only a total fred would use 36-spoke wheels...



well, look at these messages or posts as the spectrum of consumers in
the us bicycle market: wanna be racers, a-b commuters, tourers and a
few fred's?
one question: which group buys more bicycles, which group buys more
"stuff," what stuff is less expensive. who buys LBS, who buys MO.
taking the racer's edge tho it does appear the 28 spoke rim is bottom
line reliable for street racing grading up depending on conditions
and tolerances
 
>
> > In the nicest possible way, those who ridicule others for this or that
> > consumption choice should spend a few years studying psychology and
> > then they might be a bit more understanding and kinder to fellow
> > posters.
> > Do what suits you, for your own reasons, and everyone is happy.
> > all the best, Nick.

>


I agree, psychology is a powerful force. I once heard a Discovery
mechanic say that they reserve some of the equipment for mountain
stages just because the riders get a mental boost from thinking that
they have an extra light bike compared to their normal race bike. I
don;t doubt it, the placebo effect is real even for the pros.

Fashion and taste of course is another matter and to each his own. I
don't mind people who ride low spoke count wheels - just those that
tell I should not ride 32 spoke wheels (approx 1600g by the way).
Unfortunately I am not a strong enough rider to make them eat their
words. I don't need newer wheels, I need a younger and/or better
heart and lungs.

Wayne
 
On 12 Apr 2007 07:35:11 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Apr 12, 9:09 am, [email protected] wrote:
>> "Skew the market", exactly!
>>
>> At its simplest this 'debate' is just a conflict between that part of
>> the population which runs on cognitive autopilot and on the
>> otherhand, those who do what they want for their own reasons. Many
>> people are unable to tell the difference between what they want and
>> what the companies want you to want.

>
>BINGO!
>
>
>>
>> If person A. needs 36 spoke wheels, then he gets them. If person B is
>> so chronically crippled by his need to conform and to be controlled by
>> a sales influenced roleplaying 'script', then i guess we don't need to
>> have a discussion, because that person doesn't appear to have a self-
>> refernced thought of his or her own.

>
>BINGO!!
>
>
>>
>> Some people do what they do, with little or NO reference to what
>> others think. It's funny to note that things have turned full circle
>> since the anti-conformity of the 60's. Conforming blindly seems to
>> have become a great deal more acceptable. Case in point Peoplecarriers
>> in the UK, simple 1950's idiotic 'keeping up with the Jones', such an
>> unsophisticated faux pas during the ironic 80's. So it seems to be
>> with the weightweenies movement in cycling, people believe everything
>> they're told, if the can feel some form of relief from the 'consumer
>> insecurity" which product A alleviates. Create a fear, then sell
>> something to quench it. Only a total Fred would ride 36 spokes, buy
>> our coincidentally cheaper to produce 28's, arrrrrrr, fear all gone.
>> More than just a hint of Walden 2 or 1984.

>
>One more time: BINGO!!!
>
>
>>
>> In the nicest possible way, those who ridicule others for this or that
>> consumption choice should spend a few years studying psychology and
>> then they might be a bit more understanding and kinder to fellow
>> posters.
>> Do what suits you, for your own reasons, and everyone is happy.
>> all the best, Nick.

>
>
>
>Great post, Nick. :)


How appropriate it is to keep spreading lame comments about other
people being taken in by marketing, as opposed to being taken in by
conservative, cheap old hippies who are lamer than wannabes -- so lame
they are neverevencouldawantedtobes?


--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
On 12 Apr 2007 13:06:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>I don't want your money.


I'll send the money if you're certain about the spoke numbers. Not
specualating or extrapolating: certain. Are you?
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
On 12 Apr 2007 14:54:50 -0700, "Wayne" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>
>> > In the nicest possible way, those who ridicule others for this or that
>> > consumption choice should spend a few years studying psychology and
>> > then they might be a bit more understanding and kinder to fellow
>> > posters.
>> > Do what suits you, for your own reasons, and everyone is happy.
>> > all the best, Nick.

>>

>
>I agree, psychology is a powerful force. I once heard a Discovery
>mechanic say that they reserve some of the equipment for mountain
>stages just because the riders get a mental boost from thinking that
>they have an extra light bike compared to their normal race bike. I
>don;t doubt it, the placebo effect is real even for the pros.
>
>Fashion and taste of course is another matter and to each his own. I
>don't mind people who ride low spoke count wheels - just those that
>tell I should not ride 32 spoke wheels (approx 1600g by the way).


I do mind people who say the only reason to ride a wheel with less
spokes than 36 is marketing.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:03:46 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

> On 12 Apr 2007 14:54:50 -0700, "Wayne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> > In the nicest possible way, those who ridicule others for this or that
>>> > consumption choice should spend a few years studying psychology and
>>> > then they might be a bit more understanding and kinder to fellow
>>> > posters.
>>> > Do what suits you, for your own reasons, and everyone is happy.
>>> > all the best, Nick.
>>>

>>
>>I agree, psychology is a powerful force. I once heard a Discovery
>>mechanic say that they reserve some of the equipment for mountain
>>stages just because the riders get a mental boost from thinking that
>>they have an extra light bike compared to their normal race bike. I
>>don;t doubt it, the placebo effect is real even for the pros.
>>
>>Fashion and taste of course is another matter and to each his own. I
>>don't mind people who ride low spoke count wheels - just those that
>>tell I should not ride 32 spoke wheels (approx 1600g by the way).

