're replacing the whole crankset and BB, then any 9-speed double crankset should work. The chain width for 9-speed systems is the same for all makes (not the case for 10 or 11 speed).

But before you do that, I'd look around and see if you can replace just the left  arm. Any crank designed for the Shimano "outboard bearing" BB should work (those are the ones that clamp onto the BB spindle with two pinch bolts). Just make sure the crank arm is the same length.


dual pivot side pull brake shoe touches wheel rim. How do I fix it? Based on Sheldon Brown what I have on my front tire is the "Dual Pivot Sidepull" type brake. The right brake shoe touches the wheel without having to actually apply the brakes. The left has a small gap, and only touches the wheel when the brake is pulled as I would assume is expected behavior.

How exactly do I loosen it? Currently, I am riding on rollers, and I have rotated "up" the thingie (sorry I don't know the exact term . still learning the technical details) on the very left there, which has "loosened" the entire mechanism and now the brake shoes (obviously) do not touch the wheel rims anymore. But I can't really take it out on the road like this.

Which screws am I looking at loosening, or what exactly am I supposed to be doing to make sure the right brake shoe doesn't touch the wheel rim (while still being close enough to the rim that pulling on the brakes works correctly).

See at Sheldon's page about centering the brakes: meaning loosening the bolt that attaches the unit to the frame and rotating the caliper until both pads are at equal distance from the rim. Then re-tighten and check once more. You should also check if the wheel is correctly centered in the frame or fork. In case of doubt always refer to your LBS.


What pressure should I run my Mountain Bike tires at? Should I run my mountain bike at the suggested PSI/Bar on the tire/rim?  Or should I run it a bit lower?  Or is it more about conditions?  Should I run lower if I am running on softer terrain?

Tire pressure is generally a trade-off between three things:

Rolling resistance (more pressure == rolls easier)
Pinch flat resistance (more pressure == less chance for the tube to tear when a rock squashes the tire toward the rim)
Grip (with less pressure, the tire can conform better to rocks, roots, and other terrain giving a larger contact surface)

If you are riding terrain where grip isn't too much of an issue (flat or low-angle dirt and dry rocks for example), then higher pressure will keep you going fast without pinch flatting.

If you are riding steep downhills and/or on slippery open rock outcroppings, grip will be more important than rolling resistance, so use as little pressure as won't pinch-flat quickly.

There is a 4th trade-off as well: weight. You can buy double-sidewall downhill tires that allow you to run very low pressures (such as 25psi) without any danger of pinch-flatting, but these can weigh almost double what normal cross-country tires do.

As mentioned in other answers, your tires don't have to be the same pressure. Usually grip is more important on the front tire since most of your weight is on it while descending difficult downhill sections. Similarly, when riding on flat or climbing, most of your weight is over the back tire, so rolling resistance and pinch-flat resistance are more important for the back.

I personally ride with a low-pressure (30psi in a tire rated 35-65psi) double-sidewall downhill tire on the front and with a higher pressure (50psi in a tire rated 45-65psi) cross-country tire on the rear. I sacrifice some weight, but otherwise get the best of both worlds: fabulous grip going down and easy rolling on the flats and climbs.

Use your best judgment in going below the rated pressure of the tire, as pinch flats become more likely. If you go below the rated pressure, be sure to test it out on hard impacts (such as a rock-corner) on easy terrain before throwing yourself at high speed down a mountain where a blow-out would be catastrophic.


Tire selection for winter trike riding? I'm thinking of trying out some winter riding on a recumbent tadpole trike. (ie the single drive wheel is in the rear).

With regular tires it slips all over the place; of course you can't really wipe out but still its not practical and is perhaps unsafe to ride that way.

I was contemplating rugged snow tires or even studded tires, but I'm not sure what configuration for this type of trike would be ideal. I think studs on the rear may be necessary for max traction but I'm not sure if that would be the best choice for the front? Could it even have any downsides? It is possible to roll this trike by cornering too hard, not sure if studs would even make that more likely.

Temperatures in the teens/20s (F, or -12 to -4 C) are typical, and snow is on the ground a lot of the time. I'm planning to ride on packed down roads or trails, not in deep or loose snow. Secondary roads are generally gritted, not salted.

The existing tires are all 20x1.50 and there is ample clearance for fatter tires. On the front there is literally nothing near the wheels at all, and in the rear the frame is spaced out a lot. I think we can assume tire width is not a limitation.

The current tires are pretty smooth - they slide easily in gravel for instance. Totally unsuitable for ice or snow.

Thanks

For bicycles the so called "snow tires" are essentially mountain bike tires with large gaps between the lugs so snow will come out.

Studded tires are intended for ice and do little good in loose snow. I have a snow bike (aka fat bike) with knobby tires designed for snow - but no studs.

