Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Re: Another curiosity question

Started by Werehatrack · · Last activity · 1 post · 368 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
7 June 2005
Last activity
7 June 2005
Original author
Werehatrack
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
368
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Leo Lichtman said:


    "Tom Weaver" (clip) Why do the front and rear shifters work opposite to
    each other? (clip)
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    A couple of others have mentioned possible confusion regarding which rings
    and cogs are closest to the frame, so I will leave that alone. I would like
    to answer the question I have clipped from your post. Front and rear
    shifters work opposite, in the sense that the motion on the rear shifter
    that gears you down does the opposite on the front shifter. This is because
    going to a larger sprocket, front or rear requires more force than dropping
    to a smaller one. For this reason, shifting "larger" is always done with
    cable tension, and going the other way is done by creating cable slack,
    allowing a spring to do the work. Following this rule, you downshift in the
    rear with tension, and upshift in the front with tension. It's the SAME in
    terms of the mechanism, and OPPOSITE in therms of effect.

    Except with low-normal rear ders, of which I have two now. They work
    just fine, thank you, and they make shifting *far* more intuitive.
    --
    Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
    Some gardening required to reply via email.
    Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.