[RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[Mojo]

I use 3 groups of 3 donuts across the top tube, and they stay put with
no migration at all. But perhaps it is my cables. I think I am
currently using teflon coated (black) Nashbar cables.

On Nov 17, 11:44 pm, Earl Grey  wrote:
> I have used the rubber doughnuts on a different bike (Indy Fab Planet
> X), and find that they all migrate to the rear cable housing stop in a
> matter of hours, where they do no good. I guess I could use a hundred
> of them, though... :)
>
> Gernot Huber
>
> On Nov 18, 1:10 pm, rcnute  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Just get the little rubber doughnuts that the cable goes through.
>
> > On Nov 17, 10:04 pm, Earl Grey  wrote:
>
> > > Hi,
>
> > > I went for the larger Hillborne size that fit me, and find that when I
> > > come to a stop that my thigh rests squarely on the top tube and rear
> > > brake cable, and am worried about eventual paint damage. I saw a photo
> > > of a bike recently that had a plastic sleeve around the exposed brake
> > > cable, and it was a silver-grey that pretty well matched the silver
> > > grey cable housing Rivendell sells.
>
> > > Anyone know what this stuff is called and where to get it?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > Gernot Huber- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Ron Farnsworth]

Bad math.
If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph, not 5.1 mph. 
And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the chain setup and best case 
efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on this, the other calculations are off 
too.
Correct me if I'm wrong. 

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:


From: Eric Norris 
Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM


For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around  
the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally  
geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench  
testing done in 1998:

--Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when  
the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode  
(such as small cog/small chainring)

--Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency,  
achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct- 
drive mode was 95 percent efficient.

Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a  
4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.

--With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency,  
the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm

--With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6  
percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph

Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4- 
hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15  
minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at  
all on downhills).

However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89  
hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that  
half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).

I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8- 
speed Sturmey Archer performs.

P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98  
test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than  
other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.

P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's  
a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves  
once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact  
invented 100 years ago. Really.

--Eric
www.wheelsnorth.org
www.campyonly.com

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.





  

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: For Sale: Bay Area Rivendell Bleriot, 59 cm

[eflayer]

Sold

On Oct 27, 11:15 am, eflayer  wrote:
> For Sale:  Bay Area RivendellBleriot, 59 cm
> Built up and ridden less than 100 miles.  I like it a lot, but have
> moved more toward my long wheel base recumbent.
> Handspun Velocity Dyad rims laced to Deore LX hubs,
> Nifty Swifty tires installed plus one extra new one
> Nitto 44 Noodles
> Nitto Techno Deluxe 9 cm  (also have a 10 cm if you prefer)
> 9 speed drive train with DA bar end shifters
> 11-34 cassette
> Sugino 170 mm 34-48 compact double crank
> Ultegra front derailleur
> Deore XT rear derailleur
> Bottle cages
> DA seat post
> Brooks B17 Honey
> Tektro R556 long long reach brakes
> Frameset is perfect except for a couple of pinpoints where the cream
> hits the blue on the headtube.
> All other parts in fine condition with exception of seatpost below my
> insert line.
>
> Photo shows it with black cork bar tape, but have cork colored cork
> tape ready for next wrap.
>
> I know my crank choice is not everyone’s cup of tea, so could install
> square taper new Tiagra triple with 170 arms and 52.42.30 rings.  Or
> would be willing to delete crank if you choose.
>
> This looks like the typical fine lookingBleriot, but I have a photo
> of it to send if you request.  Frogs in photo not included.
>
> Or here it is on flikr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/44069...@n04/4050129051/
>
> I prefer to conduct biz via email rather than on the forum.  eddie dot
> flayer at att dot net
>
> $1500 picked up in Berkeley.  Not considering shipping at this time.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Velo Orange Campagne Handlebar Bar

[dan gee]

I haven't used any bag other than the ostrich, but I like it. The flap
issue isn't as big of a deal as you would initially think it would be
(although it would be nice for it to open from the rear). The bottom
mounting is kind of a pain, but I was able to get a more stable
attachment to my M-12 by running a thick strip of female velcro
through the slot and pressing the male half up from the bottom, so the
rack is sandwiched between the pieces. I will probably modify it at
some point, but haven't worked up the courage yet.

Otherwise, it's really well made, the stiffeners work great, and it's
been a good size thus far (although smaller than I was expecting it to
be). It's probably not as good as a Berthoud or Zugster, but is a good
value for the price - especially after hearing the negative comments
about the VO bag, which is the only thing cheaper.

-Dan


On Nov 18, 8:09 pm, "John Stoesser"  wrote:
> Which makes the Ostrich bag VO sells look appealing to me. Has anyone tried
> the Ostrich bag?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike [mailto:mjawn...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:29 PM
> To: RBW Owners Bunch
> Subject: [RBW] Re: Velo Orange Campagne Handlebar Bar
>
> I borrowed one from a friend. I really wanted to like the bag. It looks nice
> and is relatively inexpensive. The bag is just a bit too small to be totally
> functional. The map case on the top of the bag is too small to adequately
> display a cue sheet like you'd use on a brevet. The pocket on the front of
> the bag is also too small to be totally functional. And while you can attach
> it to the rack  with straps I think you'd ideally use a decaleur. Finally,
> the bag is also not optimal for those who ride bigger frames. I ride a 63
> Hilsen and
> 62 Rambouillet and the bag is a bit too short.
>
> I should say that I have a Berthoud bag I that, while expensive, is much
> better quality and more functional.
>
> --mike
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[RonLau]

To all Bay Area Folks.

I would like to have a ride from the Golden Gate Bridge and do the
Paradise Loop in Marin.

Starting time is 9:00AM and will take approx. 2.5 to 3 hours.

Anyone interested?

Ron

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[RonLau]

To all,

For those who has not ridden fixedgear or SS before and want to learn.

I have a two other fixed you can borrow in case you want to learn how
to do fixedgear or SS.

My extra fixed are 52 and  53cm size bike.

Ron

On Nov 19, 6:42 am, RonLau  wrote:
> To all Bay Area Folks.
>
> I would like to have a ride from the Golden Gate Bridge and do the
> Paradise Loop in Marin.
>
> Starting time is 9:00AM and will take approx. 2.5 to 3 hours.
>
> Anyone interested?
>
> Ron

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[David Faller]

I think I like this method!  May give it a try next time I get new cables...
  - Original Message - 
  From: benzzoy 
  To: RBW Owners Bunch 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 7:58 PM
  Subject: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable


  On Nov 18, 6:36 am, Seth Vidal  wrote:
  > How does everyone protect their head tube paint from being abused by
  > their shifter cable housing? I've found some amount of cable rub
  > happening and I'm not sure how to protect the head tube better.

