Over-locknut dimension (hub distance) (cup depth) changed after 10.000km Recently I wanted to replace my bearings and spotted something strange.

My Over Locknut Dimension has reduced by 7mm.

You can spot the difference when you compare it to the new hub:

Can this happen if the bearings are set too tight?

Old cup is obviously damaged:

Also one very important fact, my quick release axle was broken :) :

So I wanted to know what is the main reason that caused the OLD reduction by 7mm? Did anyone else had similar experience?

Hub model: QUANDO KT-A12R / QR Type for Freewheel

EDITs

Dimension that I'm referring to is the "M" according to this image

Inside distance(edit) of the hub is reduced by 7mm (non-drive side bearings - drive side bearings). Depth of the cup has increased by 7mm.

OLD with the original hub is 135mm.

If I use the same spacers O.L.D for the used hub is ~128mm.

O.L.D measurement

BTW I am heavy guy - 105kg, 2m tall, that explains axle breakdown :)

So it is not a diameter, it is distance! 135 mm is a classic value for rear MTB wheels with 8-11 speed cassettes. 128 mm sounds more like a hub with freewheel would have however.

O.L.D. is a parameter for the axle (over the locknuts distance), not the hub shell width you show on the pictures. Having more washers or thicker cone washers on the old hub might explain the difference you see.


Did my bike frame crack? during my morning ride today, I slipped and fell down, and as a result, a crack formed on my carbon frame. I have checked the entirety of the bike and this is the only crack, but I am not sure if I would need to go repair this. My bike is Cannondale Supersix Evo Hi-Mod Ultegra.

Thank you very much.

It certainly doesn't look healthy to me. I'd recommend getting that check out professionally by someone with experienced in carbon frame repair. Better that than it snap later on you.


Cycling on snow in extreme freezing conditions: will my bike break? I plan on riding my Merida Matts 40-D in mountains like these:

The temperatures are usually around -20 °C and I was wondering whether anything can break on my bike due to the freezing conditions. Is there anything I should take special care of before/after any such riding?

-20C is -4F, cold enough to be uncomfortable for humans, but not particularly cold for mechanical equipment.  You will notice that lubricants get stiffer, but generally they warm up rapidly when you ride and the stiffness will be gone in a minute or two.  Hydraulic fluids, et al, should be good to -35C or below, though they will stiffen before that, noticeably increasing the response time of the brakes.

Steel and aluminum do get more brittle at colder temps, but not to a noticeable degree above -50C or so.  Plastics and composites, on the other hand, are a bit more unpredictable -- most plastics get noticeably more brittle below about -25C, though no doubt there is a wide variation depending on the specific materials involved.

You will notice that the tires get stiffer, and people have reported difficulty with the tires becoming rock hard and spinning on the rims at low temps (eg, -20F).  Also, of course, rubber brake pads get harder, and rim brakes become much less effective.

There's really nothing in a bike that isn't in a car, and cars can handle -35 or -40C.  And the places where you have trouble with cars is mostly the battery and fuel system, components you don't have on a bike.


What is this Allen bolt on my novatech freehub, and what does it do? I've been servicing the novatech freehub on my Kona cyclo-cross bike after a particularly filthy ride. When removing the freehub I noticed this tiny Allen bolt by the inner pawls of the freehub. When I found it, it was partially unscrewed and loosely holding a small tube on the inside, however I don't know what it is! As far as I can tell this is the only function it does, as it does not affect the pawls engaging in the freehub.

Blue arrow is pointing towards it.

What is it, what does it do, and how tightly does it need to be done up?!

I think it holds the spring in place and prevents it from rotating.
Found the spring as Spare Part. It would also makes sense as the ring has only one opening that is were the bolt is.

I would turn it so it sits flush with the freehub outer body so it can rotate without scratching the hub body.


Replace internally routed and housing My mountain bike has internally routed cables and and I'm struggling with indexing. My first thought is to replace my cables which I've never done.

Is it as simple as pulling the inner cable out and replacing it with a new one or do i need to replace the sheathing as well?

There are many different shift cable and housing arrangements found on internally routed frames. For example, one end of the spectrum is bare cables running all the way through the frame with plastic cable guides to route them around the BB, and the opposite end is just a continuous run of housing routed internally. The best procedure is dictated by what kind of configuration you've got, or in some cases what options the frame offers.

Replacing just the cable is easy on some frames but enough of a pain on others that it's better to replace the housing too so that you know everything is fresh and perfect and you won't have to do it twice.

Your best friend when doing this is often a supply of cable liner, available from bike shops, which you'll cut to length, use some tricks to feed through the frame in place of the old cable as you pull it out, and feed the new cable into.


Remove stickers and decals from frame I am trying to remove the stickers/decals so I can repaint the bike.

I have tried scrapping, paint thinner, and xylene.

I also tried using a heat gun, but the process seems rather tedious.

Is there some method that is faster?

I'd suggest stripping all the components off the bike (yes, ALL of them) then hit the frame lightly with a flap disk in a hand grinder.  You want to key the paint, not necessarily remove it.

Keying provides a mechanical surface that is not flat.  This will allow your new paint to form a three dimensional bond with the previous coat and will be more abrasion-resistant.

You also have to mask off every part that doesn't need paint.  That's the bottom bracket shell and threads, and anything else that has threads.  Your fork's bearing races must be paint free, both on the fork and in the head tube.  Noone paints their seat post because tolerances are too fine and it will scratch up anyway, so remove that.   There's no point painting the inside of the seat tube, but a little overspray's no big deal.

Your frame appears to be a Huffy, which is a low end bike so probably made of steel.  So any scratches through the existing paint will show bare bright steel which will need a steel primer.  Sometimes this is called an etching primer, which chemically does a similar thing to the sanding process.  Both is a great idea.  Don't wait - you should be spraying the primer within an hour of finishing the sanding.  Don't give the rust monster a chance to get stuck in.

If your bike frame is aluminium/aluminum then you need a primer for AL and not FE.

Then when the primer is hardened, a light wet-sand over the whole frame to remove any flecks and provide the next keying surface, for your top coats to sink their teeth into.  Use this to examine the frame for light spots and missed areas.  There's a lot of surface area to your bike - more than one might think.

Depending on your paint and its thickness, density, and grippiness, you probably want to do a minimum of two top coats.   Some of the 80s bikes had 12~20 coats of paint total.

If you're adding new decals, then put them on top of the last colour coat after light sanding and wipe down, and do at least one clear-coat over that.  If no decals, do the top coat anyway.  This provides the first line of defense against dings, whangs and scratches.

You can choose a matt or satin or gloss finish at all layers, but the clear coats are on the outside and give the most finish-effect.

If all this sounds like too much work, and your plan is just to blast it with a rattle can with no preparation, then go ahead.  Its your bike, do what you want with it.  But expect it to look like a rattlecan job and to flake off pretty quick.


Please help me identify this brake pad type What is the proper name for this type of brake pad?

Thanks

It's a rim brake pad for road bikes, with separate holder and rubber insert, Shimano/SRAM style.


All gears are going one over to the right I’ve got a couple of problems here. I don’t know if they are all related.
Problem 1: it doesn’t always shift into the big ring in front. Usually, I have to slow my pace down for it to catch and also go to the biggest cog. But that still only works sometimes.

Problem 2: The chain won’t go to the largest big in the back when I try to get there. It doesn’t matter which front ring I’m on.

Problem 3: Similar to problem 1. When I go down to the smallest cog, the chain falls of and goes between the smallest cog and the frame. Basically, everything is shifted one to the right.

Any solutions?  The bike wasn’t very expensive to start with. (Surprise, surprise). It’s more cost effective to fix it myself than to take it to a bike mechanic.

As Criggie said in his answer you basically just need to adjust both the front and rear derailleurs. This is well within the capabilities of a home mechanic if you know what you are doing. Trick is knowing about limit adjustments (prevents the derailleur moving too far in or out) and indexing adjustments (aligns the derailleur over the sprockets or chainrings. What really helps is a article or video that walks you through the process step by step. Park Tool has particularly good ones that are clear and easy to follow.

Rear derailleur (do the rear first): https://www.parktool.com/blog/repair-help/rear-derailleur-adjustment

Front derailleur: https://www.parktool.com/blog/repair-help/front-derailleur-adjustment


What should I look for in a mountain bike for doing BMX-style balancing tricks? When I was a kid I started learning to ride around on my back wheel and it was really difficult.  Then I tried doing it on a crappy CCM mountain bike we had (rather than my nice Gary Fisher Piranha) and it was much easier!  I could ride around balanced on the back wheel for a full minute, and was able to do other tricks more easily as well.

For reasons unknown to me, the CCM was much easier to balance in that position.  I'd like to fool around on my bike and learn some more tricks, but if I buy a new one it will be a mountain bike.  Which leads to my question: What do I need to look for in a mountain bike if I want to be able to do this stuff?  I can imagine it's related to the following, but I don't know exactly how:

Weight
Size
Shape?
Weight distribution
Other?

The CCM was heavier and taller, if that helps.

You want a very low stand over height, short chainstays, steep headangle, and little to no suspension.  If you still want to use it for general mountain biking stuff, then look at street or dirt jump bikes, rather than trials.


Compatibility between Shimano 105 crankset and Shimano Deore derailleur I have a wild idea to replace a crankset on my Merida Crossway 500 (2014) (which is now SR Suntour NCX-FX-10s 48A-36-26 CG) with Shimano 105 5750 cCompact 10sp (switch from 3-speed to 2-speed).

The question is: will my older derailleur be compatible with new crankset?

If you want to switch from a MTB triple to a road double crank you'll need to replace the front derailleur and shifter to get the correct derailleur movement.

Putting a road crank on an hybrid frame designed for MTB components is problematic:

You'd have to find a road groupset that also has compatible flat-bar shifters. 105 5700 does not, the latest lower end road Shimano groups do.

I think (from looking at old reviews of the bike) you have a Shimano Hollowtech II bottom bracket. You very likely have the wider MTB version that fits on 73 and 68mm wide shells. A road crank spindle is made for the narrower road BB version for 68mm shells only and is therefore 5mm shorter.