I have another bike with Schwalbe Marathon 26"x2.2" studded tires and these are great on ice but are pretty much useless in snow more than 3" as they don't have a deep lugged design and they'll float on top of the snow where the studs cannot grip anything.

To recommend a tire I would need more information on wheel size, tire clearance and the riding conditions. For deep snow a knobby tire likely will work best. If you're encountering hard pack and ice then definitely consider studs.

Also note that narrow tires will knife through loose snow better than wide tires which tend to float more.  So in some conditions a narrow (1.375") studded tire will perform better than a much wider 2.25" tire as the narrow tire will knife through the snow better for the studs to bite in.  Again, this is very dependent on the conditions.


Commuting and recreation scooter with handlebar brake lever I am looking for a commuting / recreation scooter but have no experience of using one. I am very familiar with riding a bike and using handlebar-mounted brake levers.
My budget is sub-£100 (GBP) and this appears to give me three options:

scooter with foot operated rear brake (friction on tyre)
scooter with foot operated rear brake (friction on tyre) plus ancillary handlebar mounted lever
budget scooter with rear disc brake and handlebar mounted lever

For occasional use I presume friction-on-tyre would be adequate, albeit cause accelerated tyre wear. Does this type of brake perform adequately for an adult (70kg) travelling around town?
Would the additional handlebar-mounted lever be useful or prove ineffective for rapid braking? From the photos I've seen, there appears to be little mechanical advantage in the braking mechanism.
Is a rear disc brake a desirable option for occasional use in fair weather? My concern is the trade-off in getting a better braking system vs. lower standard elsewhere in a budget machine.

I used to commute by kick-driven scooter. I rode about 3 miles a day, perhaps 700 miles in total (max 5% grade uphill; max 7.5% downhill). I feel reasonably qualified to discuss some of the implications.
My rides were two small folding Razor scooters, bought second-hand, at $10 each. They have the rear-friction brakes. One was in great shape. The other had some peeling handlebar foam but was otherwise fine.
Braking
You need to lean your weight way back. Folding scooters typically have wheels that are quite small, and even those that do not fold will still have much smaller wheels than a bicycle. If you don't lean backward, you are likely to pitch forward over the handlebars when slowing down.
Unless it is wet outside, the limiting factor of foot-brakes is not typically the braking force. It is how much torque you can put onto the rear of the scooter to avoid that nasty trip over the handlebars. Your braking efficacy is certainly diminished in wet weather, and you may need to reduce speed to compensate or ride the brake to slough off some of the water. Wet leaves are your worst case, and they stay wet much longer than pavement. Wet leaves will slide right over each other, giving you zero braking power and probably fishtailing your scooter.
The rear foot brake operates via friction. This means it has to convert all of the reduction in your forward-movement energy into sound and heat. That's a lot of heat. You can never use it barefoot because of burns, and I literally melted the sole of some shoes. This is probably an argument in favor of handbrakes. But recognize that the handbrake advantage is more about heat dissipation, and less about braking power where gains are mooted by front-tip-over torque.
After 500 miles on the first scooter, the aluminum panel of the rear brake wore through, and I combined the best parts of each scooter to continue riding. The wheel had worn down somewhat, but it outlasted the aluminum. Also, you can swap front and rear wheels for longevity.
Other considerations for scooters
Wheel size is a very important factor. The larger your wheels, the less you will notice bad surfaces. Any discontinuity in the pavement that is higher than half your wheel radius is one you must prepare and lean back for. Any discontinuity higher than your wheel radius is one you have to bunny hop. (Or until you can hop: step off for a pace, pop the scooter over the bump, and step back on. This is a motion you will perform a lot.)
Ultimately, I stopped using mine because of foot pain, primarily on the uphill sections. I tried different foot strokes, but those strokes just wore out my feet in different places. There might be advice you could get from longboard riders that would be helpful for this, but my "scommuting" days are over. I now have a folding bicycle.
I still have the remaining scooter and occasionally take it to the workplace when I want to grab lunch from a slightly farther distance, but it's no longer a regular part of my routine.


Why are recumbents so slow uphill? I've ridden a recumbent a few times and noticed that going uphill is very, very slow. Given that recumbents are supposed to be more efficient than diamond frame bicycles, why are they so darn slow uphill?

Related: does "efficiency" mean something different when applied to recumbents?

Bike geometry and bio-mechanical topics have been discussed by others already, but I wonder if a large part of what you're observing is a relative difference between speeds on the two types of terrain?

Think of it this way:

You ride a "regular" bike on the flat. Your ultimate top speed is essentially governed by aerodynamics. You reach a speed where the force of the air you're pushing against equals the force you put in.

When you ride a recumbent under the same conditions, it's more aerodynamically efficient, so your top speed is higher.

Makes sense.

Going uphill it's a little different.

A larger part of your input energy goes in to overcoming gravity. Which is why your top speed will be lower.