  You can protect your headtube paint by routing the cable housing in
  such a way as to avoid rubbing the headtube. :)

  For me, the rubbing only occurs with the derailleur housings.  To
  address that, I route the right housing (for the rear derailleur
  cable) around to the left cable stop, and the left housing to the
  right cable stop.  This creates a larger arc that does not rub the
  headtube.  Then I cross the cable on the downtube, such that when they
  reach the BB shell, they're back to their right side=rear cable, left
  side=front cable positions.  The crossing between the cable stop and
  the BB shell does not impact shifting and the gentler arc probably
  helps mitigate housing friction to boot.

  See: http://tinyurl.com/yaqgdse and http://tinyurl.com/5c9a5

  -B

  --

  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"RBW Owners Bunch" group.
  To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
  For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[Ray Shine]

Does it have to be on a fixie?  Would a standard old freewheeling QB be 
acceptable?

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, RonLau  wrote:

From: RonLau 
Subject: [RBW] Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.
To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 6:42 AM

To all Bay Area Folks.

I would like to have a ride from the Golden Gate Bridge and do the
Paradise Loop in Marin.

Starting time is 9:00AM and will take approx. 2.5 to 3 hours.

Anyone interested?

Ron

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Eric Norris]

Blame Berto.  They're his numbers.

--Eric
www.wheelsnorth.org
www.campyonly.com

On Nov 19, 2009, at 6:17 AM, Ron Farnsworth wrote:

> Bad math.
> If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph,  
> not 5.1 mph. And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the  
> chain setup and best case efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on  
> this, the other calculations are off too.
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:
>
> From: Eric Norris 
> Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
> To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM
>
> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around
> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally
> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench
> testing done in 1998:
>
> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when
> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode
> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>
> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency,
> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>
> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a
> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>
> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency,
> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>
> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6
> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>
> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15
> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at
> all on downhills).
>
> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89
> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that
> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>
> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>
> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98
> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than
> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>
> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's
> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves
> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact
> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>
> --Eric
> www.wheelsnorth.org
> www.campyonly.com
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners- 
> bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl= 
> .
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners- 
> bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl= 
> .

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[RonLau]

SS works just fine.

On Nov 19, 7:01 am, Ray Shine  wrote:
> Does it have to be on a fixie?  Would a standard old freewheeling QB be 
> acceptable?
>
> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, RonLau  wrote:
>
> From: RonLau 
> Subject: [RBW] Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.
> To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 6:42 AM
>
> To all Bay Area Folks.
>
> I would like to have a ride from the Golden Gate Bridge and do the
> Paradise Loop in Marin.
>
> Starting time is 9:00AM and will take approx. 2.5 to 3 hours.
>
> Anyone interested?
>
> Ron
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[Ray Shine]

OK, I'll pencil it in.  Can't confirm just yet.  Thanks for the invite.

RS

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, RonLau  wrote:

From: RonLau 
Subject: [RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.
To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 7:10 AM

SS works just fine.

On Nov 19, 7:01 am, Ray Shine  wrote:
> Does it have to be on a fixie?  Would a standard old freewheeling QB be 
> acceptable?
>
> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, RonLau  wrote:
>
> From: RonLau 
> Subject: [RBW] Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.
> To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 6:42 AM
>
> To all Bay Area Folks.
>
> I would like to have a ride from the Golden Gate Bridge and do the
> Paradise Loop in Marin.
>
> Starting time is 9:00AM and will take approx. 2.5 to 3 hours.
>
> Anyone interested?
>
> Ron
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery]

Mechanical inefficiency of the drivetrain is not the only thing that
makes a cyclist slower. Let's say, for example, that 90% of the total
inefficiency comes from tire rolling resistance and aerodynamics, and
10% comes from the mechanical friction and slop in the drivetrain.
Then the total effect of a 6% drop in mechanical efficiency would
translate to something like 10% of a 6% drop in speed (i.e. 0.6%).
Approximately. My numbers are for illustrative purposes only, not
based on actual measurements of inefficiency.

On Nov 19, 8:17 am, Ron Farnsworth  wrote:
> Bad math.
> If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph, not 5.1 
> mph. And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the chain setup and 
> best case efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on this, the other 
> calculations are off too.
> Correct me if I'm wrong. 
>
> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:
>
> From: Eric Norris 
> Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
> To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM
>
> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around 
> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally 
> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench 
> testing done in 1998:
>
> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when 
> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode 
> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>
> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency, 
> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>
> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a 
> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>
> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency, 
> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>
> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6 
> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>
> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15 
> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at 
> all on downhills).
>
> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89 
> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that 
> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>
> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>
> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98 
> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than 
> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>
> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's 
> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves 
> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact 
> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>
> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Velo Orange Campagne Handlebar Bar

[Mike]

For the price I'd definitely recommend the Ostrich bag over the VO.
And it's a great color.

--mike

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Eric Norris]

Jim:

You're right, of course.  If you look at Berto's numbers, a drop from 5.2 to 
5.1mph is a 2% decrease, not 6%.  Obviously, other factors are involved in how 
fast you go, not just the efficiency of the drivetrain.

Applied to my PBP example, going 2% slower would add about 1.7 hours to an 
84-hour PBP (again, probably less time would be added when the downhill 
sections are factored in).

--Eric
campyonly...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
www.wheelsnorth.org



On Nov 19, 2009, at 7:26 AM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:

> Mechanical inefficiency of the drivetrain is not the only thing that
> makes a cyclist slower. Let's say, for example, that 90% of the total
> inefficiency comes from tire rolling resistance and aerodynamics, and
> 10% comes from the mechanical friction and slop in the drivetrain.
> Then the total effect of a 6% drop in mechanical efficiency would
> translate to something like 10% of a 6% drop in speed (i.e. 0.6%).
> Approximately. My numbers are for illustrative purposes only, not
> based on actual measurements of inefficiency.
> 
> On Nov 19, 8:17 am, Ron Farnsworth  wrote:
>> Bad math.
>> If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph, not 5.1 
>> mph. And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the chain setup and 
>> best case efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on this, the other 
>> calculations are off too.
>> Correct me if I'm wrong. 
>> 
>> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:
>> 
>> From: Eric Norris 
>> Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
>> To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
>> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM
>> 
>> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around 
>> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally 
>> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench 
>> testing done in 1998:
>> 
>> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when 
>> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode 
>> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>> 
>> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency, 
>> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
>> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>> 
>> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a 
>> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>> 
>> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency, 
>> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>> 
>> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6 
>> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>> 
>> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
>> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15 
>> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at 
>> all on downhills).
>> 
>> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89 
>> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that 
>> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>> 
>> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
>> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>> 
>> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98 
>> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than 
>> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>> 
>> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's 
>> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves 
>> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact 
>> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>> 
>> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group 
>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
> 
> --
> 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
> 
> 


--Eric
campyonly...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
www.wheelsnorth.org



--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

RE: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[Frederick, Steve]

If your housing is long enough, you don't need to wait.  Just pull your stem, 
cross the cable under it, then reinsert.
 