There is also the problem of clearance between the larger chainrings and the right hand side chainstay.


When shifting both left and right shifters, what's the preferred sequence? My technique has always been "easier, then harder".  When switching to the big chain ring, I first downshift at least twice on the right (easier) and then upshift on the left (harder).  When switching to the small chain ring, I first downshift on the left (easier) and then upshift at least twice on the right (harder).  I find this technique effective because it maintains my cadence and prevents loss of momentum in my legs, especially important when switching to the big chain ring.

Does my technique hold water?

It doesn't really work to ask or answer this question independent of rear cluster gear count, range, and chainring tooth difference. In particular, road compact vs standard front gap leads to totally different strategies with shifting.

The more gears in back for a given cluster range, the less downside there is to just staying in the same chainring chosen based on the terrain you're in. The technically most optimal gear may still be on another ring, but there are efficiency and enjoyment downsides to doing all that back and forth shifting to stay on top of it. This effect has increased marginally with each speed generation.

The greater the chainring gap, the more rear shifting you need to do if you insist on sequencing your gearing exactly. That's a big reason why compact really took off in the days of 10 speed and not 5 speed - with 5 speed rear ends you're priced in to doing that sequencing, but with 10 it matters a lot less.

Also the greater the ring gap, the more gear values you're going to have back to back on the same ring at the extremes of the bike's gear range. For example, on 11-speed 34-50 11-25, the top 6 or so gears are all on the large ring and the bottom 4 or so are all on the small, so there's going to be a lot of the time where the most optimal sequencing involves no front shifting at all. Compare that to five-speed 42-52 13-25, where the only the top 1 or 2 and bottom 1 or 2 gears are on their respective chainrings. Again, you're then priced in to hunting around.

If you want to master this topic, studying different setups in a gearing calculator like https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gear-calc.html is a good idea.


How do I clean the inside of a freehub? I didn't know any better and I let degreaser drip into the freewheel body of my Shimano FH-RM65. Now it makes a terrible retching noise when it rotates.

How do I clean the inside of this thing?

I'm afraid to put load on it until it sounds quiet and happy again.

That particular Shimano freehub can be disassembled, but it is quite a job to get it back together afterward. There are around 80 2mm bearings in two different locations in the freehub, and a skilled and practiced mechanic has roughly a 60% chance of opening without losing parts, and successfully getting it back together.

The good news is, there is a tool to lubricate the inside of a freehub, without disassembling it. It's called a Freehub Buddy.

The photo shows the Freehub buddy, next to a freehub with a cutaway so you can see the rows of bearings I mentioned earlier, a tube of soup lube, and 2 new reusable seals.

It's made by Morningstar tools, and works very well. You will also need the proper lubricant, and new exterior seals for the freehub. Both can be purchased from Morningstar tools as well.

The other option is to simply replace the freehub, which should be readily available at your LBS, for about $20.

I hope that helps.


Should a saddle hurt? We recently brought a road bike for my sister in law and we took her out on a quick test ride (only about 1km and SLOW). The next day she complained (a bit, mostly my brother being over protective maybe) about her rear.

Question is, how do I know it's normal and she just needs to get used to the saddle, or if it will cause discomfort in future.

The bike path in question isn't well maintained so had a fair few pot holes. Also my brother informs me that my sister in law is a woman (never checked myself, and evidence supports this), so I am aware that she would need a lady's saddle, which I hope came with the bike.

I bought a bike last year and after a few rides, I found the saddle very painful. I resisted on riding it, assuming that I'll get used to it, but it never happened, and I was even concerned that I haven't got the right size of a bike. However I got a silicon gel saddle cover and since then the pain stopped. I didn't need cycling shorts or pants either.

Over time I was thinking that it probably is not the gel cover, but just me getting used to the saddle, till the cover got stolen a couple of months ago, and since then, every time I want to cycle, the pain is back, and I can remain painful even for a few days after an hour of cycling.

As I had read various articles about choosing the right saddles, and based on my own experience riding different city and mountain bikes, the bigger, wider and softer (ladies') saddles work better for me, and possibly for most of the women; (Tip #3 from 7 tips to find the perfect saddle also mentions this), but if she's not willing to spend money on the saddle, you can just get one of those silicon covers to fix the problem, and it's less hassle than wearing the pants/shorts if you're using your bike as a means of transportation in different outfits, rather than just cycling.


How to adjust brake lever travel? I am trying to adjust the brakes of a new bike and need some help. It has mechanical disk brakes. I have successfully aligned the disk pads so that they are parallel and are at an adequate distance from the disk. However, the lever travel is ridiculous, it goes down all the way to the grip. I understand that in order to decrease lever travel you have to bring the pads closer to each other, however I have brought them as close as they can be already without causing brake rubbing. Any ideas on what I can do?

First I would determine for certain that the levers are compatible with the disc brakes.  They should be long-pull levers  and will be compatible with linear pull (V-brakes) rim brakes.  Being a new bike, I would think this should not be a problem if sold by a bike shop.

Next, I would check that you have proper cable tension. You may have to remove all slack from the cable by loosening the pinch bolt and pulling more cable past the bolt, effectively tightening the cable.  Also of use would be turning out the lever's barrell adjuster (anti clockwise) which also tightens the cable.  This is the rounded end of the lever where the cable exits the lever. On brake barrell adjusters there are two threaded parts that
move. The smaller one closest to the lever is a lock ring. When you've set cable tension appropriately with the longer cylinder shaped adjuster, you set this in place by turning the round part tight to the lever.  To make any adjustments after this you'll first need to loosen the lock ring. Essentially, determine if any slack exists in the cable and correct this.

The lever travel is typically set with a small set screw found on the inside (toward rider) of the lever body, the part of the whole lever assembly that doesn't move. Tightening (clockwise) this screw shortens the travel.  This maneuver, however, won't really help your problem since you experience inadequate braking  to begin with. The lever travel screw works essentially by pushing the lever toward the handlebar, and is the same as the first few millimeters of lever closure your fingers do now.  Shortening the travel won't help.  Lengthening the travel by loosening the set screw  initially puts slack into the system so without further cable adjustment, you're pulling the same amount of cable and therefore braking is unchanged.


Is my cassette made of steel? I want to know when to change my chain:
I purchased the following item:

It has two sides:

0,75 % --> for aluminium Cassette

1 % --> for steel cassette
(according to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettenverschlei%C3%9Flehre)

My bike: https://www.boc24.de/p/compel-rr-100/213327/#itemId=213327-1
According to
https://www.bike-components.de/de/Shimano/105-Kassette-CS-R7000-11-fach-p62071/

Material Ritzel: Stahl

Spider / Ritzelträger: 1 (Aluminium)

(Therefore, I would guess my cassette is made of steel (Stahl)).
Question:
Is my Cassette made of steel and i would go for the 1% side?

Focusing on the question, almost all cassette cogs are steel. For Shimano’s and Campagnolo’s top road groups, the top few cogs are made of titanium to save weight. However, titanium wears a lot faster than steel, thus this is limited to Dura Ace and Super Record. Those cassettes are very expensive. Your bike seems to come with most of a Shimano 105 group, which is two levels down from Dura Ace. That cassette is fully steel, aside from the aluminum cog carrier for the largest 3 cogs and the plastic (I believe) spacers. (NB: your brakes are Tektro and the cranks are FSA, and down-speccing these items is a common cost-saving measure. I wouldn't be that surprised if a manufacturer down-specced the cassette, but there's no Shimano 11s cassette below 105 in the current generation of parts.)
For MTB cassettes, Shimano’s XTR cassette has the top 3 cogs made of aluminum and the next few made of titanium. XT has its largest 2 cogs made of aluminum. The balance are all steel SRAM's X01 and XX1 (highest end two groups) may have only the largest cog made of aluminum, with steel for the rest. However, those cogs have 39 or more teeth. So, they’re larger than many road chainrings, which are all made of aluminum (although MTB chainrings, being smaller, are often made of steel, and sometimes titanium rings may be available aftermarket). Generally, the more teeth there are in a cog or chainring, the more material there is to spread wear over, so it's feasible to make big cogs or rings of aluminum or titanium and not have them wear too fast. I'm not sure how fast big aluminum cogs (or mid sized titanium ones like on XTR) wear on MTBs. Otherwise, on road groups, you’ll generally only see aluminum cogs on weight weenie builds, and these would not be regarded as daily use cassettes.
However, you indicated that the instructions for the chain checker said to use the .75 wear indicator if you have aluminum cogs. Maybe something is getting lost in translation, but I don’t think that can be correct. Chain manufacturer guidance is to change the chain at 0.5% wear if it’s 11s or higher, otherwise change at 0.75%. It has nothing to do with the cog material. You would change cogs if the chain were skipping, and if you change the chain right when it hits the indicated amount of wear, you can run multiple chains before you need to change the cassette. I am not sure why an aluminum or titanium cassette would necessarily influence the point at which you should replace the chain. It does seem like the steel chain would wear at the same rate or at a lower rate if used on a softer material, and both titanium and aluminum are softer. As to the 1% wear mark, that may have been a thing on 8s or earlier chains. Once a chain exceeds its wear mark, the roller-roller distance will be significantly different from what the cogs and chainrings were designed to accommodate. The chain will then begin to wear out the cogs and chainrings much faster. If you left your 11s chain to 1% wear, you would certainly have to replace the cassette at the same time, and you could have worn the chainrings significantly as well.
Regarding the German Wikipedia page you linked to, I don't speak German, but Google Translate does render Kettenverschleißlehre as "chain wear gauge." The page does appear to say that, using Google Translate:

Most manufacturers recommend changing the chain if the elongation of the chain exceeds 0.75 or 1%, depending on the type of chain. Accordingly, chain measuring gauges are used to check whether the elongation is within the tolerance range 0.75% (for light metal cassettes) or 1% (for steel cassettes) elongation.