Riding a recumbent uphill, you're still overcoming exactly the same amount of gravity, so aside from other mechanical advantages a recumbent may or may not give you in this situation, your top speed will be roughly similar to riding any other type of bike. The aerodynamics play a much smaller part in the equation..

Summary : the relative difference in the two top speeds is going to be greater  (and more noticeable) on a more aerodynamically efficient machine.

Caveat: I'm neither a scienctist, nor a recumbent rider :P


Bumpy ride. Is it the casing or the inner tube? I pumped a new tube to about 80 psi (I missed that on the casing the recommended pressure is 100 psi). On the ride immediatly, I hit a very small kerb harder than I wished and after I noticed that my ride was bumpier than usual (though I couldnt say for sure if it's because of the kerb). Upon visual inspection, I notice that the casing doesn't go perfectly round (between the lowest point and the highest there seems to be maybe a 3-4 mm difference). The inner rim seems round enough but the whole wheel (back wheel) seems a bit wobbly.

I think it's not the rim that has issues. How can I check if I need to change the casing or the inner tube?

Thank you.

OP said:

  Well I still had a warranty on my wheels so I've changed them. They
  stopped being true I think. When rolled at high speed the wheel
  (without tubbing and tire) was very unstable.

Hooray for warranties!  Remember, always keep your receipts, and don't procrastinate or the warranty window may close on you.


Off brand bearings for hubs? I'm looking to replace the bearings a of set of Fulcrum Red Power 29 hubs (RT-004 front and RP9-004 rear). I'm having a hard time sourcing them from Canada and I'd also rather order 2 each rather than the 4 each sold in the package. Is it advisable to buy off brand bearings or should I avoid that? If yes, do I just need to look for the same dimensions as the branded bearings?

With bike hubs you are generally safe buying a high-quality generic replacement as long as it's actually the same bearing type, same dimensions, same kind of shields, and with 100%-ish grease fill. Getting all those things can have some subtleties.
If you're getting something from outside the bike world, like a local bearing house, you want to ask for 100% grease fill or add it yourself, because otherwise you won't get it. That said I'm not sure that the 18307s for the front exist outside the bike world.
Within the options packaged and sold for bikes you'll probably find there's at least one applicable option each from Enduro, Phil, and others. You may also find you have a choice on the seal type. Your front ones, again being kind of weird and made-up, may not pronounce the seal type or anything else on the existing bearings. In that case you'll need to either choose how aggressive of sealing you think you want, or examine the old seals and figure out what they are (LLU, LLB, etc) if you want it to match exactly. That said if you're wearing out bearings on a mountain hub it often makes sense to just get the most aggressive sealing you can find.
Perhaps more to your real question, yes it's mostly fine, since in many cases the good quality aftermarket options are as good or better, and sometimes a lot better, and in practice there is often confluence between needing to replace the bearings in the first place and the original ones being junk.


What should I do with a cracked titanium Lemond Tete De Course frame? I have a 2002 titanium Lemond frame.  Just found a crack on down tube. Bummed to not be able to ride it anymore.  Is it worth trying to repair (if it's even possible)?

Getting it fixed may cost more than the frame is worth and there's no guarantee it won't crack again. My husband's titanium Litespeed road frame cracked on the head tube twice. The first time, Litespeed replaced the frame.  The second time (cracked in almost the same spot as the first one) Litespeed said the frame had exceeded the "lifetime" of the lifetime warranty. He took it to a couple of welders but they said it would be $600 - $900 to fix (weld on a new head tube).

He gave the Litespeed frame to a welding student for parts/pratice and replaced it with a cheaper aluminum frame. Since he's not racing, he's not worried about a few extra ounces of weight in the frame and if it breaks he's only out a couple hundred dollars instead of a couple thousand.


Is the Shimano 2303 crank arm and the 2300 crank arm the same? I bought a Shimano 2303 crankset (52/42/34 triple) by mistake although I should have bought a 2300 crank

If I remove the inner 34t, will it have the same structure as 2300 crank? By structure I mean things like chain line.

According to the Shimano manual, 2300 should use 110mm B.B. and 2303 113mm B.B. while the chain line is 43.5mm(2300) and 45mm(2303).

After the separation of the smallest chainring, if I use a 110mm square bottom bracket, would I have 43.5mm chain line?

I'm worried because I'm using a road front derailleur and a road STI lever.

Not a specialist on this, but I assume that the 2303 (being a triple crankset) would have the chainline aligned to have the middle ring right on the center of the cassette, while the 2300 would probably have middle of the two chainrings in line with the cassette. You could probably get bottom bracket with a shorter spindle to move the two remaining chainrings closer to the frame to make things line up perfectly. Be careful that the chainrings and crank arm do not contact or rub on the chainstay when using a shorter bottom bracket.

As far as your levers go, you will probably be fine, as both the 2300 and 2303 are build for road shifters, and there's no different between road and mountain groupsets anyway in the 2300 level of components. For instance, my bike uses 2300 shifters with a deore rear derailleur.