This assumes you have split cable stops of course...
 
Steve Frederick, East Lansing, MI

-Original Message-
From: David Faller [mailto:dfal...@charter.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:46 AM
To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable


I think I like this method!  May give it a try next time I get new cables...

- Original Message - 
From: benzzoy   
To: RBW Owners Bunch   
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 7:58 PM
Subject: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

On Nov 18, 6:36 am, Seth Vidal < skvi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How does everyone protect their head tube paint from being abused by
> their shifter cable housing? I've found some amount of cable rub
> happening and I'm not sure how to protect the head tube better.

You can protect your headtube paint by routing the cable housing in
such a way as to avoid rubbing the headtube. :)

For me, the rubbing only occurs with the derailleur housings.  To
address that, I route the right housing (for the rear derailleur
cable) around to the left cable stop, and the left housing to the
right cable stop.  This creates a larger arc that does not rub the
headtube.  Then I cross the cable on the downtube, such that when they
reach the BB shell, they're back to their right side=rear cable, left
side=front cable positions.  The crossing between the cable stop and
the BB shell does not impact shifting and the gentler arc probably
helps mitigate housing friction to boot.

See: http://tinyurl.com/yaqgdse and http://tinyurl.com/5c9a5

-B

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.





--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

RE: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[Frederick, Steve]

Actually, I think some donuts grip the cable better than others.  Look for the 
soft rubber 5-sided ones rathe than the hard/shiny rubber round ones...

Steve Frederick, East Lansing, MI

-Original Message-
From: Mojo [mailto:gjtra...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 7:01 AM
To: RBW Owners Bunch
Subject: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable


I use 3 groups of 3 donuts across the top tube, and they stay put with
no migration at all. But perhaps it is my cables. I think I am
currently using teflon coated (black) Nashbar cables.

On Nov 17, 11:44 pm, Earl Grey  wrote:
> I have used the rubber doughnuts on a different bike (Indy Fab Planet
> X), and find that they all migrate to the rear cable housing stop in a
> matter of hours, where they do no good. I guess I could use a hundred
> of them, though... :)
>
> Gernot Huber
>
> On Nov 18, 1:10 pm, rcnute  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Just get the little rubber doughnuts that the cable goes through.
>
> > On Nov 17, 10:04 pm, Earl Grey  wrote:
>
> > > Hi,
>
> > > I went for the larger Hillborne size that fit me, and find that when I
> > > come to a stop that my thigh rests squarely on the top tube and rear
> > > brake cable, and am worried about eventual paint damage. I saw a photo
> > > of a bike recently that had a plastic sleeve around the exposed brake
> > > cable, and it was a silver-grey that pretty well matched the silver
> > > grey cable housing Rivendell sells.
>
> > > Anyone know what this stuff is called and where to get it?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > Gernot Huber- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Reminder: NorCal Riv Ride: Mount Hamilton next Sunday

[Jim M.]

I was looking forward to the ride but my company has announced a
sudden re-org and I'm traveling on business. I posted this
announcement to the I-BOB list to reach more folks.

Have fun and I'll see you next time!

jim m
wc ca

On Nov 15, 10:23 am, Anne Paulson  wrote:
> This is a repeat of the message I sent out a few weeks ago. I hope to
> see a lot of you next Sunday to ride up Mount Hamilton. Four thousand
> feet of righteous vertical fun! A classic ascent all local cyclists
> should do at least once! This time of year is perfect to ascend Mount
> Hamilton. If we're lucky and it's clear, we'll be able to see all the
> way to the Sierra.
>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[MichaelH]

I'll bet  these estimates assume a  clean, oiled chain and cog set, as
well as pulleys and rings.  I wonder what the calculation would be
with a couple of pounds of winter slush over the drive system!  Then
add studded tires to the equation.

Michael
Westford, Vt
I can resist anything except temptation.

On Nov 19, 11:23 am, Eric Norris  wrote:
> Jim:
>
> You're right, of course.  If you look at Berto's numbers, a drop from 5.2 to 
> 5.1mph is a 2% decrease, not 6%.  Obviously, other factors are involved in 
> how fast you go, not just the efficiency of the drivetrain.
>
> Applied to my PBP example, going 2% slower would add about 1.7 hours to an 
> 84-hour PBP (again, probably less time would be added when the downhill 
> sections are factored in).
>
> --Eric
> campyonly...@me.comwww.campyonly.comwww.wheelsnorth.org
>
> On Nov 19, 2009, at 7:26 AM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mechanical inefficiency of the drivetrain is not the only thing that
> > makes a cyclist slower. Let's say, for example, that 90% of the total
> > inefficiency comes from tire rolling resistance and aerodynamics, and
> > 10% comes from the mechanical friction and slop in the drivetrain.
> > Then the total effect of a 6% drop in mechanical efficiency would
> > translate to something like 10% of a 6% drop in speed (i.e. 0.6%).
> > Approximately. My numbers are for illustrative purposes only, not
> > based on actual measurements of inefficiency.
>
> > On Nov 19, 8:17 am, Ron Farnsworth  wrote:
> >> Bad math.
> >> If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph, not 5.1 
> >> mph. And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the chain setup and 
> >> best case efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on this, the other 
> >> calculations are off too.
> >> Correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> >> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:
>
> >> From: Eric Norris 
> >> Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
> >> To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
> >> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM
>
> >> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around
> >> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally
> >> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench
> >> testing done in 1998:
>
> >> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when
> >> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode
> >> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>
> >> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency,
> >> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
> >> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>
> >> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a
> >> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>
> >> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency,
> >> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>
> >> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6
> >> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>
> >> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
> >> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15
> >> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at
> >> all on downhills).
>
> >> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89
> >> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that
> >> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>
> >> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
> >> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>
> >> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98
> >> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than
> >> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>
> >> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's
> >> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves
> >> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact
> >> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>
> >> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com
>
> >> --
>
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> >> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> >> For more options, visit this group 
> >> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> > "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group 
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?h

Re: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[rswat...@me.com]

These donuts don't slide:

http://store.icyclesusa.com/shared/StoreFront/product_detail.asp?RowID=789&CS=icycles&All=

I'm using them on the brake cables on two bikes and they haven't  
slipped yet.
The black ones I got from my LBS always slide down.