However, that statement is unsourced. As I stated, I don't believe it is correct. The author might have mistakenly confused things with chain wear guidance from the 8s/9s era, but again, they would be incorrect as to modern chains.
You didn't ask, but I believe that some chains are partly made out of titanium. For example, YBN has one chain model with titanium rollers, but I believe the pins and plates are steel. This is a super-duper weight weenie item. I would expect it to have extraordinarily short life - chains 'stretch' because the rollers and pins wear out from moving against each other during pedaling, and titanium is softer, so it should wear faster in this application, just like ti cassette cogs. However, again, you would still want to replace the chain at the 0.5 wear mark. Also, there are some carbon fiber chainrings (e.g. Fibre Lyte) available for weight weenie builds, although I also don't believe they would wear very well.


Can I shrink my steel rear dropouts to fit a smaller hub? I am rebuilding a 1971 Raleigh International road frame into a single speed bike for college. I bought a set of track wheels with rear hub spacing 110mm. The rear dropout on the Raleigh is 120mm. Will I be able to cold set the frame, shrinking it 10mm to fit this rear wheel? The frame is Reynolds 531 tubing with a lugged steel construction.

One solution might be to add a larger 5mm spacer on the axle, between the outside of the cone-nut and the inside of the locknut.

The risks here are that your axle may suffer from bending easier because its now supporting the bike's weight further out.  Also, you'll probably need a longer axle too because the track wheels are unlikely to have much spare.  Get the strongest axle you can, and I'd suspect a solid axle with nuts will be better than a hollow QR axle.

You could also do both, slightly compress the frame and have 2~3mm of spacers rather than the full 5mm a side, to minimise parallelism changes in the rear dropouts.

Spacers are marked on this image of a replacement rear axle.


New rear wheel to 8-speed Shimano Citybike, don't know what to look for My current rear wheel wont rotate around the hub anymore, so I need a replacement. I don't know what to look for, but I have this info:

Bike is an Avenue Airbase, dont know how old, but more than 3 years.

135mm hub spacing between rear forks.

28inch wheel with 25mm tire.

8 Shimano gears.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/Waka2WUs3RybQXbL7

Also: What do I need to take apart the wheel and check the bearings(Drum brake)?

Thanks :)

In general here we don't give specific product recommendations, so instead let's look at what your options are:

Replace The Wheel

Based on your question you know the spacing of the hub, and you know the size of cassette. You should be able to easily find a replacement online or at your local bike shop. You may have to chat with someone for a bit to make sure you get the right thing. The main things you need to be concerned about are either transferring or replacing your

8 speed cassette - if you do that yourself it's easy but does require a special lock nut tool and chain whip.
Brake Rotor - I don't have a bike with disc brakes, so I can't say for sure, but you would likely only need a set of hex wrenches to do that.

Or most bike shops will swap the parts for you for free when you buy the wheel.

Rebuild The Wheel With a New Hub

If the hub is truly shot, but the rim and spokes are in good condition, you can talk to  your shop about having the wheel rebuilt with a new hub. You may have to replace spokes as well if the flange of the hub sits higher or lower. Depending on the labor cost and how nice a while you would have picked above, the cost of rebuilding a wheel can approach or exceed the cost of buying a new wheel outright. But you would have the satisfaction of not contributing to our throw-away society.

Repair The Hub

It's possible that there is a simple bearing issue or some other easily repairable problem with the hub. Steps to rebuild a hub would be a different question, and if you search here you will find several posts of advice. But if you are going to the shop anyway to explore Replacing or Rebuilding, you might as well take the wheel with you and see if you can get out on the cheep with a simple repair.

As far as tools if you want to attempt the overhaul yourself, I can't see the hub clear enough in the pic to make sure, but you would likely need:

Cassette lock nut tool
Chain whip
Cone wrenches in the right size (these are flat/skinny open end wrenches)
Adjustable/Crescent wrench
Bearing grease

You may have cartridge bearings, in which case your overhaul job is simpler. But note that if the problem is the freehub and not the hub bearings then the freehub overhaul job is much more complicated.


If you keep a bike inside for months in a row, do you have to check it? For example, if you keep it in a garage or in basement, I am thinking the tires might lose air and then the wheel will pressure down the tire. So do you need to check the bike once in awhile and inflate it?

I'm gonna sorta disagree with Zen on this one.  If you're talking months vs years, and the bike was stored inside in a location where condensation would not have occurred (eg, not in a cold corner of a basement in a humid climate), and the bike was in good condition when stored, then all you need to do is air up the tires and wipe the dust off.

The tires and brake pads won't rot overnight, the lube won't leap off the chain.  Properly lubed bearings won't corrode.  Disk brake rotors (and caliper brake rims) may develop a slight coating of oxidation, but that will be worn off in the first ten miles.

If it's been stored for several years, however, you may want to squirt a little oil on the chain and give it an extra wipe, both to get the dust off and because oil does slowly evaporate.  And check the tires and brake pads for rot.

Once or twice a year a bike should get its cables lubed, and the chain should be cleaned and reoiled every 200 miles or so (or at least once a year).  This is unrelated to how long it's been stored, but a good time to do this is when you take the bike out of winter storage (though a better time is before you put it into winter storage).


Mountain Biking with Heavy Rider and Rigid Bike I ride an early 90's Trek MultiTrack 700. It's a completely rigid, Cro-moly frame with 700c wheels, and, except for a new rear wheel (double wall rim) and cassette, all of the components are original. I want to begin riding some basic MB trails. Nothing fancy, no jumps or DH riding, just basic hardpack trails. However, I'm 6'2" and 235 lbs. Will a fully rigid frame withstand the abuse of roots and ruts with a rider of my size? Or will I constantly be buying new rims, or risk breaking something more vital? According to my LBS, suspension forks for this style of bike are pretty much nonexistent, so if I need shocks, I'll wait until I can invest in a new frame.
Thanks for your help!
Edit: I rode my first hardpack yesterday, and it was a blast! I'll get a better feel for technique as time goes on, but the bike seemed to handle it like a boss.

The Multitrak is really a hybrid designed for light off road, on road and touring. You are right not to try and upgrade the bike parts. As long as you stick within its limits it will be fine. Enjoy the ride you have. If you enjoy it enough to justify it, save up for a new(er) bike.
Your legs and arms are the suspension.  If you learn to 'ride lightly', there is no reason the bike will not handle moderately rough trails. You need to unweight the wheels as you come up to bumps like roots and ruts, stand on the pedals and let the bike 'float' under you. The geometry is more aligned to road use, so its agility and stability won't be that of a full mountain bike.
You will need to pay close attention to the tire pressures - too much and you will have problems with traction, too little and you will have problems with punctured (snake bites from pinching the tube).  With no suspension its unlikely to can run low enough tire pressures for best traction and completely avoid snakebites, a tiny mistake can result in a heavy hit onto a trail feature (root, rock etc). I suggest starting with higher pressures and lowering them a little at a time if you feel the traction is too 'sketchy'. If you get a snake bite puncture, think about why, and decide of you need to bring pressures back up.


Advice for shorter toe clips I ride a road bike daily for commuting (~2.5 miles) and I like having toe clips (cages, straps, whatever other name they go by) so that I don't have to use special bike shoes.  My bike came with toe clips, but when the plastic on those finally busted, it was time for a new set.  I ended up getting some Wellgo pedals that came with toe clips, and they work great except for the fact that they are too long - with the wrong combination of pedal position while turning the front wheel, they will actually collide with the tire.  This is not only annoying, but dangerous (I have had two minor falls from it while I'm trying to find another solution).
In shopping around for toe clips online, I seem to only find ones that look similarly long to the ones I got (interestingly, this length is almost never specified in the product details), or they are very short and much more minimal, with no strap that goes over the mid-foot (I think called a "half toe clip").  Can anyone recommend a shorter toe clip with a full strap, or a better way I should be searching for these?  I am confused by the lack of results for a very similar product that just has a shorter length from the front of the toe to the front of the pedal (or equivalently, to the center of the pedal).

Toe clips come in various lengths, since obviously toe clips sized for a big guy with size 46 shoes (like me) (== US 13) wouldn't work for a petite woman with size 36 shoes (== US women's 6).
The toe clips page on Chain Reaction Cycles shows very poor stock, but I did find this page at a US shop which has medium sized ones in stock.  According to the sizing chart further down that page, they nominally fit men's sizes 5-8, but would almost definitely be shorter than what you have.
Additionally, since they are steel, if you are willing to put some work into it you could probably adjust them somewhat.
Note also that Criggie is correct and you should try adjusting your foot position when you turn.  I used to consciously rotate my pedals so my outside foot was down when going into a turn; now it is a purely automatic action.


Are Shimano components compatible with each other? Do I have to get a specific chain? My cycling maintenance experience goes as far as changing tyres, but winter has been cruel and I need to replace some components.

Setup:

Cassette is a Shimano 105 CS-5700
Front chainring : Shimano Ultegra SG-X 53B
Chain : Not sure, all I can see is "shimano","VIA", "HG","JG" on the
sides. It's at 0.5% stretch.

Can I just get any 10 speed chain, or do I have to get a 105 or ultegra chain? Does it matter if I have a mixture of 105/ultegra components?

As long as you use a ten speed chain it shouldn't matter which group you take it from. Normally the higher priced ones are bit lighter but the additional price often does by far not match the lower weight. Also the higher priced ones might last not that long due to the lighter material.

Therefore if it's for a bike where you know that it will see some dirt and wear, better get some mid-priced stuff. It might last longer and if doesn't it won't drill as big a hole into your budget.


How far off a chain line can I go? I'm struggling to find a replace crank set to replace the SR Suntour set that came on my bike. The chain rings were riveted together so on bending one I had to replace the set. There's very few 7 speed crank sets for a 118mm spindle and separate chain rings. I would like to fit a Shimano M410 on a 113mm bb. This will alter the chain line by 2.5mm, will this be an issue?

2.5mm would not be a serious issue.  You may find the "sweet spot" in your gearing changes a little to favor the larger rear sprockets, but so long as you don't run a lot in your top-most gear this should not be a problem.


