It takes two...

"Andy Cox" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What is the panel's view on the likelihood of my 32H SON-hubbed wheel
supporting the front of this beasty? I guess the need for 48 spokes will
be more critical at the rear to counter the effects of dish and
load-weight. Obviously wishing I'd gone for the 36H version now, but does
it make that much difference? For what it's worth, I'm sitting on the
front and weigh in at just under 75Kgs at the mo.

I've bent two 40H 700c rims on a tandem - soft tyres, bump in road, bang.
(Actually the second one wasn't that soft, but it was quite a sharp bump).
Both of these were on the back.

Nowadays all our tandems have 36H 26" wheels, and I've never had a problem.
Fat tyres help here...

I reckon your 32H wheel would work fine on the front, even in 700c - ok, the
front wheel gets a harder time than on a solo, but it's still the back which
gets the real stress. If buying new, I'd definitely get more spokes
(probably match the rear), but for a temporary solution your existing wheel
will probably be ok.

(proviso - the wheel is properly built, isn't it?)

cheers,
clive

Andy Cox said:

Have any of you encountered quality control probs with Dawes products?

The only quality control problem we've had with ours (same model), was the
rear wheel had very low spoke tension, and as a result the rear wheel
slowly fell apart on one of our first rides. Good news was that after
returning the bike to JD cycles, where they rebuilt the rear wheel, we've
never had a problem with the back wheel. Touch wood after 2000 miles of
fully laden touring.

The front wheel however, has lost a spoke or two, only when fully laden
and travelling quite fast hitting a bump. This has never been a show
stopper, as with 47 spokes I still feel confident in the strength of the
wheel, and after the 2nd time I'm now quite proficient in re-truing the
wheel.

The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
eccentric bottom bracket, I can only conclude that the chainwheels have
worn. Hopefully Santa will bring some replacements to test the theory,
that or there is a serious issue with frame shrinkage 🙂

Hope that helps, and I hope you enjoy the bike, we've had nothing but
great fun on ours.

Gareth

In article <[email hidden]>
gd250 <[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip)

Quoted message said:

The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
eccentric bottom bracket

Why not?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
eccentric bottom bracket

Why not?

I bet he'll say something like "I can only conclude that the chainwheels
have worn."

In article <[email hidden]>
Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
eccentric bottom bracket

Why not?

I bet he'll say something like "I can only conclude that the chainwheels
have worn."

I suppose I should have made it clear that I was asking for symptoms,
not a diagnosis. :-)

Andy Cox said:

Hi Group,

We've just invested in a Dawes Galaxy twin with a view to doing some
Audax/light touring over the coming year.

Gratuitous kitchen pick at:
www.andsl.org/twin.jpg

Two queries:

Have any of you encountered quality control probs with Dawes products? To
date, I've had to re-tape both wheel rims, following holes blown in the
cheese-made originals on initial inflation; there are a number of nasty
chips to the paintwork on the top tubes which revealed themselves when
unpacked and the excess cable on the front mech got mangled in the LHS
chain. None of these are deal breakers, but tempted to pen a letter off
regardless. Can't blame it on a courier, as we collected from NLBS...

What is the panel's view on the likelihood of my 32H SON-hubbed wheel
supporting the front of this beasty? I guess the need for 48 spokes will be
more critical at the rear to counter the effects of dish and load-weight.
Obviously wishing I'd gone for the 36H version now, but does it make that
much difference? For what it's worth, I'm sitting on the front and weigh in
at just under 75Kgs at the mo.

Thanks,

Andy Cox

We've had ours a couple of years and are very happy with it. We did
LEJOG with full camping kit last year and the bike has now done a total
of a little under 2500 miles. No issues quality related at all in fact
the only replacement has been a new free hub at around 1500 miles

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>
Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

Quoted message said:

> The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
> chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
> chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
> eccentric bottom bracket

Why not?

I bet he'll say something like "I can only conclude that the chainwheels
have worn."

I suppose I should have made it clear that I was asking for symptoms,
not a diagnosis. :-)

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel.
But removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the
eccentric adjusted fully the other way.

Gareth

gd250 said:

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>
Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

>> The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
>> chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
>> chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
>> eccentric bottom bracket
>
> Why not?

I bet he'll say something like "I can only conclude that the chainwheels
have worn."

I suppose I should have made it clear that I was asking for symptoms,
not a diagnosis. :-)

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel.
But removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the
eccentric adjusted fully the other way.

I had this. I got round it by making a half link. Google has the
instructions somewhere. On the other hand I might still have the half
link, having removed it as the chain wore and have now flogged the
bike.

Tim

"Andy Cox" <[email hidden]> asked:

Quoted message said:

Have any of you encountered quality control probs with Dawes products?

Her indoors has a Dawes some-desert-or-other as her second commuter bike,
and I was a little disappointed with the quality of some of the components
and the details. It has V-brakes that are slightly cheesier than the
Shimano ones on her Ridgeback, and the cable run around the bottom bracket
is decidedly not-quite-right. I'm not sure how to explain the problem
with the cable run: there's a welded guide which forces the cable inner to
run against the paintwork outside the guide for a good centimetre.

Quoted message said:

Have any of you encountered quality control probs with Dawes products?

I've traditionally found Dawes bikes just a grade lower in quality than
one would expect when it comes time to fiddle about with them, and
definitely slapdash about cable runs and similar details.

O.

"gd250" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel.
But removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the
eccentric adjusted fully the other way.

Tim has mentioned half links - the longer term alternative is to go for the
other of odd/even number toothed chainrings to what you currently have - eg
if you're using 38 at the moment, try 39, or vice versa.

cheers,
clive

In article said:

gd250 said:

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel.
But removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the
eccentric adjusted fully the other way.