Optimal front / rear weight ratio What is your preferred weight ratio between front to rear wheels on your bike(s)?  I always assumed 40% front / 60% rear was "normal".  I have been experimenting with tire pressure and stem length trying to improve front tire grip and steering on my trail bike which is often slipping in corners.
These are the front / rear weight ratios I measured on my bikes:
Full suspension MTB:  38% / 62%
Hardtail MTB:  39% / 61%
Cyclocross:  42% / 58%
(Methodology: me on bike with one wheel on a scale and opposite wheel slightly elevated to compensate for height of scale)
The frequently referenced Frank Berto tire pressure experiments assumed a 45%/55% ratio.  Those were road oriented tests.  I'm guessing I might get closer to 45/55 on a road frame.  But I am no where near that on my mountain bikes and was surprised to find I was slightly below 40% front weight on both bikes.
Has anyone else ever actually checked this for themselves?  What ratio do you have?  Have you tried to alter your ratio?

I have been experimenting with tire pressure and stem length trying to improve front tire grip and steering on my trail bike which is often slipping in corners.

I cannot see how tire pressure can affect weight distribution in any measurable manner. A very minor effect on the static weight distribution may perhaps be observed on a fat bike, where a severe underinflation of one tire actually changes bike's geometry (by visibly raising or lowering one of its ends). Adjusting tires' pressure may help with getting a better traction, but the involved physics do not have much with the weight distribution to do.
Changing stem length is obviously a different story, as a longer stem may force the rider to shift their center of mass forward.

I'm guessing I might get closer to 45/55 on a road frame. But I am nowhere near that on my mountain bikes

I do not see how a "recommended" weight distribution, if there was such a thing at all, provided for a road bike can be applied as a measure of anything for a mountain bike. These types of bicycles have different dynamics and areas of use.
If we track trends in changes of static weight distribution for mountain bikes over the last three decades, I am sure that we will see a trend of weight shifting from front to rear. MTBs of 90's were inspired by road frames, and modern MTB's tend to have rather short chainstays.
What really makes these numbers irrelevant is the fact is that under braking/acceleration the weight distribution between front/rear wheels is nowhere close to the static values.


Frequent flats on a trainer I was using an old bike on a trainer and the tire fell to pieces.  I had a local bike shop replace the tire with a special CycleOps trainer tire but the tube kept going flat.

I just noticed that the trainer tire size is 700x23c and the original tire size is 700x28C.  Could this be the cause of the problem?  (The guy at the shop was telling me I'd have to replace the whole rear wheel - which would have cost more than the bike itself.)

Highly unlikely that a mismatch between the rim width and tire width is causing flats. I would hope that if your rim was too wide for a 23mm tire and would not seat properly the bike shop would not have installed it.

Note that on a trainer you have a much greater margin of error with tire sizes because the rear wheel isn't taking very much radial load, and no lateral load.

The first thing to check for if you are getting frequent punctures is a problem with the rim tape exposing the spokes or nipples or another sharpe surface inside the rim, or a foreign object embedded in the tire that is abrading the tube. As you have a new trainer tire that has never been ridden on the road the latter should not be the case.

Lining the tire logo up with the valve and keeping track of where punctures occur on the tube can help track down the location of whatever is damaging the tube.

You say that you are getting flats, but not specifically punctures. If the tube is just deflating either a small slow puncture or a faulty valve is likely the culprit.


New steel frame, paint issue -- options? I've bought a new chromoly tourer.  It's a very nice bike but I noticed (while on a rather wet ride the other day) a loose flake of paint that fell off when I touched it.  It's on a rack-mounting lug, can only be a fault in the original paint job, and appears to be down to bare metal.

It seems to me that this is a weak spot for rust to set in, and should be sorted out by the manufacturer or dealer.  Would touching it in be as robust as a factory finish if they could come up with some touch-up paint?

It seems silly to treat something that should be easily fixed as a warranty issue, but I don't want a spot that's going to let rust in.  Am I overthinking this?

I'd have been happy with a repair, even doing the work myself, but neither I nor the bike shop could get suitable paint out of the manufacturer.

It ended up being a warranty replacement. The shop (a major chain of bike specialists) were good; their options were limited.


Confusion regarding the Shimano numering system I have learned that the first couple of letters on a stamped Shimano part mean the part type e.g. FD - front derailleur, and the first digit indicates the series e.g.

