Whaddayacallem?

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o

Am I the only one?
--
PeteCresswell

Per (PeteCresswell):

Quoted message said:

Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o

Am I the only one?

My money is currently on "Yes, I'm the only one...".

Reason: I had just sat down at this PC after a 15-year-old had
been on it for a couple hours.... -)
--
PeteCresswell

On Fri, 11 May 2007 16:29:01 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o

Am I the only one?

Dear Pete,

When I click on my link, I just get a picture of a really old bicycle,
nothing more.

Double-clicking on the picture of the bike itself does nothing.

When I click on your link, I get something strange about adware and
avast and warnings, with a flickr version of the same picture.

Possibly your system has spyware/virus trouble? Since my systems don't
go where yours does, I'm baffled.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

(PeteCresswell) said:

Per (PeteCresswell):

Quoted message said:

Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:

Quoted message said:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o

Quoted message said:

Am I the only one?

My money is currently on "Yes, I'm the only one...".

Reason: I had just sat down at this PC after a 15-year-old had
been on it for a couple hours.... -)
--
PeteCresswell

Dear Pete,

No problems with my link off a linux box running Mozilla Firefox.

Now I realize (d'oh!) that your link is to a screen capture of what
happened to you, not to a real link.

So yes, it looks as if you experienced what I tell my clients is an
unusual event that reveals a computer with rich and interesting social
history.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

(PeteCresswell) said:

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o
Am I the only one?

Quoted message said:

When I click on my link, I just get a picture of a really old bicycle,
nothing more.
Double-clicking on the picture of the bike itself does nothing.
When I click on your link, I get something strange about adware and
avast and warnings, with a flickr version of the same picture.
Possibly your system has spyware/virus trouble? Since my systems don't
go where yours does, I'm baffled.

Link worked for me, no problem.

I was about to write 'redundant' but on further thought I think they may
add tension to a poorly designed (pre-Starley) spoke system.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Quoted message said:

A friend asked me to explain the pairs of thingies that aren't spokes
in ancient wheels like these:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric fittings
for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels.

But I don't know if that's true, and I have no idea what those
doohickeys were called.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

lever tension driving-wheels Sharp p341

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

On Fri, 11 May 2007 15:51:47 -0500, A Muzi <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(PeteCresswell) said:

Per [email hidden]:
> http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg
Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o
Am I the only one?

Quoted message said:

When I click on my link, I just get a picture of a really old bicycle,
nothing more.
Double-clicking on the picture of the bike itself does nothing.
When I click on your link, I get something strange about adware and
avast and warnings, with a flickr version of the same picture.
Possibly your system has spyware/virus trouble? Since my systems don't
go where yours does, I'm baffled.

Link worked for me, no problem.

I was about to write 'redundant' but on further thought I think they may
add tension to a poorly designed (pre-Starley) spoke system.

Dear Andrew,

I don't know if the picture corresponds to the timeline, but it turns
out to be from here, about half-way down the page:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bicyclehistorywh.html#tline

The picture is connected to the 1870 Starley entry, so it might be a
picture of a Starley.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 11 May 2007 15:51:47 -0500, A Muzi <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> Per [email hidden]:
>> http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg
> Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o
> Am I the only one?

Quoted message said:

When I click on my link, I just get a picture of a really old bicycle,
nothing more.
Double-clicking on the picture of the bike itself does nothing.
When I click on your link, I get something strange about adware and
avast and warnings, with a flickr version of the same picture.
Possibly your system has spyware/virus trouble? Since my systems don't
go where yours does, I'm baffled.

Link worked for me, no problem.

I was about to write 'redundant' but on further thought I think they may
add tension to a poorly designed (pre-Starley) spoke system.

Dear Andrew,

I don't know if the picture corresponds to the timeline, but it turns
out to be from here, about half-way down the page:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bicyclehistorywh.html#tline

The picture is connected to the 1870 Starley entry, so it might be a
picture of a Starley.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Here's another page that shows an 1870 Starley with those thingies
that aren't spokes:

http://www.cycle-info.bpaj.or.jp/english/learn/chistory2.html

It may be that the struts were the tension mechanism before the
threaded spoke nipple trick, but I'm not sure and I have no idea what
to call the doohickeys.

CF

Quoted message said:

A friend asked me to explain the pairs of thingies that aren't spokes
in ancient wheels like these:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric fittings
for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels.

But I don't know if that's true, and I have no idea what those
doohickeys were called.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

No idea either, but don't those paired spokes violate Rolf's patent?

Carl Fogel said:

A friend asked me to explain the pairs of thingies that aren't
spokes in ancient wheels like these:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

Quoted message said:

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric
fittings for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels. But I don't
know if that's true, and I have no idea what those doohickeys were
called.