Mm, Donuts!
Ryan




On Nov 19, 2009, at 5:01, Mojo  wrote:

> I use 3 groups of 3 donuts across the top tube, and they stay put with
> no migration at all. But perhaps it is my cables. I think I am
> currently using teflon coated (black) Nashbar cables.
>
> On Nov 17, 11:44 pm, Earl Grey  wrote:
>> I have used the rubber doughnuts on a different bike (Indy Fab Planet
>> X), and find that they all migrate to the rear cable housing stop  
>> in a
>> matter of hours, where they do no good. I guess I could use a hundred
>> of them, though... :)
>>
>> Gernot Huber
>>
>> On Nov 18, 1:10 pm, rcnute  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Just get the little rubber doughnuts that the cable goes through.
>>
>>> On Nov 17, 10:04 pm, Earl Grey  wrote:
>>
 Hi,
>>
 I went for the larger Hillborne size that fit me, and find that  
 when I
 come to a stop that my thigh rests squarely on the top tube and  
 rear
 brake cable, and am worried about eventual paint damage. I saw a  
 photo
 of a bike recently that had a plastic sleeve around the exposed  
 brake
 cable, and it was a silver-grey that pretty well matched the silver
 grey cable housing Rivendell sells.
>>
 Anyone know what this stuff is called and where to get it?
>>
 Thanks,
>>
 Gernot Huber- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners- 
> bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl= 
> .
>
>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[Jeremy Till]

I was the one advocating for doing a fixed/ss ride at the last Norcal
ride back in Oct, but unfortunately this weekend coincides with the
end of the academic quarter for me so I will be madly writing term
papers that weekend.   I'll see if I can take that morning off but I
can't be sure.

If folks would be willing to push it back a week, I could definitely
make it.

Should be fun, either way!  Paradise is a great loop for people who
haven't done longer rides on a fixed or ss before.

On Nov 19, 6:42 am, RonLau  wrote:
> To all Bay Area Folks.
>
> I would like to have a ride from the Golden Gate Bridge and do the
> Paradise Loop in Marin.
>
> Starting time is 9:00AM and will take approx. 2.5 to 3 hours.
>
> Anyone interested?
>
> Ron

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Steve Palincsar]

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 07:26 -0800, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
> Mechanical inefficiency of the drivetrain is not the only thing that
> makes a cyclist slower. Let's say, for example, that 90% of the total
> inefficiency comes from tire rolling resistance and aerodynamics, and
> 10% comes from the mechanical friction and slop in the drivetrain.
> Then the total effect of a 6% drop in mechanical efficiency would
> translate to something like 10% of a 6% drop in speed (i.e. 0.6%).
> Approximately. My numbers are for illustrative purposes only, not
> based on actual measurements of inefficiency.


But I think the big issue with IG hubs isn't the actual inefficiency --
it's well known that 11T and 12T sprockets are extremely inefficient,
yet nobody complains about their inefficiency vs larger ones -- it's the
feel, that slushy, squishy feeling that you're putting power in but it
isn't coming out.  A derailleur drive train in any gear feels "solid"
under your pedal as you apply power, but 1st gear in a Sturmey AW (and
that is, after all, what most people have in their experience bank when
you speak of internal geared hubs) doesn't.  

Also the gear change in a derailleur system, even non-indexed, once it
stops clacking, feels "positive" compared to the gear change on an AW,
which somehow does not.

People call that "inefficiency," even though nobody's measuring power in
vs power out.  It's that "friction box" feeling.




--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Dustin Sharp]

The "feel" issue is definitely a big issue with the Rohloff in certain
gears. You can feel static in the pedals as it grinds in gear 7, for
example. Hear it too. Makes you understand why some riders used to call them
pepper grinders and gives you the sensation of pedaling through water.

In terms of real world time, I'm as fast in my commutes on my
Rohloff-equipped bike as with my derailleur-equipped one. If it weren't for
my computer, I might not believe it.


> From: Steve Palincsar 
> Reply-To: 
> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:24:02 -0500
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
> 
> On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 07:26 -0800, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
>> Mechanical inefficiency of the drivetrain is not the only thing that
>> makes a cyclist slower. Let's say, for example, that 90% of the total
>> inefficiency comes from tire rolling resistance and aerodynamics, and
>> 10% comes from the mechanical friction and slop in the drivetrain.
>> Then the total effect of a 6% drop in mechanical efficiency would
>> translate to something like 10% of a 6% drop in speed (i.e. 0.6%).
>> Approximately. My numbers are for illustrative purposes only, not
>> based on actual measurements of inefficiency.
> 
> 
> But I think the big issue with IG hubs isn't the actual inefficiency --
> it's well known that 11T and 12T sprockets are extremely inefficient,
> yet nobody complains about their inefficiency vs larger ones -- it's the
> feel, that slushy, squishy feeling that you're putting power in but it
> isn't coming out.  A derailleur drive train in any gear feels "solid"
> under your pedal as you apply power, but 1st gear in a Sturmey AW (and
> that is, after all, what most people have in their experience bank when
> you speak of internal geared hubs) doesn't.
> 
> Also the gear change in a derailleur system, even non-indexed, once it
> stops clacking, feels "positive" compared to the gear change on an AW,
> which somehow does not.
> 
> People call that "inefficiency," even though nobody's measuring power in
> vs power out.  It's that "friction box" feeling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
> Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
> 
> 
> 


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Steve Palincsar]

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 09:48 -0800, Dustin Sharp wrote:
> The "feel" issue is definitely a big issue with the Rohloff in certain
> gears. You can feel static in the pedals as it grinds in gear 7, for
> example. Hear it too. Makes you understand why some riders used to call them
> pepper grinders and gives you the sensation of pedaling through water.
> 
> In terms of real world time, I'm as fast in my commutes on my
> Rohloff-equipped bike as with my derailleur-equipped one. If it weren't for
> my computer, I might not believe it.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about.  



--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Eric Norris]

So far, I get the feeling that the internal gears on my Sturmey Archer 8S don't 
like to be put under a load.  It feels fine--just like a regular bike--when I'm 
spinning on the flats.  Going uphill, it feels harder to pedal than it did with 
a fixed gear in the same ratio.  In my experience, the IGH promotes spinning, 
not mashing.

As Dustin noted, my computer tells me I'm riding just as fast with the IGH as I 
would be on a derailleur or fixed gear, but it sure *feels* different.

--Eric
campyonly...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
www.wheelsnorth.org



On Nov 19, 2009, at 9:55 AM, Steve Palincsar wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 09:48 -0800, Dustin Sharp wrote:
>> The "feel" issue is definitely a big issue with the Rohloff in certain
>> gears. You can feel static in the pedals as it grinds in gear 7, for
>> example. Hear it too. Makes you understand why some riders used to call them
>> pepper grinders and gives you the sensation of pedaling through water.
>> 
>> In terms of real world time, I'm as fast in my commutes on my
>> Rohloff-equipped bike as with my derailleur-equipped one. If it weren't for
>> my computer, I might not believe it.
> 
> Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about.  
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
> 
> 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Cycling Cap Suggestion

[PATRICK MOORE]

I don' know if it is my low bar position or my excessively low brow, but how
do y'all see from under those long brims? I had some caps made by Carolyne
at LittlePackagedotcom with 4 cm brims and they are the first I can pull
down securely in front -- too keep the wind of my ferocious speed from
blowing them off -- while letting me see where I am going.