M960 XTR/DCL 9s
M950 XTR 9s
M900 XTR 8s
M800 Saint 9s
M760 DeoreXT/DCL 9s
M750 DeoreXT 9s
M740 DeoreXT 8s
M700 DeoreXT 7s
M630 DeoreDX 7s
M580 DeoreLX/DCL 9s
M570 DeoreLX 9s
M560 DeoreLX 8s
M550 DeoreLX 7s
M520 Deore 9s
M510 Deore 8s

However, when I look at a couple of bikes, there is nothing similar:

FC-M191 is an Alivio crank arm, while the "1" should have indicated a Tourney
ST-EK70 and SL-M310 - those are both shifters, the first one with integrated brake lever. Why are the first two letters different? What is "EK"?
CS-HG30-8I - cogset marking - wtf!?

Ideally, I would appreciate a .pdf Shimano catalogue, the paper version of hich I have seen at the LBS. Alternatively, explaination about my listed parts would also be an answer.

Not a full answer, but I can fill in one small blank for you - in the CS-HG30-8I, the HG refers to Hyper Glide - this is Shimano's name for multi-speed sprockets that are designed to allow smooth gear shifting.


Upgrade 160mm to 200mm disc brake rotor I want to upgrade my mtb's front brake to a 200 or 203mm brake rotor.

current setup (180mm):

My front fork's posts are for a 160mm rotor (without any adapters/brackets, with the brake caliper bolted directly to the fork a 160mm rotor fits).
I am currently using a 160mm-180mm adapter with a 180mm rotor but would like to upgrade to 200 or 203 mm rotor.

Questions:

I looked online and couldn't find any (front) 160-200mm or 160-203mm adapter brackets (PM-PM).
Maybe I did not look in the right places, could anyone tell me where I could get such an adapter/what to look for when buying one?
Or should I use a combination of two adapter brackets? (160-180mm followed by a 180-200mm or 180-203mm bolted onto the first adapter bracket) (as can be seen in the images in this thread: https://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/160-200mm-brake-adapter-919684.html )

My setup:
Fork: Rock Shocks Solo Air Spring 26"
Brake caliper (current): Magura MT4
Brake caliper (to be installed): Magura MT5

Thank you very much!

You need a +40mm post to post adapter. The Magura one is their part number QM42. Usually these kinds of adapters interchange between brands, but just getting the Magura one plus a Magura or Shimano 203mm rotor should set you up.


I keep destroying new tubeless tires! My "Googling" haven't exactly yielded many results with people having such obnoxious issues with destroying tires as I do. In short, I destroy such a high number of tires that its becoming one of the most expensive "consumable" in this hobby. And these tires are of the "Most durable and expensive" ones, so I'm not cheaping out on these.

For example, sometimes a tire will last for only 3 rides like my current "minions dhr" that I just bought and destroyed (rear tire), but front tires also goes quickly. I'd say average life expectancy for a tire would be 10 rides (if I'm lucky). The tires end up having minimal wear to the threads, obviously, so I often have to bin what looks like new tires.
The kind of punctures i get are those that the sealants wont fix, typically larger ruptures/slashes. I'd like to clarify, these are tubeless tires running no inner tube.

This might be a silly question altogether, but I just thought I should ask, and if someone are having similar problems...

Is it "normal" to go through a tire this quickly, or am I being unlucky/doing something seriously wrong?

I follow a lot of mtb-vloggers, and I just had to "laugh" when "BKXC"(Good YouTube channel! ^^), said he wouldn't buy Schwalbe tires as they wore out in just 3 or 4 months. Well, I'd consider myself being lucky having a set of tires past a month...

I understand that there are a multitude of parameters that can affect the longevity of said tires, but here are some to hopefully clarify things:

Rider and riding style: I'm on the heavier side, being at 215lbs(95kg), equipped. I Usually pick the cleaner lines, avoiding sharp rocks, etc. I dont't exatcly ride super hard either.

Bike type: This is a 2018 Remedy 9.8 (basically an enduro type of bike, with 160mm fork). I don't feel like I can push this bike to its limit.

The area in which I ride (Norway, near the capital -- woods with little elevation), usually has a lot of roots, occasional rock gardens, although singletrack is scarce. Also typically wet, "swampy".

Sounds like you are running your tire pressures WAY too low or high. If you are experiencing tire failures due to "larger ruptures/slashes" that's indicative of a pressure issue.

If too low, and you hit a root/rock too hard, the tire will deform too much and you'll strike rim, thus compressing the inside of the tire against a sharp surface and/or fold back on itself to create a weak point on the tire surface.

If tire pressures too high, the sidewalls and treads are bulging more and thus more prone to failures from rock/root hits. Also, when pressures are too high, the sealant is incapable of sealing any holes due to interior pressure pushing the sealant out too fast or possibly even evacuating all of the sealant.

There is a "Goldilocks", not-too-high/not-too-low pressure for tires that allows them to deflect enough off of roots, rocks, and trail chatter but not so much that you strike the rim on those or risk blowing sealant out. For my use, at 172lbs weight and hard pedaling; that pressure is about 21~24psi on 29x2.3 tires w/ about 3~4oz of Orange Seal inside. I will occasionally finish races with little bits of sealant visible on the tread of the tires where it experienced a small puncture and sealed as intended but not lose so much air that it affects my handling.