I had this. I got round it by making a half link. Google has the
instructions somewhere. On the other hand I might still have the half
link, having removed it as the chain wore and have now flogged the
bike.

You can buy half links (and chain made entirely of half links, which is a
lot cheaper per link if you can find a few other people who want one).
http://www.wiggle.co.uk/Default.aspx?ProdID=5360021268
http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/fixed.html#chains
http://www.charliethebikemonger.com/page7.htm

Tim Hall said:

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:09:45 +0000, gd250 <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel. But
removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the eccentric
adjusted fully the other way.

Quoted message said:

I had this. I got round it by making a half link. Google has the
instructions somewhere. On the other hand I might still have the half
link, having removed it as the chain wore and have now flogged the bike.

Tim

Thanks for the half link idea, but my thinking is that previously the
setup had worked without the need of a half link and now something has
changed. Basically I think what I'm getting at is, is it ok to run the
bike with worn timing chainrings, as long as you can get the chain the
right tension?

Gareth

"gd250" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for the half link idea, but my thinking is that previously the
setup had worked without the need of a half link and now something has
changed. Basically I think what I'm getting at is, is it ok to run the
bike with worn timing chainrings, as long as you can get the chain the
right tension?

Yes - so long as it actually still works. What's the worst that can happen?
Timing chains/rings get an easy life - straight chainline, large rings, so
if there's sufficient tension, they can be run a very long time.

It sounds like your setup was wrong in the first place. You say it
previously worked without the aid of a half link - but is that actually
true? When brand new, was it at the minimum position? It can only be
described as working if there is sufficient adjustment to cope with chain
wear - and in your case that appears to not be true. It may have appeared to
work, but that's a feature of the way eccentrics work - there could well be
an overlap between the odd and even cases.

cheers,
clive

gd250 said:

Tim Hall said:

gd250 said:

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel. But
removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the eccentric
adjusted fully the other way.

Quoted message said:

I had this. I got round it by making a half link. Google has the
instructions somewhere. On the other hand I might still have the half
link, having removed it as the chain wore and have now flogged the bike.

If it's the chainrings, turn them around to wear on the other faces.
You'll end up with some nice pointed weapons. Adding half links isn't
really a solution. In fact timing chains should wear fairly slowly. Try
adjusting the (difficult) eccentric Bottom Bracket. You'll need a BIG
pin spanner, or take it to a shop, they'll have one.

Adding one extra tooth to a single chainwheel will make you run in-and
out of phase.

regards,
daren

In article <[email hidden]>

gd250 said:

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>
Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

>> The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
>> chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
>> chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
>> eccentric bottom bracket
>
> Why not?

I bet he'll say something like "I can only conclude that the chainwheels
have worn."

I suppose I should have made it clear that I was asking for symptoms,
not a diagnosis. :-)

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel.
But removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the
eccentric adjusted fully the other way.

I don't think chainring wear would make that much difference, and you've
eliminated any possibility of chain stretch by replacing the chain.
Basically the eccentric only gives about about 20mm of adjustment[1],
and a pair of chain links is 25.4mm, so you need a half link or
something else to take out the slack. Was there a half link in the
chain you replaced? It's also quite possible that the original chain
was overly tight and that caused the rapid wear. Timing rings normally
last quite well. Maybe you could stick in a floating chainring, which
is a larger chainring that just sits between the top and bottom run
midway between the bottom brackets and holds the chain apart.

[1] As measured on my tandem - yours may be different.

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>

gd250 said:

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>
Mark Thompson
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote:
> >> The only other problem I've had with the bike is that the timing
> >> chainwheels seemed to have worn very quickly, I've replaced the timing
> >> chain but I'm still unable to get correct tension in the chain with the
> >> eccentric bottom bracket
> >
> > Why not?
>
> I bet he'll say something like "I can only conclude that the chainwheels
> have worn."
>
I suppose I should have made it clear that I was asking for symptoms,
not a diagnosis. :-)

Symptoms being the chain is very slack (2ish inches of travel) with the
eccentric bottom bracket adjusted fully towards the front wheel.
But removing a link leaves the chain a fraction too short with the
eccentric adjusted fully the other way.

I don't think chainring wear would make that much difference, and you've
eliminated any possibility of chain stretch by replacing the chain.
Basically the eccentric only gives about about 20mm of adjustment[1],
and a pair of chain links is 25.4mm, so you need a half link or
something else to take out the slack. Was there a half link in the
chain you replaced? It's also quite possible that the original chain
was overly tight and that caused the rapid wear. Timing rings normally
last quite well. Maybe you could stick in a floating chainring, which
is a larger chainring that just sits between the top and bottom run
midway between the bottom brackets and holds the chain apart.

I don't think the chain had a half link, but I'm not 100%. I'll put a
half link in, cheaper than buying new chain rings.

Thanks all for the advice,
Cheers,

Gareth

Quoted message said:

[1] As measured on my tandem - yours may be different.

Andy Cox said:

Have any of you encountered quality control probs with Dawes products?

One of my friends had a 2005 model Dawes, which he was very happy
with. The bike got nicked, and replaced with a 2006 model, which seems
to have been put together by chimps - the materials aren't as good as
on the old one, and the assembly was poor.

He's had it rebuilt - at Dawes' expense - at an LBS, but said the
lower quality is still extremely obvious.

--
Stevie D
\\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the
\\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

Quoting Andy Cox <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

What is the panel's view on the likelihood of my 32H SON-hubbed wheel
supporting the front of this beasty?

Well, I have a 36h SON on Sun Rhyno on the front of our tandem, and it
hasn't broken a spoke yet.

Rohloff claim 32h undished _rear_ wheels are up to the job, and there
seems to be some supporting evidence...
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Distortion Field!
Today is First Leicesterday, December.