Patrick "brachycephalic" Moore

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Jim Cloud  wrote:

> For those of you who like to wear a cycling cap, either with or
> without a helmet (I frequently ride only with a cap).  You may be
> interested in a cap that has been around for many years - the Kromer
> cap.  These caps were originally worn by railroad men, although they
> now are frequently sold as welding caps.
>
> The original Kromer caps were made by a railroad man's wife for his
> personal use, they quickly became a standard and were worn almost
> universally by working railroad men (engineers, firemen, yardmen,
> etc.) in the days of steam locomotives.  Here's a link that would give
> you some idea of the numerous colors available (want a "King of the
> Mountain" polka dot - you can get one).
>
> http://www.kromercap.com/products.html
>
> I've worn the A250 in black for quite some time, it's very suitable
> for cycling (stays on in the wind, has plenty of space to accommodate
> your hair, is washable, and quite cheap - I found one site in a Google
> search that sells the caps for $8.92).
>
> Jim Cloud
> Tucson, AZ
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
>
>
>


-- 
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, NM
For professional resumes, contact
Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com
(505) 227-0523

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[CycloFiend]

on 11/19/09 7:01 AM, Ray Shine at r.sh...@sbcglobal.net wrote:

Does it have to be on a fixie?  Would a standard old freewheeling QB be
acceptable?


I would expect so.  Just keep pedaling and no one will notice...

- J

-- 
Jim Edgar
cyclofi...@earthlink.net

Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com
Current Classics - Cross Bikes
Singlespeed - Working Bikes

Send In Your Photos! - Here's how: http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines


"Nigel did some work for some of the other riders at Allied, onces who still
rode metal.  He hadn't liked it when Chevette had gone for a paper frame."
-- William Gibson, "Virtual Light"


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[franklyn]

Sounds like fun. Too bad I have divested my fixed/SS properties
earlier this year--am looking to acquire a good fixed steed again,
though. I used to ride that route on 40/17 and it's perfect as a fixed
route.


Have a great time.
Franklyn

On Nov 19, 10:25 am, CycloFiend  wrote:
> on 11/19/09 7:01 AM, Ray Shine at r.sh...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> Does it have to be on a fixie?  Would a standard old freewheeling QB be
> acceptable?
>
> I would expect so.  Just keep pedaling and no one will notice...
>
> - J
>
> --
> Jim Edgar
> cyclofi...@earthlink.net
>
> Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries -http://www.cyclofiend.com
> Current Classics - Cross Bikes
> Singlespeed - Working Bikes
>
> Send In Your Photos! - Here's how:http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines
>
> "Nigel did some work for some of the other riders at Allied, onces who still
> rode metal.  He hadn't liked it when Chevette had gone for a paper frame."
> -- William Gibson, "Virtual Light"

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] fenders and short reach brakes

[J L]

Hey all,

Im sure there are multiple factors here but what is the biggest tire that
will work with fenders and short reach (at 49mm) brakes?  I would love to
get some 28's underneath fenders on my road standard but it looks like it is
only possible with the front.  I don't want to "make" the fenders work with
alternative placement, so my next option is to use smaller tires.  Anyone
have success with fenders and this little brake reach?

Jason

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Nitto M-12 for 26" Atlantis?

[rcnute]

A new-to-me 56cm Atlantis is coming my way.  This one doesn't have mid-
fork braze-ons.  I have a Nitto Mini but would prefer not to use p-
clamps if possible.  Anyone know if an M-12 will fit?  Thanks.

Ryan

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Bay Area Fixedgear ride, Dec. 5 Sat.

[T Truong]

In.  I look forward to our coffee/pastry stop in Tiburon. Right?
Tom

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:43 AM, franklyn  wrote:

> Sounds like fun. Too bad I have divested my fixed/SS properties
> earlier this year--am looking to acquire a good fixed steed again,
> though. I used to ride that route on 40/17 and it's perfect as a fixed
> route.
>
>
> Have a great time.
> Franklyn
>
> On Nov 19, 10:25 am, CycloFiend  wrote:
> > on 11/19/09 7:01 AM, Ray Shine at r.sh...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> >
> > Does it have to be on a fixie?  Would a standard old freewheeling QB be
> > acceptable?
> >
> > I would expect so.  Just keep pedaling and no one will notice...
> >
> > - J
> >
> > --
> > Jim Edgar
> > cyclofi...@earthlink.net
>  >
> > Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries -http://www.cyclofiend.com
> > Current Classics - Cross Bikes
> > Singlespeed - Working Bikes
> >
> > Send In Your Photos! - Here's how:http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines
> >
> > "Nigel did some work for some of the other riders at Allied, onces who
> still
> > rode metal.  He hadn't liked it when Chevette had gone for a paper
> frame."
> > -- William Gibson, "Virtual Light"
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
>
>
>


-- 
T2
Oaktown, CA

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Nitto M-12 for 26

[Rene Valbuena]

The Nitto M12 will fit if the [diagonal] distance of any of the canti studs to 
the hole of the fork crown [where you usually pass through the bolt of a 
side-pull or center-pull] brake, is around 10cm. I am assuing that this hole is 
present on fork of the bike you are getting. This I learned from Hiroshi of 
Jitensha when I bought my first M12. -- Rene

-Original Message-
>From: rcnute 
>Sent: Nov 19, 2009 4:17 PM
>To: RBW Owners Bunch 
>Subject: [RBW] Nitto M-12 for 26" Atlantis?
>
>A new-to-me 56cm Atlantis is coming my way.  This one doesn't have mid-
>fork braze-ons.  I have a Nitto Mini but would prefer not to use p-
>clamps if possible.  Anyone know if an M-12 will fit?  Thanks.
>
>Ryan
>
>--
>
>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
>Owners Bunch" group.
>To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>For more options, visit this group at 
>http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
>
>



--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Mark]

Efficiency is a funny word to those who ride a bike for fun! I agree
it may be important if you are in competition, but when I ride and I
am out looking at the birds and the beautiful scenery, effeciency? To
me, thats why I was attracted to Grant, because his whole philosophy
about bike riding has been forgotten by the industry that has
forgotten what it was like as a kid to just go out and have fun riding
a bike. Thats what makes the RIV so much better and fun!

No offense intended Eric, People do ride bikes for different reasons
and if training or competition is important, stay with the deraileur!

Surf

On Nov 19, 12:35 am, Eric Norris  wrote:
> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around  
> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally  
> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench  
> testing done in 1998:
>
> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when  
> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode  
> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>
> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency,  
> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>
> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a  
> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>
> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency,  
> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>
> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6  
> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>
> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15  
> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at  
> all on downhills).
>
> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89  
> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that  
> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>
> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>
> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98  
> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than  
> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>
> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's  
> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves  
> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact  
> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>
> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Nitto M-12 for 26" Atlantis?