I race singlespeed MTB and run exclusivly Schwalbe tires with their snakeskin sidewalls (thin), and their Speedgrip compound. The current tires I installed back in May have 353 miles on them with zero flats and won my regional XC series as well as placed me 9th in USA MTB National Chapionships. I typically get well over 1,000 miles out of a set before swapping them out.

Hope this helps; best of luck.


Trek 750 multitrack chainnsize and length? It has 3 gears in the front and 7 gears in the rear. And the derailers are suntour XC-Master.

Chains are highly standardized, but are specific to the number of sprockets in the rear cluster (because the spacing of those sprockets is narrower the more of them there are).

You simply need a chain marked as '6/7/8 speed' ('speed' here refers to number of sprockets in the rear cluster).

All chains are sold with more links than are needed. They are sized to each bicycle, cut to the proper length and joined.

Instructions for sizing, cutting and joining the chain are easy to find, but here's my favorite.

Buying a chain with a 'quick-link' type joining link is preferable as these are easier to join that those that use a joining pin that must be driven in with a chain tool.


Chain skipping on new single speed freewheeel I just got a Colnago Master Arabesque single speed conversion from a friend who moved abroad.

It's set up as a fixie on a flip flop Hub. I flipped the wheel and installed a new single speed 1/8 freewheel, loaded up the chain but it's skipping under pressure,
wondering if anyone had any ideas why along with the below?

New chain? - will be getting a new 1/8 chain today
Misalignment, I noticed he'd probably bodged a cold set to get it to single speed, may be that the freewheel is out of alignment with the crank? - But then the fixie set up he had works fine when I flip it back.

Does anyone have any other suggestions as to why it skips so badly under even a little pressure?

One two options given that your freewheel is new:

The chain is too loose. A chain tensioner might help. Alternatively, if you have semi horizontal dropouts just pull the rear wheel back and tighten.
The front chainring is worn. This has happened to me before. Replacing the chainring solved the problem.


What are the disadvantages of securing your foot to the pedal? I understand that there are many benefits when it comes to different methods of securing your foot to the pedal, and how they allow for more power through an entire revolution of the pedal.

However I am struggling to find a source talking about the disadvantages of these systems. If you know of any different disadvantages for different types, please explain.

The only disadvantages I could think of are:
- The higher price for clip-less pedals and the need to have cycling specific shoes (which are usually not comfortable in walking)
- Not being able to comfortably ride your bike with normal shoes again. However, you can overcome this by going for dual sided pedals.

On the bright side, you get to use different muscles while pedaling which make cycling more comfortable. You eliminate the chances of your foot slipping off the pedal and getting your leg hit.

When I first started using clip-less pedals, I only fell once. It was because I forgot to un-clip at the end of my ride. Now, if I was going to fall off my bike for any reason, I can smoothly and quickly un-clip my self to prevent the fall.


Are both sides of a Avid rotor the same? i've got a Cotic Roadrat, and the disc mount on the fork is on the right hand side (as you're seated).  However, the front rotor of the avid BB5s (road) i just bought can only be fit on the left fork if I am to follow the installation instructions to the letter - ie rotation must follow the arrow, and the writing must be facing outward.  Can I use this rotor on the right hand side? That is, keep the rotation correct, but have the writing facing inwards?  Are both sides the an avid rotor the same? I assume its the direction of rotation that is the important bit, and not the surface.  Thanks, PB

Rotors are identical on both sides but are marked to ensure correct rotation as they aren't bi-directional. Few hubs and forks allow for a right hand mounted disc so rotors are only marked for left hand set up. The water and mud shedding capabilities drives the design and direction they should turn.

The earlier Roadrat RB2 was designed for a right hand mounted disc brake (outwards facing on front fork) to negate pressures put on the wheel when braking. The wheel was simply reversed in the drop  out. The new RB3 fork has a left hand mounted disc brake but uses a 9mm thru-axle design which integrates with current 9mm QR hubs. Lawyer lugs achieve the same thing.


Rust on chain and cassette It looks like rust on my chain and cassette.

Both were new 5 months (4000 km) ago. The chain is about 60% worn/stretched. I've been riding 5 days/week, 40 km/day, Toronto on mild winter roads, and using only 'dry' lube (i.e. alcohol and teflon) on the chain.

What should I know about that?

I like to keep my bike in good working order, so that it rides very well (but, arriving home each evening after an hour-long commute, I have had no time for bike care: I just lock it, in the laundry room). Is this rust only cosmetic?

Should I use a winter lube? What (product or servicing) should affect/prevent rust on the cassette, if that's necessary?

When I replace the chain (when it's next serviced, perhaps two months from now) should I ask the LBS to replace the cassette again as well?

It's unclear how much rust you're talking about, but it's unlikely that a bike could develop serious rust on a chain in 5 months unless left outside with no maintenance.