What are the benefits of oversize lower headset bearings? Long time ago, bicycles had threaded 1 inch headsets and fork steerer tubes were always made of steel. Then, approximately the same time, 1+1/8 inch headsets, threadless headsets and steerer tubes made of materials other than steel began to be widely used.
The 1 inch headset always was bit of marginal, especially if used with steerer tubes made of other materials than steel, so the move to 1+1/8 inch headsets is understandable. Tubes with larger diameter are stronger.
However, recently there has been a trend to make the steerer tube tapered. So it could be the case that the lower headset bearing is 1.5 inch whereas only the upper headset bearing is the standard 1+1/8 inch size. Then standard stems can be used but at the same time the lower headset bearing is much bigger.
What are the benefits of this strange setup where the lower headset bearing is larger and the steerer tube is tapered?

There is more load on the lower bearing because it bears all the weight and receives all vertical impacts. Making the lower part of the head tube bigger also allows for bigger down tubes.


How to install rear rack & fenders on a vintage road bike How feasible is it to install a rear rack and fenders on common vintage road bike frames (e.g. Peugeot PX-8, Raleigh Record/Super Course etc.), and how can it be done, exactly?-- on my "true" randonneur from Motobecane (which is now sadly dead), the frame had eyelets to allow a rack to be installed:

However, on some other bikes, the rear rack is merely "clamped" onto the frame:

Considering that e.g. a Raleigh Super Course doesn't have eyelets for a rear rack, would it then be possible to install a rack via this latter "clamp" method? Would it be able to hold a proper amount of weight, e.g. 20kg? Likewise, how would one put fenders on such a bike (if this is indeed possible)?

Does this frame have mounting points down on the rear dropouts?  The sort  sometimes used for mudguards/fenders, which can be repurposed for the downshafts of a rack.  Since they hold most of the weight, a front mount is relatively lightly loaded.

I made a couple of clamps out of thin sheet metal for my rack, which wrap around the seat stays and bolt through the rack.

View from above

Looking backwards

Each bracket is a short strip of aluminium which is wrapped around the seat stay and then back on itself.  The bolt is a stainless steel one, and is (edit: should be!) double-nutted for vibration resistance.

Remember at least 2/3 of the weight is taken by the rear struts.  I've had a good 12-15 kilograms on this rack.   The black plastic is a substitute for a mudguard/fender, which does fine protecting my backside and bag, but does little to keep the bike and chain clean.


Changing my rear wheel tyre from 26 x 2.1 to 26 x 2.0: what's the difference? Firstly, would a 26 x 2.0 tyre fit, and would there be a noticeable difference compared to my original tyre? (I am going from 2.10 to 2.0)

I am reasonably assured the larger tire will fit. As has been stated here before, bicycle tire width sizes aren't an exact standard. Maker A's tire size 2.0 inch may in fact be larger than Maker B's 2.1. The best information comes from user reviews about a specific model. Just to be sure look at your current tire. Does it barely fit between the frame stays? When on the smallest front sprocket how close is the front derailleur from hitting the tire. If the tolerances are very close the larger tire may not fit. Tire design also comes into play. A full knobby tire ( WTB velociraptor)  may hit while a microknob  (Geax AKA) may have enough clearance.


Dia Compe Brakes for 1991 Bridgestone RB-T I have a 1991 Bridgestone RB-T.  This bike has passed through many hands so much of the stock parts are gone.  The original Dia Compe XCE brake arms have been replaced by Dimension canti arms.

My problem involves the canti braze-ons.  After examining other bikes with cantilever brakes these pivots seem to be located differently.  The placement is much closer to the rim itself.  Judging from pictures of the Dia Compe brakes the pad holder was located outside the pivot.  The Dimension arms place the pad holder way too far inside of the brake pivot.  The pads are installed without any adjustment washers on the inside and all the way to the bottom of the slot.  Even with these compromises they aren't located properly and start to hit the tire if I don't watch them.

Can anyone recommend a Dia Compe XCE replacement?  Is there really a difference in where the canti braze-ons were located for these brakes?  I just want an OEM brake that will work for pad clearance.

Advert for Bridgestone RB-T showing brake placement to be a lot closer than standard:

The brakes look like Deore LX cantilevers from the early 1990's (these were available in both silver and black):

I would agree that you have a problem. You may want to put narrow 20mm rims on the bike to mitigate the problem. You could source some early 1990's Shimano/Suntour/Dia-Compe brakes that catered well with touring as well as mountain bikes. Dia-Compe 986's were the first ones to be 'low profile' yet still use the 'brake blocks on stalks' (as opposed to the nut and bolt ones). There were also examples from Shimano and the Suntour badged Dia-Compe models. Pads are also a consideration. When Shimano XTR came out the pads became longer and thinner. In the UK Aztec make replacements for these (with the 'stalks') and they are widely available.

What you may also want to look for are the very early cantilevers that stuck out a long way. Dia Compe 983's are the classic example. There is a problem with these if you are using panniers on the back and if you have anything but a small frame size - they poke out into the pannier bag and get wedged on.

As for getting hold of some of these early cantilevers, try your LBS as they may have some knocking about in the workshop that they may let you have for a small fee.

Reposted from the MTBR forums for future reference, the specifications of how cantilever bosses should be done:


How to store a bike outside and still avoid rapid decay? I've got insufficient space to store my bike inside. I fear however that it will rust away within a few years if I store the bike outside. My question is twofold:

Will storing a bike outside be a problem?
What can I do to prevent rust and possibly other types of decay?

A small shed seems like the best option if you have space–some insulation inside the shed would help stop condensation.

A bike kept outside will rust given enough time, its gears, etc. will also not like being wet all the time.  Just as importantly, it is more likely to get stolen if it is just left outside, and I would always rather get on a dry bike than a wet/cold bike.


Riding with a big dog Does anybody have experience with riding with a big (60-70 pound) dog? I took a look at How do you carry a dog on a bike?, but there doesn't seem to be much experience with big dogs reflected there.

What I'm hoping for is a bike setup that would be practical (e.g., easy to set up and go) for errands around town and short rides (30-50 km). It would be a bonus if the bike also worked well for "non-extreme" touring (with dog). I don't think I want to ride with the dog running alongside – there is too much traffic for me to feel like that is safe for dog or rider. The Soma Tradesman looks like a possibility, although I'm not sure that it would work with such a big dog on the platform.

I'm open to considering a trailer, but the one's I've seen and used don't seem to practical for use in a (sub)urban environment. I've seen a bike with a Bob Yak trailer and a biggish (maybe 40 pound) dog "surfing" on the platform, but it seems too risky for the dog without some modification to the trailer.

I trust you used the search function and read "How do you carry a dog on a bike"?

I haven't ridden with a big dog since I was a child, but I have a friend who had one. My experience was that when the dog weighed about the same as I did my ability to ride was entirely dependent on the co-operation of the dog. In my case that was not usually a problem, but when he leaned out to have a look I had to stop. In that respect it's much like riding a tandem.

The main thing is how disciplined the dog is. If your dog will stay in sit or lie when there's a dogfight going on or some other strong distraction, the only question is how you carry the weight. And the Soma Tradesman will do that.

The problem is that you won't be able to effectively strap a dog onto that front rack - it's too small, and you can't fit a deep enough basket to it, so any attachment is going to require a full harness on the dog, and tying the harness to the rack between the dog's front legs. I can't imagine any dog liking that. Otherwise you'd get (at best) strangulation issues when the dog tries to sit up or jump off, and more likely you and the dog will end up in a heap on the ground. At whatever speed you were travelling.

The cheap option that will work is a trailer. Either a second hand on (probably a kiddy trailer since they're more common), or a new one, and ideally one of the ones designed to carry a dog. That way you can enclose the dog so it's not tied in one place, but it can't get out and run amok. A two wheel trailer is also more stable, so the dog moving about won't throw you off the bike (as easily). This article discusses trailers in detail and recommends the Croozer. I have seen decent size dogs carried this way, and one that the owner was happy to leave loose with the trailer open so the dog could jump out and run when it wanted to. I've never owned a dog that I was willing to see killed, so I haven't done that.

If you want to go touring, the trailer will not be ideal and the consensus is that to reduce air and rolling resistance you want a low, single wheel trailer (one vs two wheel trailer)... which will not work with a dog.

My dog-owning friend ended up with a load bike for his dog. Something like a long john will be ok for touring and very handy for carrying loads around town. As with kids, the dog will probably appreciate being able to see something other than your butt. Those are increasingly common in Oz, and I suspect the USA too. They've been common in Europe for going on 100 years.

Other load carriers will also work, but you will need to do your own research and balance load capacity, ease of pedalling, cost and availablity.


Tektro RL 340 brake levers cannot find tightening bolt to keep shifter secure I have this bike from Decathlon, but the right shifter started to come loose and drop down, so I have unwound the bar tape and proceeded to move it back up.

But unlike my old shifters there is no bolt to tighten it up! I have looked everywhere on it, but cannot see it, it seems that is only held in securely by the bar tape. Is there a way to make this more secure? As at the moment it is still moving around.

It has Tektro RL 340 brake levers, not sure if I am doing something wrong.

The brake levers are held in place by a metal band that wraps around the bars. The band is tightened with a bolt inside the brake lever. One may see the head of the bolt when pulling the brake lever and looking into the gap between hoods and lever.

A L-shaped hex key should easily reach it. The brake cable might be in the way though. By slackening or usinga ball-head hex key one may adjust that bolt without removing the brake cable.


Tubeless fatbike setup, does valve choice matter? I've got a pugsly setup as tubeless, running endomorph tires, typically I run between 8 and 12 PSI in the tires depending on the conditions.

Is there a significant difference between performance of presta vs schrader valves at these low pressures?

As far as I'm aware, at these pressures, there'll be no difference in performance.

A bigger issue might be the rim. The value hole will be either Shrader or Presta sized and will either not fit a Shrader or be hard work to seal with a Presta.


