Michael, Very insightful regarding all those points especially the funnel shaped entry point and cable size. I suspect some would say the derailleur cables needs to be a smaller diameter so the cable flexes a bit more especially at the rear with all the curves. I'm just guessing here as I am no expert.
The Trek looks fantastic! Isn't this the second Trek you've brought back to life? Anyway good job and enjoy the trip to the City in the West. ~Hugh On Friday, October 11, 2013 7:59:37 AM UTC-7, Michael Hechmer wrote: > > Since retiring I found that my Trek 620 commuter wasn't seeing much use, > and after I bought a Saluki on this list I pretty much stopped riding it > all together. I tried selling it but no one made me a decent offer and I > liked the ride too much to just give it away. When someone offered a good > set of NOS 650B wheels I decided to go ahead with a long standing plan to > convert this bike and add S&S couplers to the frame. Had to move the canti > studs, added DT studs and had it powdercoated, all by Bilenkey. Pictures > here: https://www.icloud.com/photostream/#A2GgZLKuGQYuu6 Sorry about > the fuzziness but I find it very difficult to hold an iphone steady enough > to take decent pictures. Other than the wheels, all the parts are stuff I > had on hand. > > Anyway, every time I put a bike together I find myself wondering about why > some things are so much harder than they have to be and why the bike > industry hasn't made any attempt to ease the process. Don't get me started > on the bright idea of putting one chainring bolt in backwards! Cables > puzzle me the most. First, threading cable into aero brake levers. If > your light isn't perfect, or your eyes are over 50, or you're working with > a used cable that has the slightest bend in it, you will struggle. Why not > make the entry point funnel shaped, or the anchor slotted, or removable, or > even make the top of the lever housing removable? How hard would that be? > Second given how much the industry has worked to reduce inventory (steeply > sloping TT & ahead stems for example) why do we still have two cable sizes > with two different size housing, two different ends, two different caps and > crimps? I understand that brake cables need to be stronger than derailler > cables do, but derailler cables don't need to be weaker. In 35 years of > riding the only cable I have ever broken has been a rear derailler. I was > a long way from home and would have been much happier with a stronger > derailler cable as there were a lot of hills for me to negotiate on a > single speed bike! This time the cable disconnects created another > complication. If you haven't used these, the female end of the connectors > house a cable end. But that end is sized to work perfectly with derailler > cable. The brake cable end needs to be filed down in order to fit loosely > enough to allow the part to turn. This is in spite of the fact that they > made the brake cable hole a tad larger. In contrast the male end holds the > cable with two set screws, but the entry hole in the brake connect is much > smaller than the exit hole and, to my eye, just barely distinguishable from > the derailler connect. I think I spent half the time on this job playing > with cables! > > Now I'm going to take it on a shake down ride, then disassemble, pack it > in a suitcase and fly to Oakland on Tuesday. > > Michael > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