I believe you are right, but the effort was misplaced, high wheelers
used radial spokes as this one does, without torque levers and wires.
The inventor did not realize that with direct drive, torque is
insignificant and also failed to realize that there is no torque in
the rear wheel even with a skid pad brake. The main thing is that the
truly paired spoke fetish is pretty old and is as popular today as it
was more than 100 years ago with no demonstrable advantage over
conventional left and right alternate spoking.

Cheers to Rolf Dietrich and Keith Bontrager! The public will buy
anything in the absence of a press to critique these foibles.

Jobst Brandt

Pete Cresswell said:

Quoted message said:

Here's what popped when I double-clicked that link:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=494019157&size=o

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Am I the only one?

Quoted message said:

My money is currently on "Yes, I'm the only one...".

Quoted message said:

Reason: I had just sat down at this PC after a 15-year-old had
been on it for a couple hours.... -)

You might consider downloading and running ADAWARE:

http://www.antispywareresource.com/co/antispywareresource/adaware_p1.asp?sid=M2AG0001eGS

Jobst Brandt

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I was about to write 'redundant' but on further thought I think
they may add tension to a poorly designed (pre-Starley) spoke
system.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't know if the picture corresponds to the timeline, but it
turns out to be from here, about half-way down the page:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bicyclehistorywh.html#tline

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The picture is connected to the 1870 Starley entry, so it might be
a picture of a Starley.

Quoted message said:

Here's another page that shows an 1870 Starley with those thingies
that aren't spokes:

http://www.cycle-info.bpaj.or.jp/english/learn/chistory2.html

Quoted message said:

It may be that the struts were the tension mechanism before the
threaded spoke nipple trick, but I'm not sure and I have no idea
what to call the doohickeys.

I don't believe the text on that page that seems to be conjecture.
Firstly, John Starley cross laced wheels on "ordinary" bicycles to
allow tying them at crossings to prevent errant spoke failures from
causing a header. Secondly, the paired spokes in the pictures are
truly radial and not tensioned by the device. And thirdly, the wheel
still needed truing by individual spoke tensioning so the device must
have been a mental crutch for those who saw pedaling torque as a demon
to be tamed.

We have folks here who ride conventional road bicycles with radially
spoked wheels. The "wind-up" is so slight that you cannot feel it.
Pedaling is not spongy, as is often claimed.

Jobst Brandt

M-gineering said:

Quoted message said:

A friend asked me to explain the pairs of thingies that aren't spokes
in ancient wheels like these:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric fittings
for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels.

But I don't know if that's true, and I have no idea what those
doohickeys were called.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

lever tension driving-wheels Sharp p341

Dear Marten,

Aha! You beat me to it--I just found an ad for Starley lever-tension
wheels in Ritchie's "King of the Road", p.82:

http://i3.tinypic.com/4q8tsso.jpg

Here's the text from Sharp:

"Lever Tension Driving-wheels.--In the early days of the 'Ordinary,'
wheels were often made with a pair of long levers prjecting from the
hub, from the ends of which wires went off to the rim. These
tangential wires were adjustable, and by tightening them the rim was
moved round relative to the hub, and thus the tension on the spokes
could be adjusted. The tangential driving effort was also supposed to
be transferred from the hub to the rim by the lever and tangent wires,
while the radial spokes only transmitted the weight from the hub to
the rim. Figure 338 shows the 'Ariel' bicycle with a pair of lever
tension wheels."

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

> I was about to write 'redundant' but on further thought I think
> they may add tension to a poorly designed (pre-Starley) spoke
> system.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't know if the picture corresponds to the timeline, but it
turns out to be from here, about half-way down the page:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bicyclehistorywh.html#tline

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The picture is connected to the 1870 Starley entry, so it might be
a picture of a Starley.

Quoted message said:

Here's another page that shows an 1870 Starley with those thingies
that aren't spokes:

http://www.cycle-info.bpaj.or.jp/english/learn/chistory2.html

Quoted message said:

It may be that the struts were the tension mechanism before the
threaded spoke nipple trick, but I'm not sure and I have no idea
what to call the doohickeys.

I don't believe the text on that page that seems to be conjecture.
Firstly, John Starley cross laced wheels on "ordinary" bicycles to
allow tying them at crossings to prevent errant spoke failures from
causing a header. Secondly, the paired spokes in the pictures are
truly radial and not tensioned by the device. And thirdly, the wheel
still needed truing by individual spoke tensioning so the device must
have been a mental crutch for those who saw pedaling torque as a demon
to be tamed.