30mm bottom bracket and 30mm spindle axle compatibility, should it go in by force? I am not sure if this is a stupid question or not. Finding compatible parts is not so easy for MTB, after quite a search I found my bottom bracket shell is not so standard, PF107.
I bought a Rotor raptor bundle, this includes a supposedly-30mm external-diameter spindle axle that should fit the Rotor bottom bracket 4130, which supposedly has 30mm internal-width. I did not buy the wrong parts, they are mentioned in the manufacturer website, even the BB says it is compatible with the axle.
However, there is no way I can put the axle through the bottom bracket, at least with my hands. They both have 30mm exactly, I would say either of them should have a slightly different measure, so that the axle can slide into the bottom bracket.
I am new to fitting MTB parts, but my road bike doesn't have this issue, the spindle goes through the bottom bracket effortlessly.
Hence the main question is: Should the axle fit by force into the bottom bracket? (I would need to apply quite some pressure, probably just like fitting the bottom bracket to the frame).
If not, would I have the same problem with other 30mm bottom brackets?
I am wondering if this is a design mistake on the bottom bracket or on the axle. If most 30mm bottom brackets have slightly more than 30mm internal diameter, then a 30mm diameter spindle can fit, and I can just return the BB-4130, go and buy another BB107 for 30mm and solve the problem.
Otherwise, if the axle is too wide (so, most 30mm spindles are slightly less than 30mm and this one is not), then it is pointless trying to fit this crankset and I should return all the products right away.
I do not have another 30mm crankset or BB to know what's the issue, my road bike uses 24mm.
Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!

There is no difference in the fit expected based on road vs mountain.
I thought I would be able to provide tolerance numbers from the original BB30 technical documents put out by Cannondale. They used to be at www.bb30standard.com, which is defunct now but can be found on Wayback. However, turns out it seems to have only ever had shell dimensions. The spec seems to have left the specifics of spindle and bearing tolerances to manufacturers.
Generally speaking, it's a pretty tight slip fit, same as you're used to. I understand that you've measured with calipers and gotten 30mm exactly for both. With higher precision tools you could see more of the story, i.e. if something is out of round or if the parts are actually requiring a press fit or what. (Note that among commonly encountered vernier calipers, some have .05mm precision and some .02mm, which could be enough to make the difference in this case, which it usually doesn't with anything bike.)
I've encountered similar situations where it took some force to get it all together, but if it was a press fit I would be unwilling to do that unless Rotor told me it was how it was supposed to be, which I don't think it is.
Hammering in the spindle is not a good idea because side loading the bearings like that can damage them. It's the peak loads from hammering that can do it, and knowing how much is too much is a guessing game. Gentle taps are probably okay, especially if it works, but I still don't love it. I believe the notion is that radial bearings are supposed to be able to handle 10% of their allowable radial loads in the lateral direction. Usually when it's tight I try to walk the spindle into the first bearing by wiggling it up and down with force behind it. I deal with a lot of BB30 and do not find myself having to hammer cranks in basically ever.


Can a 10-speed mountain bike chain be used on a 10-speed road bike? I would like to use a Shimano Deore XT Chain CN-HG94 on my road bike. Are there any differences between roadbike chains versus mountain bike chains that prohibit this?

Sample Road Bike Chains:

Dura Ace CN-9000
Ultegra CN 6701

Sample Mountain Bike Chains:

Deore XT CN-HG94

Using the "approved" chain is probably better if all else is equal, and it may be worth a slightly increased cost for more peace of mind. If you already have the mountain-specific chain, there's no harm in trying it. And if the mountain-specific chain is far cheaper and you aren't picky about shifting performance, it will probably be adequate (but no guarantees).

The "mountain bike specific construction" of the HG-X chains seems to be as follows (quotes from Performance Bike, High on Bikes, Amazon, and Competitive Cyclist):

"Dyna-Sys chains have 4 different types of outer plates that facilitate shifting up & down on the cassette or between chainrings."
"HG-X Chain uses a directional design with specifically shaped inner and outer plates to optimise shifting over the chainset and cassette. Outer plate design has been developed to reduce the chance of chain suck. The inner plate has been developed for better contact with gears providing smoother shifting under high load, giving efficient pedalling, increased rigidity and near silent running."
"Open design of inner links increase mud shedding ability."
"Mushrooming of the pins gives unsurpassed side-plate retention, enabling the chain to far exceed the BS/ISO standard for breaking force."
"Chain is optimised for Shimano 10-speed HG-X MTB drivetrains only."
"Advanced pin riveting technology yields same strength as 9-speed Hollow-pin technology for lightweight Mud-shedding, off-road-specific design."
"Since the action of climbing up the ramps and pins from one chainring to another is slightly different from climbing up one cog to the next, Shimano chose to shape the left and right side plates differently to optimize the chain for each specific purpose."

Given the prevelance of the words "optimized performance" in product descriptions, I would conclude that using the "wrong" chain may affect performance, but it wouldn't cause failure. This conclusion is bolstered by this report from a user who switched from HG-X to a non-Shimano chain (the opposite direction of what you're intending):

"Shifting under load up hills with the Connex is slightly less smooth than with Shimano's HGX chain, but it works just fine.  I'd say it's the same as Shimano's non-HGX chains or any other good top end chain.  This is for sure a nit-picky difference." (Cris LaBossiere)

Of course, you'll never know for sure until you try it on your own bike and judge it by your own standards.


How long do inner tubes last? I recently started biking again after taking about 2.5 years off. My bike has been sitting in my garage since then. I did a 30 mile ride as my first one back and I didn't replace my tubes beforehand. Everything went surprisingly fine, but the whole time I was worried about getting a flat. I did have a spare with me, but it's as old as my other tubes.

That got me thinking, how long do tubes usually last while they are in storage, both on and off the bike? Do I have to worry about dry rotting/cracking?

Generally speaking,

  Inner tubes will last forever, until you get a flat

Unless the tubes are very old - I'm talking 15+ years - you don't have to worry about them dry rotting, cracking, or loosing structural integrity. I have a collection of patched and new inner tubes from since I started riding around 9 years ago, and all of them look brand new.

And in my experience, the most common cause of flats is due to me doing a shoddy job of installing the tube (ie, the tube is pinched, stress on stem, etc). Back when I started working on bikes, I would regularly get flats a couple days after installing new tubes.

In short, if the tubes have lasted this long, and still hold air, don't touch them. I even remember reading (on Sheldon Brown's website?) that he has witnessed very old tubes bond to the tire.


Will a hollowtech shimano BB fit a bike which currently has an octalink bracket? I have a mongoose otero elite 2008 and the crankset is broke (wobbling) It's also bent, so time for a new one. I currently have a nice shimano deore crankset from an old bike, but it uses a different kind of bottom bracket (holllowtech) where as on my bike I have an octalink BB. Can I remove the octalink and buy a hollowtech BB to fit the deore crankset?

the spec says I have a Shimano ES25 Octalink BB

The bikes themselves - in this case, the frame - are pretty much standard on all the modern mountain bikes.

The Hollowtech and Octalink systems are different because you need to match the crankset to the bottom bracket, that is, you cannot use the BB from one system with the crankset from other system.

But any of the bottom brackets can be installed in the same type of frame (the "default"/ISO 68mm wide, 1.37in diameter, 24 TPI).

Hope it helps


Is it OK to ride in the drops almost the whole time? I just bought my first road bike, 2 months and a thousand km ago, and into several 50 to 130 km rides I found myself riding mostly in the drops, like reeeaally in the tip of the bar. I even removed the bar end plugs so the plastic edges won't hurt my hands. On the climbs I go to the top of the STIs, and I also use the tops, altough rarely.

I'm 180 cm tall, and my bike is a 54 cm, with a bit of a longer top tube for this size, and I feel pretty comfortable. My stem has a positive angle, pointing up. I had a bit of a back pain after a few of the first rides, but now I've got rid of them, somehow.

What intrigues me is why everybody else seems to use the drops only for sprints and aerodynamic hard riding, but not me. Am I doing something wrong/damaging?

Cycling is a non-natural activity (i.e., homo sapiens did not evolve bio-mechanically over millions of years to ride bikes). As such, the only real rule is whether or not it works for you.  Many road bikes are set up for racing, where the effort is high and the change in position small. Here the drops are often used for sprints and hard efforts. Because modern races are quite short most people spend the majority of time in some sort of aggressive position and as such getting up tall  wasn't really needed (contrast this to historical races which were generally much longer so having a very upright position was important).  For the few times where an upright position is required  (e.g., extended climbs) the bar tops now fill this role.  As such, over time the hoods have evolved into de facto position, with now a short distance to the drops (i.e., compact bars).  It doesn't have to be though.  If you go back and look at road cycling photos from the 1920-1950, the drops tended to be used more and the hoods less so.  In fact the brakes were really designed to be optimally actuated from the drops. Drops were also much deeper (compared to modern road bars) as there was more of a need to have a bigger range in positions then.

I would ask the following:

Is your position sustainable? (i.e. comfortable over long periods of time)
Can you use all your controls effectively? (i.e., shifters and brakes)

If you can answer yes to both then you are doing reasonably well.

Can you optimize further?  Potentially, but you won't know until you experiment. I would suggest keeping a log book of your bike set up along with notes on how you feel. This way you can always revert to a previous setting. If you want to ride using more of a modern form (i.e., you have a modern road bar and a modern set of shifters), then try flipping your stem down.  The hoods will likely  become the go-to position and the drops for harder efforts.  Ideally, you should still be able to use your drops, they will however feel best during harder efforts.  See if you like it, if not try a different change. Also note that hood angle plays a huge role in comfortable when riding on the hoods.  Modern hoods should be angled up slightly.  I actually use a digital level to ensure even settings.  You can also pull the bar tape and measure with a ruler against the edge of the bar to get the same result.

Good luck!


Fuji Transonic 2.8 2016: rear derailleur hanger direct mount or standard? I have a Fuji Transonic 2.8 from 2016 that has the following hanger installed:

https://wheelsmfg.com/derailleur-hanger-215.html

I am replacing the short cage Shimano 105 rear derailleur with the medium cage version to be able to use an 11-34 cassette.

Now the previous bike mechanic installed the short cage derailleur with the b-link removed, so clearly it was being treated as direct mount hanger, but I want to make sure that I should do the same with the medium cage derailleur. Couldn't find any documentation anywhere on which type the above hanger is, found a bunch of sites trying to explain the direct mount vs standard distinction but they all look the same to me. I want to make sure I don't remove the b-link by mistake when it is really needed.

Thanks.