[Rene]

The Nitto M12 will fit if the [diagonal] distance of any of the canti
studs to the hole of the fork crown [where you usually pass through
the bolt of a side-pull or center-pull brake], is around 10cm. I am
assuing that this hole is present on fork of the bike you are getting.
This I learned from Hiroshi of Jitensha when I bought my first M12. --
Rene

On Nov 19, 1:17 pm, rcnute  wrote:
> A new-to-me 56cm Atlantis is coming my way.  This one doesn't have mid-
> fork braze-ons.  I have a Nitto Mini but would prefer not to use p-
> clamps if possible.  Anyone know if an M-12 will fit?  Thanks.
>
> Ryan

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Velo Orange Campagne Handlebar Bar

[Rene]

Thank you all very much for your comments. -- Rene

On Nov 19, 7:45 am, Mike  wrote:
> For the price I'd definitely recommend the Ostrich bag over the VO.
> And it's a great color.
>
> --mike

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Eric Norris]

I'm totally into riding slower (ask my friends), but I also do some "extreme" 
rides where it could make a real difference to be even a little less efficient. 
 If I'm not trying to stay ahead of control point closing times, let's just 
noodle along!

--Eric
campyonly...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
www.wheelsnorth.org



On Nov 19, 2009, at 5:39 AM, Mark wrote:

> Efficiency is a funny word to those who ride a bike for fun! I agree
> it may be important if you are in competition, but when I ride and I
> am out looking at the birds and the beautiful scenery, effeciency? To
> me, thats why I was attracted to Grant, because his whole philosophy
> about bike riding has been forgotten by the industry that has
> forgotten what it was like as a kid to just go out and have fun riding
> a bike. Thats what makes the RIV so much better and fun!
> 
> No offense intended Eric, People do ride bikes for different reasons
> and if training or competition is important, stay with the deraileur!
> 
> Surf
> 
> On Nov 19, 12:35 am, Eric Norris  wrote:
>> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around  
>> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally  
>> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench  
>> testing done in 1998:
>> 
>> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when  
>> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode  
>> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>> 
>> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency,  
>> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
>> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>> 
>> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a  
>> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>> 
>> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency,  
>> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>> 
>> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6  
>> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>> 
>> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
>> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15  
>> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at  
>> all on downhills).
>> 
>> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89  
>> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that  
>> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>> 
>> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
>> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>> 
>> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98  
>> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than  
>> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>> 
>> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's  
>> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves  
>> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact  
>> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>> 
>> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com
> 
> --
> 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.
> 
> 


--Eric
campyonly...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
www.wheelsnorth.org



--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[CycloFiend]

on 11/19/09 5:39 AM, Mark at mclbicy...@gmail.com wrote:

> Efficiency is a funny word to those who ride a bike for fun! I agree
> it may be important if you are in competition, but when I ride and I
> am out looking at the birds and the beautiful scenery, effeciency? To
> me, thats why I was attracted to Grant, because his whole philosophy
> about bike riding has been forgotten by the industry that has
> forgotten what it was like as a kid to just go out and have fun riding
> a bike. Thats what makes the RIV so much better and fun!
> 
> No offense intended Eric, People do ride bikes for different reasons
> and if training or competition is important, stay with the deraileur!

I think the bicycle is the most wonderfully efficient tool we've managed to
come up with, and don't find the ideas of effiency to be at odds with GP or
Rivendell in general.

My Go/No-Go moment really came with rise of full suspension (well, actually
_front_ suspension, as I kept asking myself why the heck I had to overhaul
my old Judy fork every 3-4 weeks, and why it made sense to own three
cartridges, so the other two could be rotated back to Rock Shox when they
failed...). Everything seemed to be complexifying and corrupting a simple
system until the tinkering and finicky-ness of the equipment almost became
an end to itself. 

When the idea of Stable Plaform Valve systems in bicycle shock absorbers
came out, it was an interesting idea, but it allowed designers to start
re-using designs that had horrific effects because it allowed them to shift
the fixing of the drawbacks back onto the shock.  You could put the rear
pivot point outside of the chainrings again, because you could correct for
the pedaling induced suspension with the valving.

It reminded me of the "stealth" airplanes, which, if I read it right, are
actually unstable in flight and need multiple computers to correct and
recorrect to keep it flying.

All of which is a darn long-winded way of saying that for some, the
efficiency is exactly at the heart of GP's ideas, and for most, a simple
fixed hub, coastable hub or externally shifted multi-gear setup embodies
that.  

Now that I've got the Quickbeam back up and running, one of the things I
love about it is the simple efficiency.

Certainly, if I had the stray funds this year, I'd be playing around with
the S-A 3 speed fixed hub on the Quickbeam. (Also, I do snag my wife's
Nexus-8 hubbed bike now and again, which is perfect for mail and farmer's
market runs.)

I guess my feeling is that all of the Riv designs invite adaptation and
allow us to add complexity where we want it.

- Jim

-- 
Jim Edgar
cyclofi...@earthlink.net

Current Classics Bicycle Photo Gallery - http://www.cyclofiend.com/cc
Cross Bike Photo Gallery - http://www.cyclofiend.com/cx
Single Speed Garage Photo Gallery - http://www.cyclofiend.com/ssg
Working Bikes & Practical Hardware - http://www.cyclofiend.com/working
Work Shops of the iBob's - http://www.cyclofiend.com/shop

Send In Your Photos! - Here's how: http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines

"That which is overdesigned, too highly specific, anticipates outcome; the
anticipation of outcome guarantees, if not failure, the absence of grace."

William Gibson - "All Tomorrow's Parties"


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Nitto M-12 for 26" Atlantis?

[CycloFiend]

on 11/19/09 3:06 PM, Rene at valbu...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

> The Nitto M12 will fit if the [diagonal] distance of any of the canti
> studs to the hole of the fork crown [where you usually pass through
> the bolt of a side-pull or center-pull brake], is around 10cm. I am
> assuing that this hole is present on fork of the bike you are getting.
> This I learned from Hiroshi of Jitensha when I bought my first M12. --
> Rene
> 
> On Nov 19, 1:17 pm, rcnute  wrote:
>> A new-to-me 56cm Atlantis is coming my way.  This one doesn't have mid-
>> fork braze-ons.  I have a Nitto Mini but would prefer not to use p-
>> clamps if possible.  Anyone know if an M-12 will fit?  Thanks.

Riv has added the Nitto Canti mount bolts to their offerings -
http://www.rivbike.com/products/list/bags_and_racks#product=20-201

- Jim

-- 
Jim Edgar
cyclofi...@earthlink.net

"One Cog - Zero Excuses" L/S T-shirt - Now available
http://www.cyclofiend.com/stuff

Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com
Current Classics - Cross Bikes
Singlespeed - Working Bikes

Send In Your Photos! - Here's how: http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: fenders and short reach brakes

[Bill M.]