I've dealt with some pretty rusty bikes over the years (especially when I spent a spell working on donated bikes for Christmas Anonymous) and I've never seen a cog that was so rusty that it was unserviceable.

The chain, of course, is a different matter, but generally rust on a chain is of little consequence unless it causes "stiff links", and that won't happen on a bike that's used regularly.

I'd recommend that you switch to a slightly less "dry" lube (or at least give the chain a few squirts of regular oil every now and again).  Also, if you've been cleaning the chain at all, be a little less diligent cleaning it -- it's not necessary to get it shiny bright, you just want to get off the crud.

Otherwise don't worry about it.


Waterproof overshoes: am I using them right? As part of my "in case it rains" gear, I have waterproof jacket, waterproof trousers and waterproof overshoes.
The first time I used them I had the "brilliant" idea to tuck the trousers into the overshoes, with the result of pouring all the rainwater directly into my shoes. What a miserable day it was.
Last time, remembering the previous experience, I have fastened the trousers Velcro straps around the overshoes making sure that the overshoes were under the trousers. At the end of the rainy day my socks, shoes and feet were nevertheless drenched in water.
Am I missing something in the way I should use overshoes, or is it simply unrealistic to have really waterproof overshoes?
I use cleats, leather mountain-bike shoes and when the above happened I rode about 6 hours, the first 4 under the rain, on mostly paved roads and some white roads.

I've got a couple of pairs, and have had similar experiences.
The best I can do is with my better pair (with a reasonably tight but comfortable ankle strap) underneath my splash - resistant leg warmers. That keeps out a short heavy shower, or light drizzle for a few hours, but persistent rain always gets in (and anyway feet get sweaty in overshoes). Short socks (well below the ankle band) help as they don't provide a part for water to wick.
They'll never seal well enough if your feet dip in a puddle, even if, like me in winter, you tape up any vents in your soles. Even splashing from underneath can get in eventually.
The overshoes are still very beneficial in cold wet weather, as the water in there is much warmer than the rain, and wind chill is reduced. In warm weather I often don't use them (e.g. Saturday I was riding all day, mostly in rain, but would have been too hot with overshoes).
I only cycle in waterproof trousers well below freezing, as a third windproof layer over bike tights and running leggings. Even breathable ones are too hot and get very sweaty.   In fact, in summer rain I'm reluctant to wear any form of jacket.  Breathable ones are too warm and  aren't breathable enough, so I carry something thin and light, but end up just as wet from sweat.


What happens when a bike has not had maintenance for a long time? I recently traded my Kent BMX bike I got from Wal-Mart:

for a Ross road bike ).

My friend tells me the bike sat in his back yard collecting rust, I see it has rust on the chain, the gears, brake lines and the chrome handlebars. The bike rides ok but the gear shifts need a good push and pull with my thumb to work. I know the bike has had no maintenance in a very long time so I was wondering what should I do?

When I was doing bike rehab for Christmas Anonymous I saw many bikes like this.  It can be good or it can be bad, depending on how much weather it's seen.

First thing is to do the obvious -- wash it (we used a power washer), clean & oil the chain, clean and oil the derailers.

If it's been in the weather enough then the cables will rusted solid and will need to be replaced.  Otherwise, squirt spray lube (not WD-40, but something that's more of a lube) into the ends of the cables and work them well.  Also lube the brake lever pivots and put a dash of lube on the brake caliper pivots (but take care to keep oil away from the brake pads).

The bearings are the biggie.  From the sound of it yours may be OK, but exposure to the weather for years contaminates the lube and washes some of it away, so it's best to repack all the bearings, starting with the wheel bearings.  (I've seen bearings where all the lube was washed out and there was nothing but bare (and rusted) metal.)  If you've never done this before, start with the front wheel, after studying instructions on the Park Tool site.  And if, when you open up the front hub, the bearings look good and the grease appears reasonably fresh (it will always be dirty) then you can defer work on the other bearings.

Another thing to look for would be dry-rot with the tires and tubes. Cracking in the tires is a bad sign. Be ready to replace the rim tape if you have to change tubes.


How to tighten v-brake pad without turning it out of position? I find it hard to tighten the hexagonal bolt of a v-brake pad without turning the whole pad out of position. I need to hold it in place somehow; I've tried with a big adjustable wrench, but it's still difficult (doesn't fit very well, and the pad is flexy).
Why isn't a small part of the pad body hexagonal so I can hold it with a wrench while tightening?

What's the proper way to tighten the pad onto the arm?

I usually just grab the pad with my fingers, and carefully apply torque in the opposite direction of the torque I apply to the screw. The two torques must be roughly equal (very roughly), if you apply too much torque to the pad, you are going to turn it the opposite direction.

It is not enough to grab the pad and try to hold it in place, you have to apply torque proactively to stop the first bit of movement before it happens.