TLDR: You have a standard mount hanger, leave the B pivot on the derailleur.

Looking at this Wheels Manufacturing page, what they call 'direct' hangers put the M10 mounting hole further to the rear than 'standard' hangers.

I believe that with the newer groupset series that introduced 'Shadow Technology' (moving the derailleur in and behind the cassette a bit) Shimano wanted the B pivot further rearward than previous designs and added the B-link to do this. They provided for original bicycle manufacturers and third party hanger manufacturers to make 'direct' hangers by making the B-link removable.

If your hanger goes straight down it's a standard type, use the B-pivot. If your hanger goes down and rearward at about 45 degrees, and there is a horizontal separation between the axle and M10 mounting hole of 1-2cm it's a direct type, remove the B-pivot.


Protecting quick-release seats and wheels from theft I have to say I am not a fan of quick-release, especially for seats. I do not need to raise and lower my seat nearly enough (almost never) to justify the annoyance of having to take my seat with me or worry that anyone could just walk past and take it with no tools while my bike is locked up somewhere.

My local bike shop has locks that you can put on quick release seats that make it so you require a special key, but they run something like $50 which seems too steep to me!  I could also just replace the quick release part with a regular bolt, which might be the way to go, but still somewhat insecure.

I'm just looking for feedback or recommendations on reasonably inexpensive ways to secure seats and wheels for some piece of mind.

If you use a U-lock, you can use Sheldon Brown's lock strategy to lock at least your rear wheel along with the frame. This is the approach I use. Remember: the shorter the U-lock, the safer you are.

For your front wheel, you can bring along a second U-lock, a cable, or use pitlocks. For the saddle, simply switch away from a quick-release skewer to an allen head bolt and stop worrying about it getting stolen. You don't need to adjust your seatpost often enough to warrant the added risk posed by QR levers.


Front derailleur won't change to low gear My front derailleur is stuck in high gear. No matter how I shift the gears the cable would not tighten hence the bike will not change from high to low gear. What is the cause of this? Btw  it is a Shimano Tiagra.

Set the shifter to low.

With the shifter at low and the derailleur stuck at high, the cable should feel slack. If it still feels tight, the cable may be jammed or corroded, so replace the cable, or find whatever's crushing the outer cable (if the outer has been crushed you may need to replace it too).

On the body of your front derailleur you should find two limit screws, labelled "H" and "L". If the tip of the "L" screw is making contact, unscrew it (anti-clockwise) to allow the mech to move towards the low position. If the mech doesn't move and you get space at the tip of the screw, one of the mech's pivots is seized.


Is a pad spacer needed when installing disc brake pads? I need to replace my disc brake pads on my Shimano XT brakes. This seems like a pretty straight forward procedure, and I have all the tools needed except for the pad spacer. Do I need this to install the new pads correctly, and if I do, is there something else I can use?

The pad spacer is intended to prevent you from accidentally closing the brake without the rotor in place.  It is not required, for any part of the adjustment or installation process, as long as you do not need to bleed the brakes, and as long as you refrain from squeezing the lever without a wheel in place.

If you do need to bleed the brake, it is convenient, but not required.


Bike fit: Adjusting stem angle vs. height I'm playing with my fit a bit as I have gotten much more flexible since I had a bike fit 2 years ago (+1 to stretching and foam rolling.)

As I'm experimenting with drop I am wondering if it makes more sense to adjust my stem angle going from 0 degree shim to -2 degree or removing the last spacer (~5mm) I have below the stem to adjust the overall stem height(SLAMMED!) Is there traditionally an order of operations for these types of adjustments?

Should I consider going for a longer stem at a certain point?

Thanks for the help and I realize it might be time to get a new fit but figured I play around with it a bit first.

Assuming you've got a stem of about 100 mm, changing the angle by 2° will lower the handlebars by about 3.5 mm. If you want more drop, remove the spacer first. Obviously the difference between the two is tiny, and probably not perceptible.


Fitting Matchmaker X to SRAM Guide T brakes? I've got a prebuilt MTB that came with an SRAM NX drivetrain and Guide T brakes and I'm looking at upgrading the drivetrain to higher end parts.
I'm thinking about taking the upgrade opportunity to switch to the Matchmaker X system, the new shifter will definitely be compatible and I can get hold of a clamp like this without an issue:

I understand that the new shifter will be attached to the screw thread facing downwards. The SRAM website claims my Guide T brakes are Matchmaker compatible too (https://www.sram.com/en/sram/models/db-gde-t-a1) but it doesn't look like it from their picture as its a two bolt clip similar to this image. My brake body has half the clamp molded into it, then the second piece fits on the back.

The Guide R below appears to be attached through Matchmaker, but the body is a completely different shape below. It appears to have a small wedge with a hole for the Matchmaker clip's bolt to fit through

I'm either missing something silly, or are there are multiple versions of Guide T brakes with different body styles that SRAM doesn't make clear on their site?

Further research shows there are two systems, Matchmaker and Matchmaker X. My Guide T brakes allow the use of Matchmaker and the new Eagle Shifters use Matchmaker X. It seems as though all of the other Guide brakes (including the R the bottom picture above) use Matchmaker X.
I either need to find a Matchmaker clamp adapter like this https://www.sram.com/en/sram/models/db-acc-mm-a1 (which I'm unable to find in Europe), or swap my brakes at the same time.


Why would anyone steal a bike computer off of a bike? Lights can be re-used easily, but a bike computer... they would need to setup their own rigging for the wires and the magnets, that alone would cost them money and time, and who's going to buy from them? That person well inevitably buy cheap, because of the illegitimacy, so maybe $10 or $20.

It plain doesn't seem worth it, so I must be missing something, or these things are being stolen for the joy of stealing.

Is there any value in stolen bike computers? If so how?

I guess there are various different motivations as already pointed out in the comments:

Vandalism. Stealing the bike computer is easy and fast, doesn't require equipment. Lamps (even attached with screws w/o quick release) get stolen, seats (presumably beyond the demand for seats), brake cables get unhooked, quick releases on wheels get opened on parked bikes even if the wheel is secured with a lock …
Potential reuse. Parts for some bike computers can be bought separately. E.g. a Garmin is typically expensive, and mounts and sensors can be bought individually for little money. Now that may not be the case for a stolen bike computer but "Gelegenheit macht Diebe" (german: opportunity makes thieves). One can be tempted to take the computer on the spot without drawing much attention and disappear from the scene, to later calmly in another place figure out if there is any reuse. And said reuse might be reuse of the thief or for selling.


What pads are compatible? I have Tektro R320 Calliper brakes on my bike:

http://planet-x-bikes.co.uk/i/q/BCTKTR320/tektro_r320_brake_caliper

It's time for some new pads.

However, the ones on this appear to be all in one, bolt straight into the pad on the calliper.

If I look on wiggle, my usual online component supplier, there are lots of blocks for cartridges, or blocks like this:

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/swissstop-flash-pro-green-high-performance-blocks/

But not so many options that look like what is in the Tektro OEM.

How do I know what I can fit? what's compatible?

They look like standard Shimano-type cartridge brakes. No need for new blocks, just get a set of pads.
I recently got these and they are really good - far better than the standard shimano ones: http://www.wiggle.co.uk/kool-stop-dura-aceultegra105-pair-of-cartridge-inserts/

Go for the salmon if you have non-carbon rims.

EDIT: I seems your brakes do not in fact have cartridges but the brake pad is a single piece that connects directly to the caliper arm. The dura-style cartridges (like the ones you linked to) will fit on your calipers and is a worthwhile upgrade. You will be able to more cheaply and easily replace pads and have a wider choice.


Frame differences between 700c and 29er? Before you answer: no matter what bike I would change tires to 2" slick front, 2" semi-slick rear, so in other words, tires in this question does not play role (now I have 26" MTB and I use 2.35" to get the desired effect).

I am looking for three things:

max speed on the road in short distance (when you spill out your lungs)
maneuverability in city traffic (going between cars)
and taking long trips on hard surfaces comfortably (and safely)

How the frames of cross 700c bicycle and 29er affect those three factors?

I already noticed that since 700c have usually flat top tube of the frame falling from the saddle can hurt, 29er has more clearance -- so this a plus for 29er in terms of safety.

I don't consider downhill, going through mud, sand, big rocks, and on the other hand only smooth asphalt.

Update: example of cross 700c bike: http://sklep-romet.pl/index.php?route=product/product&path=61&product_id=64 and 29er as well: http://sklep-romet.pl/index.php?route=product/product&path=59&product_id=85&size=MTB%2029ER

Since both the bikes you link to are mountain bikes, you seem to be primarily concerned with wheel size or frame size.

But the two wheel sizes are the same = 700c is, more or less, a rim size, while 29" is the outer diameter of the tyre (except that obviously you can get different width "29er" tyres and that affects outside diameter). That confusion is why tyres are now actually sold by ISO rim diameter - specifically the bead seat diameter. If you get that right the tyre will go onto the rim (it may not fit into your frame, or it may be far too fat for the narrow rim, but it will go on).

Frame size matters when you convert one of those to ride fast on sealed roads, you're going to need to do more than just switch the tyres. Most obviously, the 29er is generally lower than the cross frame so when you put the seat and handlebars up to get a better position for fast riding you may find that the 29er can't do that with the stem and seat post that come with it. So you'll probably have to buy a rising stem and possibly a head tube extender, and (less likely) a longer seatpost.

The gearing is also different, 48-11 top gear on the cross bike and 42-11 on the 29er. For both bikes you're probably going to want higher gears, but for the 29er the jump is going to be significant meaning you might need to change the front derailleur as well. I suggest allowing for a 50T or 53T large chainring, which on the cross bike is a small change and may not be worth while. It depends on how fast you ride and pedal.

Both frames are aluminium, just like most mid-range road bikes. I don't think that matters for what you're doing.

On that site the touring bikes (TREKKINGOWE?) would probably be an easier conversion to what you want, but I suspect you might prefer a cyclo-cross bike (drop bars, disk brakes, slightly heavier/stronger than a road bike). Cyclocross bikes are or were made in Poland, but the website for 'Scattante' is gone. Here's a German manufacturer instead :) They won't carry as much weight as a touring bike, but as a result they're lighter. And they're usually designed for more speed.