I have had Roly Polys under Esge fenders on my Road Standard, with Dia
Compe BRS200 calipers.  Close fit, but it worked fine for me.  I'm
currently running 32 mm Paselas on that bike, no room for fenders with
those.

Bill

On Nov 19, 12:54 pm, J L  wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Im sure there are multiple factors here but what is the biggest tire that
> will work with fenders and short reach (at 49mm) brakes?  I would love to
> get some 28's underneath fenders on my road standard but it looks like it is
> only possible with the front.  I don't want to "make" the fenders work with
> alternative placement, so my next option is to use smaller tires.  Anyone
> have success with fenders and this little brake reach?
>
> Jason

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Ray Shine]

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, Mark  wrote:

From: Mark 
Subject: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 5:39 AM

Efficiency is a funny word to those who ride a bike for fun! I agree
it may be important if you are in competition, but when I ride and I
am out looking at the birds and the beautiful scenery, effeciency? To
me, thats why I was attracted to Grant, because his whole philosophy
about bike riding has been forgotten by the industry that has
forgotten what it was like as a kid to just go out and have fun riding
a bike. Thats what makes the RIV so much better and fun!

No offense intended Eric, People do ride bikes for different reasons
and if training or competition is important, stay with the deraileur!

Surf

Ah!  Well put, Mark (Surf?)

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: fenders and short reach brakes

[Jim Cloud]

I have a Rivendell Road Standard, purchased in 1996, equipped with
Suntour Superbe Pro sidepull brakes (reach: 49 MAX, 39 MIN).  The
bicycle is presently fitted with Honjo hammered fenders (45mm width)
and tires marked 700Cx28 (Panaracer Category Pro).  I've actually
measured the tires and they are 25mm in width and height.  I believe,
just eyeballing the present configuration, that I'd be able to fit a
set of 28mm tires (Grand Bois Cerf, for example), while keeping the
fenders mounted.  Certainly, there wouldn't be sufficient room to fit
32mm tires with fenders mounted.  Here's a link to a photo on flickr
that shows the bike with fenders mounted:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37964...@n05/3633237391/in/set-72157619758078965/

Jim Cloud
Tucson, AZ

On Nov 19, 1:54 pm, J L  wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Im sure there are multiple factors here but what is the biggest tire that
> will work with fenders and short reach (at 49mm) brakes?  I would love to
> get some 28's underneath fenders on my road standard but it looks like it is
> only possible with the front.  I don't want to "make" the fenders work with
> alternative placement, so my next option is to use smaller tires.  Anyone
> have success with fenders and this little brake reach?
>
> Jason

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Angus]

Mr. Berto's math is quite close.

Power varies with the cube of the speed (speed x speed x speed).

5.2 cubed / 5.1 cubed = 1.060 or about 6% difference in power
required.

Angus



On Nov 19, 8:17 am, Ron Farnsworth  wrote:
> Bad math.
> If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph, not 5.1 
> mph. And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the chain setup and 
> best case efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on this, the other 
> calculations are off too.
> Correct me if I'm wrong. 
>
> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:
>
> From: Eric Norris 
> Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
> To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM
>
> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around 
> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally 
> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench 
> testing done in 1998:
>
> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when 
> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode 
> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>
> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency, 
> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>
> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a 
> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>
> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency, 
> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>
> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6 
> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>
> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15 
> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at 
> all on downhills).
>
> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89 
> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that 
> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>
> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>
> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98 
> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than 
> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>
> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's 
> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves 
> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact 
> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>
> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Ron Farnsworth]

The power output says 1/8 hp and I assume that is a fixed value, and I 
discounted aerodynamics and rolling resistance as well for such a small change 
in speed. Beyond that, isn't it a simple linear relationship between drivetrain 
efficiency and speed?
  After re-reading I think there may have been a simple clerical error in the 
writing, as the numbers do proportion out to 5.1 mph if one uses the 95% 
(direct drive mode efficiency of the IGH) instead of the 90% number used in the 
example. That accounts for what I originally thought may have been a math 
mistake.   

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, Angus  wrote:


From: Angus 
Subject: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 9:31 PM


Mr. Berto's math is quite close.

Power varies with the cube of the speed (speed x speed x speed).

5.2 cubed / 5.1 cubed = 1.060 or about 6% difference in power
required.

Angus



On Nov 19, 8:17 am, Ron Farnsworth  wrote:
> Bad math.
> If 96% efficient = 5.2 mph, then 90% efficient would be 4.875 mph, not 5.1 
> mph. And that's with worst case efficiency numbers for the chain setup and 
> best case efficiency numbers for the IGH. Based on this, the other 
> calculations are off too.
> Correct me if I'm wrong. 
>
> --- On Thu, 11/19/09, Eric Norris  wrote:
>
> From: Eric Norris 
> Subject: [RBW] Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say
> To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:35 AM
>
> For those who don't have a copy of "The Dancing Chain" laying around 
> the house, here's a summary of what Frank Berto said about internally 
> geared hubs (IGHs), which is itself a summary of extensive bench 
> testing done in 1998:
>
> --Standard derailleur systems achieve 98-99 percent efficiency when 
> the chain is running straight, and 96-97 when in cross-chain mode 
> (such as small cog/small chainring)
>
> --Internally geared hubs ranged between 80 and 90 percent efficiency, 
> achieving higher efficiency in lower gears.  One IGH tested in direct-
> drive mode was 95 percent efficient.
>
> Berto compared a typical rider (generating 1/8 horsepower) riding up a 
> 4 percent grade in a low (31-inch) gear.
>
> --With a standard derailleur bike operating at 96 percent efficiency, 
> the typical rider could climb at 5.2 mph at a cadence of 60 rpm
>
> --With an IGH operating at 90 percent, the same rider would be 6 
> percent less efficient, dropping his/her speed to 5.1 mph
>
> Those numbers don't sound too bad, at least for shorter riders.  A 4-
> hour ride on a standard geared bike would take about 4 hours and 15 
> minutes (or less, since the efficiency of the IGH wouldn't matter at 
> all on downhills).
>
> However, applied to an event like PBP, an 84-hour time would become 89 
> hours if the bike became 6 percent less efficient (or, assuming that 
> half of PBP is more or less downhill, 84 hours would become 87 1/2).
>
> I'll continue to test this in the field and see how my Quickbeam's 8-
> speed Sturmey Archer performs.
>
> P.S.  No, the vaunted 14-speed Rohloff hub was not part of the '98 
> test.  It's hard to see how it could be too much more efficient than 
> other IGHs, but it could be somewhat closer to a standard setup.
>
> P.P.S. If you haven't read The Dancing Chain, you really should.  It's 
> a fascinating look back at the early days of cycling, and it proves 
> once again that everything "new" in bicycling today was in fact 
> invented 100 years ago. Really.
>
> --Ericwww.wheelsnorth.orgwww.campyonly.com
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group 
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.





