"Ozark Bicycle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Tom Nakashima said:
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like the ones that I use, you'll never look back! Cheers, Carl Fogel
I still have a friction shifter 6-speed freewheel on my on my city commute bike. It shifts and rides fine. I'm sure I can do anything with that bike that you can do on your modern bike.
I'm not sure what you mean by; "You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and embrace improvement." Or else what? -tom
Else all the hip cyclists will call ya "RetroGrouch"! ;-)
Yea, I've seen that before. Pretty embarrassing when one of those "RetroGrouchies" passes one of those "LightweightWeenies" on the climbs. -tom
On 2007-10-15, [email hidden] <[email hidden]> wrote: [...]
Quoted message said:
Dear Tom,
Er, they're not. That's the point.
We (meaning current posters of dignified age and experience) tend to consider 20-spoke steel (and wood) wheels from 1889 to be old-fashioned and inferior to "modern" (aluminum) MA2 and MA40 rims from the 1980's.
("Modern" is in quotes because the only well-known source of antique MA2's is probably unwilling to part with any.)
There's a whole generation of bicyclists out there (whippersnappers) who look at 36-spoke MA2 and MA40 rims as being just as quaint as pre-1900 rims. They buy and ride low-spoke-count deep aero rims and wonder why we keep squabbling about antiques.
[...]
Here is Mr O'Grady's 19^H^H2007 Paris-Roubaix winning bike, with plenty of spokes:
> Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton > shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and > embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like > the ones that I use, you'll never look back! > Cheers, > Carl Fogel
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I still have a friction shifter 6-speed freewheel on my on my city commute bike. It shifts and rides fine. I'm sure I can do anything with that bike that you can do on your modern bike.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I'm not sure what you mean by; "You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and embrace improvement." Or else what? -tom
Quoted message said:
Else all the hip cyclists will call ya "RetroGrouch"! ;-)
Yea, I've seen that before. Pretty embarrassing when one of those "RetroGrouchies" passes one of those "LightweightWeenies" on the climbs. -tom
I'm impressed with only 32 spokes for Paris-Roubaix, where the cobblestones at speed do things to wheels that most riders never suffer.
There's probably not much to choose between 32 and 36 for these purposes. I can't see O'Grady getting off, tying a broken spoke to the one next to it, retruing the wheel and continuing.
Quoted message said:
Interestingly, the name of the box-section aluminum double-eyelet tubular rims is missing from the article.
I know, and I couldn't see any stickers in the pictures either. They do look very "low-profile"-- a similar sort of depth to MA-2s rather than the deeper U-shape of an Open Pro.
Perhaps they're made by someone other than the usual wheel-sponsor for that team who insisted on taking their competitor's stickers off.
I know, and I couldn't see any stickers in the pictures either. They do look very "low-profile"-- a similar sort of depth to MA-2s rather than the deeper U-shape of an Open Pro.
O'Grady was riding Ambrosio rims during the race, probably their "Nemesis" model. You can see the telltale gold-coloured balance weights in this picture:
I know, and I couldn't see any stickers in the pictures either. They do look very "low-profile"-- a similar sort of depth to MA-2s rather than the deeper U-shape of an Open Pro.
O'Grady was riding Ambrosio rims during the race, probably their "Nemesis" model. You can see the telltale gold-coloured balance weights in this picture:
That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles. But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles. But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
Look at the base of the valve stem. Ambrosio attach a little metal plate to the rim at the valve hole, supposedly to counterbalance the weight of the pin at the rim joint.
That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles. But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
Look at the base of the valve stem. Ambrosio attach a little metal plate to the rim at the valve hole, supposedly to counterbalance the weight of the pin at the rim joint.
I did see what looked like a bit of gold foil around there. So that was it.
You'd think the valve stem would more than counter-balance the pin at the rim joint.
the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
Then it goes without further explanation that _your_ wheels need only four spokes. Good luck with that.
> http://www.cervelo.com/wallpaper/1/w037_2560ws.jpg That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles. But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
Look at the base of the valve stem. Ambrosio attach a little metal plate to the rim at the valve hole, supposedly to counterbalance the weight of the pin at the rim joint.
I did see what looked like a bit of gold foil around there. So that was it.
You'd think the valve stem would more than counter-balance the pin at the rim joint.
it usually does. i'm not sure that ambrosio have that figured out.