>
> I do mind people who say the only reason to ride a wheel with less
> spokes than 36 is marketing.


For those of us with (some) bikes with small wheels, 36 spokes are
unnecessary. This is for wheel sizes like 349/305/298/etcetera. 28 and 20
seem to be the norm for those, and with good reason - at those sizes, the
load-affected zone spans enough spokes even wiht the low spoke count.

'Tis hard to get butted spokes in those sizes though, especially for hubs
with very large flanges...
 
John Forrest Tomlinson skrev:
> On 12 Apr 2007 13:06:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >I don't want your money.

>
> I'll send the money if you're certain about the spoke numbers. Not
> specualating or extrapolating: certain. Are you?


I am absolutly sure. Counted the spokes on the picture of Thor Hushovd
several times. I can easily see and count 35 spokes (lets assume the
last spoke is behind the fork).
But the best thing is, that everybody can register at http://www.ciclismovitamia.it/
and find picture no. " d0602090 Thor Hushovd" from the 2006 GIRO DELLE
FIANDRE (Ronde van Vlaanderen/ Tour of Flanders) and then count the
spokes. If you do you will see that I am right.


--
Regards
Peter S.
 
On 12 Apr 2007 19:06:56 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson skrev:
>> On 12 Apr 2007 13:06:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >I don't want your money.

>>
>> I'll send the money if you're certain about the spoke numbers. Not
>> specualating or extrapolating: certain. Are you?

>
>I am absolutly sure. Counted the spokes on the picture of Thor Hushovd
>several times. I can easily see and count 35 spokes (lets assume the
>last spoke is behind the fork).

Send me your address by email to usenet [at] jt10000.com.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
Peter Cole wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> One could very easily imply you do not ride much at all. Or at least
>> do not ride these wheels much. Kind of like the little old lady from
>> Florida who only drives her car to Church on Sunday. In 20+ years of
>> riding I have ridden enough miles to crash and break rims. And to
>> dent rims on potholes.
>> I do not consider rims to be wear items like some people on this
>> internet forum imply. But I definitely do not think they will last
>> 20+ years with regular usage. Every time you apply the brake pads,
>> friction is created, and something wears away. Mostly the brake
>> pads. But a little bit of rim too.

>
> I, on the other hand, have never dented or broken a rim, but I have worn
> a few out. If you ride in the rain, it's inevitable.


Heh, heh, only if you use the brakes! :)

Mark J.
 
<[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
> John Forrest Tomlinson skrev:
>> On 12 Apr 2007 13:06:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >I don't want your money.

>>
>> I'll send the money if you're certain about the spoke numbers. Not
>> specualating or extrapolating: certain. Are you?

>
> I am absolutly sure. Counted the spokes on the picture of Thor Hushovd
> several times. I can easily see and count 35 spokes (lets assume the
> last spoke is behind the fork).
> But the best thing is, that everybody can register at
> http://www.ciclismovitamia.it/
> and find picture no. " d0602090 Thor Hushovd" from the 2006 GIRO DELLE
> FIANDRE (Ronde van Vlaanderen/ Tour of Flanders) and then count the
> spokes. If you do you will see that I am right.
>
>
> --
> Regards
> Peter S.


He's right, it are 36 spokes on both accounts.
 
>>> On 12 Apr 2007 13:06:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> I don't want your money.


>> John Forrest Tomlinson skrev:
>>> I'll send the money if you're certain about the spoke numbers. Not
>>> specualating or extrapolating: certain. Are you?


> On 12 Apr 2007 19:06:56 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> I am absolutly sure. Counted the spokes on the picture of Thor Hushovd
>> several times. I can easily see and count 35 spokes (lets assume the
>> last spoke is behind the fork).


John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> Send me your address by email to usenet [at] jt10000.com.


I've half-followed this with no passion but JFT makes a good point that
even when Pros ride their preferred classic wheels, 36 isn't required.
For a Pro (one or two days of use) wheel, 32 is plenty and even those
are no longer standard. Few among us have their set of criteria*.

Outside of phs123's small point and a capricious wager JFT is largely
right and a good observer of the peloton.

* As a former team sponsor: after airplanes, hotels and staff, the bikes
and equipment are virtually free. Even for small efforts such as I made,
all bike expenses were under 10% of budget. Wheel durability beyond the
event is not relevant. YMMV if you are paying for your own wheels
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
 
On Apr 13, 12:03?am, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]>
wrote.
>
> I do mind people who say the only reason to ride a wheel with less
> spokes than 36 is marketing.
>
> --


I do not think that anyone has implied 'the ONLY reason' of your
criticism. People who are relaxed and reasonable, say that if you
"Need" less than 32, then go with it. Conversely if you are sold 28 by
your LBS 'technician' and then go out and break spokes after x miles,
for whatever reason, then if 48 spokes makes you both comfortable and
practically protected, then again, go with it. It has not, with all
due respect, been said that the only reason for buying this 'cutting
edge' equipment, is exclusively fashion or marketing. Moreover, for
some people, it is not honourable or kind to sell an unsuspecting
customer a product that is not suited to their needs, purely based on
a false premis, i.e. 'lighter is better' or in this case 'less is
more'.