11spd Shimano Road/MTB compatibility Can I use a road 11spd Shimano road cassette with a Deore XT rear hub? Or, if not, can I use an 11spd MTB cassette with 105 R7000 derailleurs?

Basically I have a Soma Fog Cutter frame and I need to use a 135mm rear hub but I want to use 105 R7000 components otherwise. Will this work?

Thanks!

You don't have to mix MTB and road components for this bike. 135mm wide disc hubs with a road 11 speed freehub body exist. I have one on my bike and it's fairly standard for disk brake road bikes with a QR in the rear.

To answer your actual question:

The compatibility issue between MTB hubs and road 11 speed cassettes is that 100 speed MTB hubs retained the  '10 speed' 34.95mm freehub body, but road hubs went to a longer 36.75mm one.

MTB cassettes generally have larger inner sprockets that can overhang the inboard end of the freehub body and clear the spokes, so a longer freehub body was not needed. Some larger range road cassettes come with a 1.8mm spacer and can fit on the shorter freehub.

If you want to use a MTB cassette with a road derailleur, this can work but you need to make sure you will not exceed the max sprocket size and total capacity of the derailleur.

Specs for Shimano rear derailleurs are here, max sprocket size for RD-R7000 GS (longer cage) is 34 teeth (although many people report you can push the Shimano specs a little, so a 36 tooth will likely work OK).


Loosen the handbrake in mecanical disk-brake One of the two handbrakes is too tight and I can't find the barrel adjusters (as in this video: Adjust bike brakes, although his bike has V-brakes not mechanical Disk-brakes like me)?

Should I adjust the cable brake on the caliper (see picture below) to make the hand-brake less tight (Disk brake adjustment)?

Yes, in your picture of the caliper you can see the barrel adjuster at the left side. Usually when mechanics set up a cable brake, they’ll allow about one rotation of space for loosening, and the rest will be available to tighten the brake as the cable stretches and the pads wear. So, it’s possible that you may not have enough adjustment at the barrel to make it as loose as you want. If this is the case, you could loosen the allen bolt clamping the cable and let out a bit of slack there.

You could also adjust the position of the static pad, which is the one nearest the wheel. This is usually done with an allen key from the wheel side, turning it clockwise to move the pad inwards and anticlockwise to move it outwards. You don’t want to back it out too far, though, as this might cause the rotor to start rubbing the caliper body when you apply the brakes. You should be able to observe this easily enough.

So, I would start with the barrel adjuster, then if you don’t get enough slack from that, let a bit of cable through the pinch bolt.


Why so much hate for presta valve caps? I first remember hearing hate for presta valve caps in the video where Lance Armstrong changes a bike tire.  He says:

  See that little black thing?  Don't put that back on when you're done... ever.

I thought it was just a joke, until someone commented on a thread of mine (on a bike forum) and said that the valve caps are super lame.

Personally, I always leave my valve caps on because it keeps dirt off of the valve, and in turn out of my pumps.  Now, when I made that argument on the forum the other member commented saying

  I totally get the keeping dirt out. Coolness [of taking them off] far outweighs the logic of those little bastards. They have gone the way of wheel reflectors and dork discs.
  Any bling will be negated by presta valve caps installed.

Can someone please describe to me why there is so much hatred for these little things?  I get that they kind of resemble a guy's genitalia, but I feel like it's not really that big of a deal.

As far as I've heard the reason for not having the cap on is because without it changing the tube is somewhat faster.


What will be the time to close a gap to catch a breakaway? how much time  is required to close a gap of 100 metres, in a cycling race,
for different differences in speed of leading and chasing group.

i need a tool to do the math on the fly. so that if one knows what speed the chasing group, one should be able to decide the speed to keep gap constant

how much time is required to close a gap of 100 metres, in a cycling race, for different differences in speed of leading and chasing group

For a speed difference of 1 metre per second, the time is 100 seconds.

For a speed difference of 2 metres per second, the time is 50 seconds.

For a speed difference of 0.5 metres per second, the time is 200 seconds.

Generally, for a speed difference of "x" metres per second, the time is "100 divided by x" seconds.

  i need a tool to do the math on the fly. so that if one knows what speed the chasing group, one should be able to decide the speed to keep gap constant

To keep the gap constant, the lead group must maintain exactly the same speed as the chasing group.


Meaning of Symbols/Icons on Amgen-ToC Stage Maps Can someone help parse the symbols on the stage maps for Amgen-ToC?

There does not seem to be a legend on any of the maps.  e.g. http://cdn.amgentourofcalifornia.com/uploads/images/2017stages/AmgenTOC17_Stage-02_012617.pdf

Some seem pretty obvious:

Blue circle with right-pointing white triangle  =  Stage Start
Red circle with 1 to 5 or "HC" : Climbs with difficulty-category
Red circle with checkered square : Stage finish

One I'm less certain of:

Blue circle with knife/fork : Safe for riders to take food here (long flat straight stretch)???

Two I have no idea:

Green circle with white "S" : ???  (maybe some sort of points/premium spot?)
Blue circle with "Km 0" (about 10 km after the start) : ???

After lots of searching, I've found that last year's maps use the same symbols, but again without any legend.  I found another site on which someone asked a similar question about the Tour of Switzerland, but some of those symbols are different.

Can anyone help me out here?   Thanks!

RED Circle with numbers 1-5 : Climbs with range of difficulty

RED Circle with numbers "HC" : Hors catégorie or Above Category

Blue Circle with knife/fork : Feed Zone where you grab your musette

Green Circle with white "S" : Sprint Zone

Blue Circle with "km 0" : Just means no break-away is allowed before this point. In essence "the race starts here"


Chain Slip at front changing from large to small front chain wheel (with large cog at back) I have a Pinnacle Neon 3 Hybrid, Shimano Sora 9 speed cassette and 2 chainrings at the front.

The bike is 2 weeks old and I've cycled around 65 miles so far.

Chain ring has come off 3 times at the front
1st time was when on the big ring at front and I selected wrong direction on the chainwheel (ie moved it outward instead of inward to smaller chainring - think I was on smallest cog at back), so I put it down to possible user error.

Today, the chain came off inwards twice at the front when moving from the large front chain ring to the small one whilst in the large cog at the back.The chain went past the small chainring. I have read it isn't ideal to be changing like this but should it really be coming off like that?

My previous bike, also a Pinnacle Hybrid, had 3 chainrings and I never had 1 chain slip in 6 years.

I'll probably take it in to be checked but wondered if there's anything I can do to adjust and make it less likely before the 1st free service is due in a month.

There is chain rub when on the largest cog and smallest chainring. Is it worth adjusting the H screw on the front derailleur to prevent the chain flying off when moving inwards as above from large to small chainring, or is it more likely due to the fact I was going from large chainring to small chainring ("extreme gear") when in the smallest cog?

Thanks

Martin

I wouldn't expect to throw the chain inwards or outwards (at least on my 3x8 setup) if the limit screws are correct.  This is true whatever sprocket I'm using and even if I push the lever the wrong way (it's not unknown when I'm tired especially if I've recently been riding another bike).  That said you shouldn't be shifting like that as you acknowledge.  The tolerances are likely to be tighter with a 9 speed chain but I would say there's no harm in a light tweak of the limit screws and tension, in fact after a few 10s of miles on new cables or after other significant changes I tend to find that some adjustment is needed as things bed in.


Can anyone identify this Tandem bike I restored from a junk yard? This is a bike that I rescued from an abandoned junk yard in central California. It was terribly rusted, and I think I am crazy for spending the amount of time and money I did to restore it. I often wish that I would have just walked right on by it! It had remnants of rubbery decals on it, but they were far unreadable. The gear changer says "FALCON" on it. Unfortunately that is the only thing with a name on the bike. Does anybody know what this bike is? Or perhaps how old it may be?

I had a very similar frame on a tandem from Craigslist several years ago. That was a Schwinn.
The frame is terribly flexible, you can't put an adult on the rear seat.


Disc Rotor Alignment Mavic Crosstrail I have a disc rotor alignment question you maybe can help me with.

I have a Canyon Nerve AL+ 8.0 that's been working nice until the front wheel got stuck on the brake. First I thought it was a brake issue but now I'm not so sure. When I inspected the wheel placement it looks as if the wheel is misaligned on the "hub tube". I took a few photos to illustrate the potential problem. But can only post two of them here (2 link limit, not enough reputation).

This is how the caliper aligns with the socket when on the rotor. Not very well at all.
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=5FF9BFDF1E0E64EB%2120369
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=5FF9BFDF1E0E64EB%2120370

The brake worked fine for a year then all of the sudden the front wheel got stuck. If I attach the caliper to the socket the right pad presses firmly against the disc rotor. It looks as if the whole hub has moved a few mm to the right on the "tube". The wheel is not centered in the front fork. The rear wheel IS centered.

Is the front wheel supposed to be centered. If so can I fix the hub alignment myself?

How much displacement are we talking about.  A mm or two?

I've never heard of the wheel moving along the axle.  Is the 15QR skewer (the axle) tight?  There is a rotatable nut with numbers on the opposite side which you can adjust to move the final angle at which the skewer lever handle sits.

One thing I would try is to remove the caliper completely (two bolts to the fork) and see if the rim and or the rotor wobbles when turned.  Also check to see if the wheel itself is loose and moves "along the axle" or rattles / has loose play.  The front wheel on my Nerve AL 8.9 is centered, as far as I can tell.

It's possible that the caliper position changed during a crash.  There is slop in the two mounting bolts on purpose so that you can center the caliper pads onto the disk.  But before you try that, you should probably make sure the disks aren't warped as well.


How much motor do I need for my electric-assist bike? I take my twins to preschool by car, and I'd like to switch to doing it by bike.

There's a hill, and we're heavy, and I'm not in great shape, so it's hard. I've done it a few times, but I always collapse when I get home, and I certainly don't have the energy to do it twice (drop-off + pick-up). I take a while to recover. It takes a lot longer, too.

I also would like to always bike to the grocery store and other errands, but they are within the range of the preschool, so let's focus on that one for now.