We have folks here who ride conventional road bicycles with radially
spoked wheels. The "wind-up" is so slight that you cannot feel it.
Pedaling is not spongy, as is often claimed.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

It turns out that the early Starley wheel with the lever-tension arm
did not have modern spokes:

"His [Starley's 1870] spokes were a single reel of wire looped through
holes in the rim and the hub to which he applied tension by screwing
up the threads, an arrangement improved further by the introduction in
1874 of eyed and threaded nipples to hold the spokes individually.
Later that year Starley thought of tangential spoking--as distinct
from radial--to ease the sideway stresses on the spokes."

http://www.dashinet.com/bicycle

The single-reel-of-wire design also explains the paired spokes and
shows that they weren't related to the modern Rolfe paired spokes. It
was just the easiest method of running a continuous wire in and out of
the hub and rim.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric fittings
for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels.

But I don't know if that's true, and I have no idea what those
doohickeys were called.

Buggy whips?
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Hank Wirtz said:

Quoted message said:

A friend asked me to explain the pairs of thingies that aren't spokes
in ancient wheels like these:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric fittings
for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels.

But I don't know if that's true, and I have no idea what those
doohickeys were called.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

No idea either, but don't those paired spokes violate Rolf's patent?

Dear Hank,

Amusingly, that old chestnut turns out to be myth and lore.

The early Starley wheel with the lever-tension arm did not have modern
individual spokes:

"His [Starley's 1870] spokes were a single reel of wire looped through
holes in the rim and the hub to which he applied tension by screwing
up the threads, an arrangement improved further by the introduction in
1874 of eyed and threaded nipples to hold the spokes individually.
Later that year Starley thought of tangential spoking--as distinct
from radial--to ease the sideway stresses on the spokes."

http://www.dashinet.com/bicycle

The single-reel-of-wire design also explains the paired spokes and
shows that they weren't related to the modern Rolfe paired spokes.

The Starley "paired" spokes weren't paired spokes at all--it was just
a continuous piece of wire and the apparent "pairing" was just the
easiest method of running a continuous wire in and out of the hub and
rim.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

A friend asked me to explain the pairs of thingies that aren't spokes
in ancient wheels like these:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bhariellg.jpg

I have a vague notion that the rods are attached to eccentric fittings
for winding the hubs up to tension the wheels.

You will notice that the wheels are radially spoked. These extras seem
to be angled to (slightly?) resist torsion of the wheel, which seems
unnecessary if you used crossed spokes instead.

--

David L. Johnson

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by
little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> I was about to write 'redundant' but on further thought I think
>> they may add tension to a poorly designed (pre-Starley) spoke
>> system.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> I don't know if the picture corresponds to the timeline, but it
> turns out to be from here, about half-way down the page:

http://www.jimlangley.net/ride/bicyclehistorywh.html#tline

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> The picture is connected to the 1870 Starley entry, so it might be
> a picture of a Starley.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Here's another page that shows an 1870 Starley with those thingies
that aren't spokes:

http://www.cycle-info.bpaj.or.jp/english/learn/chistory2.html

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It may be that the struts were the tension mechanism before the
threaded spoke nipple trick, but I'm not sure and I have no idea
what to call the doohickeys.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't believe the text on that page that seems to be conjecture.
Firstly, John Starley cross laced wheels on "ordinary" bicycles to
allow tying them at crossings to prevent errant spoke failures from
causing a header. Secondly, the paired spokes in the pictures are
truly radial and not tensioned by the device. And thirdly, the
wheel still needed truing by individual spoke tensioning so the
device must have been a mental crutch for those who saw pedaling
torque as a demon to be tamed.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

We have folks here who ride conventional road bicycles with radially
spoked wheels. The "wind-up" is so slight that you cannot feel it.
Pedaling is not spongy, as is often claimed.

Quoted message said:

It turns out that the early Starley wheel with the lever-tension arm
did not have modern spokes:

Quoted message said:

"His [Starley's 1870] spokes were a single reel of wire looped through
holes in the rim and the hub to which he applied tension by screwing
up the threads, an arrangement improved further by the introduction in
1874 of eyed and threaded nipples to hold the spokes individually.
Later that year Starley thought of tangential spoking--as distinct
from radial--to ease the sideway stresses on the spokes."

http://www.dashinet.com/bicycle

Quoted message said:

The single-reel-of-wire design also explains the paired spokes and
shows that they weren't related to the modern Rolfe paired spokes. It
was just the easiest method of running a continuous wire in and out of
the hub and rim.

I've seen this arrangement in pictures now and then but doubt that it
was successful as anyone who has trued wheels can guess. You can try
as you like to tension a continuous wire as it wends its way in and
out of holes in the hub and wire hoops in the rim by such a lever
device, but it will not make a ridable wheel. As far as I can see
this was all prototype stuff that never went to market. Besides, the
pictures show enough wheels that, in spite of the device, were still
radial.

Something is fishy in Denmark.

Jobst Brandt

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

You might consider downloading and running ADAWARE:

I have it and occasionally use it... but Avast seems to be pretty
good at catching the stuff before-the-face. Witness the screen
snap...
--
PeteCresswell