Done right, you can tighten those screws very securely without rotating the pad.

Of course, you need to position the pads properly first, which is easiest to do by applying the brake, adjusting the position of the pads with the brake applied, and fixing their position by tightening the screws with your fingers. You don't really need any torque at that point, as you are just fixing the position. It's when you take out the wrench to tighten the screw for good that you need to apply the counter-torque to the pad with your other hand.

But, of course, a hexagonal surface to grab the pad with a wrench would be nice...


I want to weld or braze the pedal to the crank arm, but what metals are they? I ruined the threading in my crank arm, and would like to weld or braze it back on, instead of buying a new crank set. It is a cheap old bike, so the result does not have to be perfect, but it should be cheap and durable.

I have welded on iron (an exhaust pipe and the like) in the past, and if this was just iron, I could fix it with no problems, but in this case it is not that easy.

Pedal arm: I think it is of aluminium. It seems light. Not magnetic. Looks like aluminium. I have no other guesses.

Pedal shaft: Steel, maybe even cast iron? I don't know how to tell the difference. It is definitely not aluminium. The material is stronger than the alu in the pedal arm, since the thread is intact. It looks sort of dirtyish / dark gray. Dark gray like some heavy parts in an engine which I believe are made from cast iron. Only slight rust despite a long life. Very far from the look of a stainless bolt.

Can you help me figure out what metals they are made from, so I can move on to finding the appropriate welding or brazing? Thanks.

Welding aluminum and steel is not a DIY skill - read This.

If you must repair rather than replace, a helicoil is the correct way to address the problem. A crank would be cheaper than the coil alone, let alone the time to fix it. Chemical bonding (AKA. Glue) is probably the only DIY solution.

The issue I see is that when a pedal comes off while riding, it usually ends in tears (at best) up to a stay in hospital or worse. Why take the risk?

Second hand cranks are readily available - I have a box of bit with at least 2 sets and an old bike with another if I needed it.  Your LBS will probably have something for a few dollars. Visit you local rubbish tip/recycle center - I can almost guarantee they will have an old, unride-able bike with usable cranks.


Uphills and downhills vs a flat I started the debate with my brother asking him, "If you had to do a 20km ride around a circle I.e at the end of your ride you arrive at the same place you started, would you rather cycle on a flat or have uphills and downhills to get the best time?" To this he answered "I would rather cycle on uphills and downhills, mainly because I have time to recover on the downhills." I said that I'd rather go on a flat because you burn out faster on the uphill than you recover on the downhill since the time spent going down is considerably shorter. Id like to hear from the community on which side of the debate they stand and why.

Note: someone please edit my tags I have no idea which to use.

This question explains that if you travel on uneven ground, your average speed drops. This is because you spend more time in the slow climbs and less time in the fast descents.


Chain seems to slip under pressure? While I was riding I went to stand and it felt like the chain busted or came off! I jumped off and turned the pedals by hand and they turned fine but any pressure at all and it slips... any ideas ?
I haven’t been on a bike for years, I managed to fix the disk brake caliper  today (never even knew the were a thing until today) and I lost a brake pad so was fairly easy fix.
It’s a Schwinn dual extension.

Sounds like the freehub/freewheel is having problems engaging the pawls.
The freehub is the component in the middle of your rear wheel, and goes between the hub and the cassette.  If your bike is older, the same task might be done by a freewheel which is integral with your cassette/cogs.
Note you can look up all these parts in the Terminology Index
Here's a great photo showing what pawls are inside the freehub/freewheel.

As you pedal, the outside ring rotates clockwise, and the four little levers are caught, transmitting power to the middle part and driving the rear wheel around.  When you stop pedalling, the outer ring stops, and the inner is driven by the ground via the wheel, and the click-click-click is the noise of the pawls tapping around the recesses.
In your case it sounds like the pawls are not fully engaging, and leg-power is enough to unseat them.   Your options are

Bounce the bike hard, or tap the axle with something solid like a rock or hammer - very temporary fix that may help you get home again.
De-grease the inside of the mech by liberally soaking with degreaser.  Sometimes the valleys can be gummed up by dried lubricant, and soaking it out helps.  This is horribly messy, and will contaminate any brakes so remove the wheel from the bike, and the rotor from the hub first.  Or you can remove the cassette and freehub or the freewheel from the rear wheel, with specialised tools.
Disassembly - I've never had much luck with disassembling either freewheels or freehubs.   There could be a hundred very small bearing balls inside there, and they never go back together right in my experience.
Replacement

A freewheel is cheap enough, just buy a new one with the same number of cogs and the same tooth counts.  You'll need a new chain too.
A cassette can be reused, but there are a lot more possible fitments for the freehub on the inside
Third option can be to fit up a used replacement wheel, of the same size from a donor bike.  A New wheel tends to be quite expensive, and is not economic.