I'm looking at electric-assist bikes as a way to overcome the hurdle and starting doing this trip by bike (almost) every time. I've seen bolt-on hub-motor systems for as little as $300, and Big Dummy + Stoke Monkey setups for $3000+.

Data:

The bike + trailer + me + passengers weigh 430 lbs. There's a 230' climb on the way there, and 110' climb on the way back. I can drive it in 4 minutes but biking takes 20 minutes.

How much motor (and how much battery) do I need to invest in?

A highly trained competitive cyclist can ride at ~ 350-400 watts of power output for a 2 hour ride.  So adding a 400 watt electric assist motor is roughly equivalent to adding a competitive cyclist 'stoker' to your rig.  The speed and battery size make a big difference but here are some rules of thumb:

Some motors are measured in horsepower, rather than watts.  1/2 horsepower is roughly equal to 400 watts for this use.
A 400-watt motor will usually be sufficient for the average rider. Your rig is a little heavier, so you might want to go with higher watts.
On a typical 400 watt rig, two 12-volt, 12 amp-hour batteries will take an average rider 10 miles at 15 mph or up a hill that's 800 feet tall.
To go faster (assuming you haven't maxed out the watts) or further, you need to increase the battery - range is proportional, so twice the battery size = twice the range at the same speed.

There are companies like Convergence Tech that sell kits for motors in the 1 horsepower range that are pretty easy to add to an existing bike if you are mechanically inclined.  That range is probably more than sufficient for your needs.

Be aware that some areas limit the top speed or the available power for electric or gas-assisted bicycles.  I've seen speed limits of 25-30 mph and power limits as low as 500 watts.  You will want to check with your local road or transportation department to make sure you comply with local regulations.


Is it possible to mount a derailleur on this bike? Is there a way to mount a derailleur on this bike?

Sure.

Buy an adapter claw like this one (e.g. Sunrace SP550.):

The claw screws into the dropout, then you bolt on the derailleur as normal.

Alternatively, you can buy a derailleur with an integrated claw like several in the Shimano Tourney line (E.g. the Shimano Tourney RD3105; actually pictured, RD8153):

Note that you still have the issue of getting in a wheel with multiple cogs in the frame. This might require spreading the frame, if its steel (not a good idea on non-steel frames).

As mikes and mattnz point out in the comments, you also have to add cable stops and/or cable guides to the frame to route the shift cable. Or, run full length housing and use zip ties.  Problem Solvers among others make clamp on ones, and Origin 8 sells some zip tie-based cable guides you can use instead. You'll need to do a bit of searching and work probably to get the right routing, but they make cable stops that clamp onto the chainstays, the top tube, bottom tube, etc. A shop should be able to sort you out with these things relatively quickly. Other options might be to braze/weld on some.


Why do deraillers require a freewheel? I've seen fixies with internal hubs, but a non-freewheeling rear wheel with deraillers seems to be unrepresented:

            |        Freewheel?        |
Derailler?  |      Yes      |    No    |
      Yes   | Standard bike |    ??    |
       No   | Single-speed  |  Fixie   |

Practicality aside, is there a mechanical constraint involved here? What happens if you try it?

For the same reason you can't have a fixie with a chain tensioner.

The load on the chain when slowing a fixie is too great and in the wrong direction for a derailler or tensioner to hold. The cage will be pulled forward and your chain will skip make a nasty noise and most likely come off or break something expensive.


adding bullhorn handlebars, what about shifter and rear derailleur? I am changing to bullhorn handlebars and I'm having some difficulty figuring out what sort of derailleur and shifter I should get. I would like to use a 9 speed bar end shifter as I currently have a SRAM X5 1x9 drivetrain running 11-34 - 9 speed cassette with a 42T chainring.

I will be mostly commuting and I don't want 'bottom of the barrel' as far as price but I also don't want 'top of the line' professional components either.

We don't do product rec here, but I will note that SRAM rear derailleurs are compatible across road and mountain groups for 9 speed, as are Shimano.

So, if you have a Shimano rear derailleur, buy another Shimano shifter and keep the existing derailleur (or Shimano compatible, e.g. from Microshift). If you have a SRAM rear derailleur, replace Shimano with SRAM in the last sentence and ignore the parenthesis.


How can I move the handlebars on a mountain bike close to the rider without affecting handling and control? I recently finished building up a mountain bike, with the help of a friend. My initial rides - a few miles, nothing too extensive yet - revealed that I need to move the handlebars a bit up and back towards the saddle to make my elbows happy; I prefer them to be bent more than they are now. I can think of two ways to do this: Raise the bars or bring them closer in, or a bit of both. (The stem is already at the top of the fork steerer tube, and I'd prefer not to get an extender on this bike.)

Background

The drivetrain is a Shimano mountain set I pulled off a hardtail 80's steel-frame mountain bike (upgraded in the noughties), hung on a hardtail 90's Specialized Stumpjumper frame (an aluminum frame with slightly more aggressive geometry). Neither bike had any suspension at all, including the front fork. (Due to my preferences. Suspension is nice, but I dislike the slight loss of feedback.)

I'd like to know what these changes are likely to do, and, possibly even more importantly, why this is the case.

Option 1: Get a smaller stem

This is an easy one, as the existing stem is quite long. Whatever I do, I'll want to bring the bars in. However, I could also look for a stem with a steeper angle while I'm at it. How will these changes affect how the bike handles? Will a shorter stem make the bike more twitchy, or less? (I quite like the way it feels right now.)

Option 2: Get some riser bars

This is a fairly simple way to get the bars closer to me. Rotating the bars one way or another will give me more options. However, I quite like the existing flat bar, as the simplicity of it is appealing from an aesthetic standpoint. Will riser bars affect the feel and handling of the bike?

Summary

I have two possibilities, and (I'm guessing) combining both approaches will likely be what I end up doing. Before I start ordering parts, which of these is likely to give me the correct reach while preserving the feel of the bike as it is now, and why? Are there options that I haven't thought of?

Moving your bars is probably going to move your centre of gravity which is likely to affect the handling of the bike. That said if the only change is that your elbows are more bent it might not make a big difference.

A shorter stem will move your weight backwards that means:

The bike will be more stable and less twitchy.
It will be easier to move your weight back when descending. It will also increase your range of movement, giving you more control (as long as you use it!).
You will be in a less powerful position for pedaling.
The front is more likely to unweight and rise when going uphill.

If you're fitting a shorter stem you'll want to lift the bars up as well, you can do this by fitting a stem which is angled, or riser bars, or both. This is all about what feels good so you'll want to experiment a bit - long/low and short/high both feel good, long/high and short/long don't.

The other thing you can do to get yourself closer to the bars is to move your saddle forwards - the saddle can move forwards or backwards on the clamp, and you could possibly use a seatpost with less/no layback.


Brake lever leaks. What to do? My bike uses Tektro Auriga M290 -brakes. They've been great, but few months ago I noticed that there was some air inside the system. I didn't do anything and continued to use my bike. Yesterday I find out that my brake lever had some brake fluid on it, so I think the lever might be leaking.

Is there any way I can fix this or do I have to buy new lever? Auriga M290 seems to be discontinued, so I can't get a new one easily. Could I use another Tektro lever, or even lever from another brand. Or do I have to buy new whole system?

I also don't know which lever/brake system to choose, because there are so many avaible. It would be great if you could recommend me some examples. My bike is a 28" hybrid bike, and I use it year-round, so the temperatures might be from -25C to 30C.

Thanks for helping!

Auriga M290s are generally pretty good and trouble-free but they do bite it sometimes. They're one of the most populous lower end hydros out there, but are mostly an OEM part so you won't necessarily see it listed in product lineups.

Pretty much the only reasonably fixable problem the lever might have is at the bleed port. If that's where the fluid is coming out, you can check that the o-ring underneath the screw is in good shape and sitting in there in the right place, and the bleed screw is tight. You could also check the bolt on the side of the lever, which normally isn't touched.

You can also check that the hose connections are tight and the hose is undamaged. Especially if the bike hangs, oil that leaks out somewhere on the hose could make its way to the lever.

There isn't any internal/rebuild spare parts support for brakes like this. A complete new M290 brake is about $35US online, and that comes with a rotor and fresh pads, so just replacing the whole thing is the usual plan if there seem to be seal leaks or other internal parts issues.


Bearing Race replacement If have a Shimano FH-M475 rear hub, the cones are pitted and need replacement, the bearing cup on the drive side is pitted, probably still usable, but will never be great. The left side cup is still good.

My question is can the drive side cup be replaced, is it part for the freewheel, or is the hub toast and do I need to use it as an excuse to upgrade to something a lot better?

This is a bike that has only done around 1000km (all off road in mostly dry) conditions. The grease in the hubs was clean when I stripped the hubs. Any reason why the hubs (front one has trashed the cones, but not the bearing race, back one trashed the cones and on race) have failed so quickly? Could it be over tightened in the shop? I never checked the hubs, the wheels were on the bike when bought new from the shop, and have never been removed. There was no play in the wheels, so I never had reason to check the bearings.

You are lucky, bearing races (or cups, as said in the other answer) on Shimano hubs are not replaceable but you can replace the rear drive side by replacing the entire freehub body. It can be unscrewed from the hub with a 10mm hex wrench.

I am not sure if the freehub bodies are available as spare parts, but it isn't too expensive to get a new FH-475 and use it for parts. You should replace the balls and probably the cone on drive side, too.

In my experience, the low end Shimano hubs (no name, Acera, Alivio) don't wear well. Even though XT has similar construction and doesn't cost much more, the sealing and materials are better and the result is far more durable. On the down side, replacing entire hub requires rebuilding the wheel, which will probably cost more than a new wheel if you don't do it yourself.


What could cause a tyre to deform in this way? I have been riding my bike about 450 miles and following the last ride I noticed the tyre had deformed. I'm riding them at 110 psi, just before the deformation you can see a skid mark. Could it have been down to that?

The casing is giving way underneath the tread. The casing is made up of woven threads that give the tire its shape and strength. Don't ride it this way as it can get worse or fail catastrophically (blow out). You need a new tire.