I break spokes because i do 150 Miles plus a week and i'm big. Ergo,
less is more, only in the sense that less spokes, translates to, more
walking home while swearing at passing motorists. Lighter is good for
some and not for others. Life does vary like that, and some
'consumers' still recognise what's good for and not corporation X's
bank balance.

Many thanks, Nick.
 
On Apr 13, 12:00?am, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> How appropriate it is to keep spreading lame comments about other
> people being taken in by marketing, as opposed to being taken in by
> conservative, cheap old hippies who are lamer than wannabes -- so lame
> they are neverevencouldawantedtobes?
>
> --
> JT



If you consider being critical of dishonourable market practices
'lame', then i conceed your point from your perspective, i am indeed
lame. You are reliant on your aggressive competitive streak to
reinforce what you see as your positive self image. That's fine and it
works for you. Others achieve their meaning of life by leisure riding
or just pottering along in the comforting knowledge that 40 spokes
will ensure that continued happiness. No Hippy doctrine here, just a
simple wish for people to have some freedom, without being induced
through fear into behaviour that serves others.


In the interests of international relations i would assert that
"Provocational posting competitiveness syndrome" is responsible for
many wasted calories. If one wishes to see onseself as amiable, then i
would suggest that calling people names, for the expression of an
opinion, is not the way to go. It's just a rock you know, beyond that
all is fiction.

cheers, Nick.
 
Dans le message de news:[email protected],
[email protected] <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :>
>
> If you consider being critical of dishonourable market practices
> 'lame', then i conceed your point from your perspective, i am indeed
> lame. You are reliant on your aggressive competitive streak to
> reinforce what you see as your positive self image. That's fine and it
> works for you. Others achieve their meaning of life by leisure riding
> or just pottering along in the comforting knowledge that 40 spokes
> will ensure that continued happiness. No Hippy doctrine here, just a
> simple wish for people to have some freedom, without being induced
> through fear into behaviour that serves others.
>

Can you actually be more condescending? Would it cause cramps? Are you an
autodidact, or did you complete a diploma to achieve your skills?

You begin with the slippery introduction of a word that gainsays all the
fluff that JT is irked by. "Dishonorable" practices of any sort are not
benign. Marketing is not ipso facto dishonorable. Nor is perpetuating
truly held yet indefensible beliefs dishonorable.

The logical conclusion of examining a photo or two, showing 32 or 36 spokes
in wheels, is not that they are frequently used by pros. It is better to
accept that they are frequently used in specific races where they are
superior. And that this is, in a racing year, rather few riders, rather few
races, rather seldom. Because that's the real scene.

> In the interests of international relations i would assert that
> "Provocational posting competitiveness syndrome" is responsible for
> many wasted calories. If one wishes to see onseself as amiable, then i
> would suggest that calling people names, for the expression of an
> opinion, is not the way to go. It's just a rock you know, beyond that
> all is fiction.
>
> cheers, Nick.


Well, Nick (see, I called you a name, also), I am sure you studied your
cooly slimy words before publishing them. Let's be simpler, though. You
write snotty prose, just as we all do from time to time. Or say things in
the course of a chat. It's not in the forum's rules to be amiable, and
that's the way it stays. Yet you chose four billious words to try to
"syndromize" this form of expression? Do let us know the contacts at the
Institute of Supercilious Stuffed Maillots for Intensive Prattling.

--
Sandy
--
C'est le contraire du vélo, la bicyclette.
Une silhouette profilée mauve fluo dévale
à soixante-dix à l'heure : c'est du vélo.
Deux lycéennes côte à côte traversent
un pont à Bruges : c'est de la bicyclette.
-Delerm, P.
 
On Apr 13, 7:29�pm, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dans le message
> > cheers, Nick.

>
> Well, Nick (see, I called you a name, also), I am sure you studied your
> cooly slimy words before publishing them.  Let's be simpler, though.  You
> write snotty prose,
>
> --
> Sandy


Thanks Sandy, yeap you're right, i never thought i was 'cooly slimy',
but i don't think that you're far wrong. 'Snotty prose' again spot on,
that's why you're successful and i'm a useless mouth as someone once
said. That's what comes of low origins+high education.

I wanted to make the point that people can spend money on stuff that
doesn't do what it is required to do. People seem to feel obligated to
insult others for doing their own thing. I think marketing can be very
honourable, but what i was talking about was mis-selling. Low spoke
counts that just won't do high miles seem to be more regular features
of touring bikes. My writing style is vomit inducing i know and about
as poor as it gets, sorry.
Cheers for the honest and concise appraisal.
best wishes, nick
 
On 13 Apr 2007 09:24:31 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>If you consider being critical of dishonourable market practices
>'lame',


He's not just critical of the marketing, he's critical of every rider
who uses the stuff.

Not the same thing.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************