  

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Tim McNamara]

On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:24 AM, Steve Palincsar wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 07:26 -0800, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
>> Mechanical inefficiency of the drivetrain is not the only thing that
>> makes a cyclist slower. Let's say, for example, that 90% of the total
>> inefficiency comes from tire rolling resistance and aerodynamics, and
>> 10% comes from the mechanical friction and slop in the drivetrain.
>> Then the total effect of a 6% drop in mechanical efficiency would
>> translate to something like 10% of a 6% drop in speed (i.e. 0.6%).
>> Approximately. My numbers are for illustrative purposes only, not
>> based on actual measurements of inefficiency.
>
>
> But I think the big issue with IG hubs isn't the actual  
> inefficiency --
> it's well known that 11T and 12T sprockets are extremely inefficient,
> yet nobody complains about their inefficiency vs larger ones --  
> it's the
> feel, that slushy, squishy feeling that you're putting power in but it
> isn't coming out.  A derailleur drive train in any gear feels "solid"
> under your pedal as you apply power, but 1st gear in a Sturmey AW (and
> that is, after all, what most people have in their experience bank  
> when
> you speak of internal geared hubs) doesn't.

That's not my experience with AWs and Sachs 3 speed hubs.  YMMV.

> Also the gear change in a derailleur system, even non-indexed, once it
> stops clacking, feels "positive" compared to the gear change on an AW,
> which somehow does not.
>
> People call that "inefficiency," even though nobody's measuring  
> power in
> vs power out.  It's that "friction box" feeling.

Hmm.  Maybe my hubs have been in fortunately good shape.  My current  
IGH, a Sram T3, seems about as efficient as my derailleur setups by  
feel.  The main problem is the overly large jumps between gears.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Drivetrain question... AHH with 9 vs 10 speeds...

[Jock Scott]

Get the triple.  Unless you have some particular physical concerns or
unique pedaling style that needs to be addressed with a specific
crank, q-factor is irrelevant.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[Tim McNamara]

On Nov 19, 2009, at 5:16 PM, CycloFiend wrote:

> on 11/19/09 5:39 AM, Mark at mclbicy...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Efficiency is a funny word to those who ride a bike for fun! I agree
>> it may be important if you are in competition, but when I ride and I
>> am out looking at the birds and the beautiful scenery, effeciency? To
>> me, thats why I was attracted to Grant, because his whole philosophy
>> about bike riding has been forgotten by the industry that has
>> forgotten what it was like as a kid to just go out and have fun  
>> riding
>> a bike. Thats what makes the RIV so much better and fun!
>>
>> No offense intended Eric, People do ride bikes for different reasons
>> and if training or competition is important, stay with the deraileur!
>
> I think the bicycle is the most wonderfully efficient tool we've  
> managed to
> come up with, and don't find the ideas of effiency to be at odds  
> with GP or
> Rivendell in general.

Well, we're begging the question "efficiency for what?"  For a Tour  
de France TT?  Or for a pleasant afternoon's ride on a sunny day?

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: Which Side Pull Brakes for Jack Browns?

[Jock Scott]

The specs of the frame and fork are what determine which brake caliper
you can use.  The effective brake reach on Jim's Ram is 54mm, and
there are several brakes available that are compatible (including the
long-reach Ultegras shown).  The AHH has a 65mm brake reach, and
Tektro's R556 is the only brake caliper in production that has this
reach.  There isn't a Shimano alternative to the Tektro.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[Rene Sterental]

Haven't found the donuts on the site you recommended, but found the tubing
for the cables...
http://store.icyclesusa.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=icycles&StoreType=BtoC&Count1=239956080&Count2=157096505

René

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[Rene Sterental]

Actually, here they are... in black!
http://store.icyclesusa.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=icycles&StoreType=BtoC&Count1=239956080&Count2=157096505

René

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Rene Sterental wrote:

> Haven't found the donuts on the site you recommended, but found the tubing
> for the cables...
> http://store.icyclesusa.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=icycles&StoreType=BtoC&Count1=239956080&Count2=157096505
>
> René

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Protecting the top tube from brake cable

[rswat...@me.com]

I don't know about the black ones, but the clear ones don't slide:

http://store.icyclesusa.com/Product789

Ryan


On Nov 19, 2009, at 22:03, Rene Sterental  wrote:

> Actually, here they are... in black! 
> http://store.icyclesusa.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=icycles&StoreType=BtoC&Count1=239956080&Count2=157096505
>
> René
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Rene Sterental  
>  wrote:
> Haven't found the donuts on the site you recommended, but found the  
> tubing for the cables... 
> http://store.icyclesusa.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=icycles&StoreType=BtoC&Count1=239956080&Count2=157096505
>
> René
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners- 
> bu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl= 
> .

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Internal Hub Efficiency: What the Experts Say

[PATRICK MOORE]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Tim McNamara  wrote:

>
> On Nov 19, 2009, at 5:16 PM, CycloFiend wrote:
>
> > on 11/19/09 5:39 AM, Mark at mclbicy...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> Efficiency is a funny word to those who ride a bike for fun! I agree
> >> it may be important if you are in competition, but when I ride and I
> >> am out looking at the birds and the beautiful scenery, effeciency?
>

Would you find a very poorly maintained bike fun to ride, even slowly? --one
with inefficient brakes, sluggish tires, excessively tight bearings, badly
lubed chain, handlebar awry, saddle badly placed, left pedal broken,
derailleur mis-adjusted, and so forth? That's extreme, of course, but the
extremes define the middle. All things being equal, of course an efficient
bike is more fun, even if you are not trying to go particularly fast, since
it does what you want it to do better than one that is not efficient. And
the coincidence of "what you want" and "what you get" makes for fun!

Patrick "efficient cyclist and epistemologist" Moore



-- 
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, NM
For professional resumes, contact
Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com
(505) 227-0523

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

Re: [RBW] Re: Drivetrain question... AHH with 9 vs 10 speeds...

[PATRICK MOORE]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Jock Scott  wrote:

> Get the triple.  Unless you have some particular physical concerns or
> unique pedaling style that needs to be addressed with a specific
> crank, q-factor is irrelevant.
>

Irrelevant to what? Some people feel more comfortable and pedal more
efficiently within certain Q ranges. OTOH, using the same crank or a similar
design for a triple as for the double won't add much to the Q, but moving
from one crank to another can make a huge difference: I think some modern
triples have Qs in at 180 or more while I've had doubles at less than 140. 4
cm is over an inch and a half -- most people would feel that.

-- 
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, NM
For professional resumes, contact
Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com
(505) 227-0523

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.

[RBW] Re: fenders and short reach brakes

[JL]

Thanks everyone

I can't seem to figure it out.  I have a 1996 road standard as well.
I am currently running Grand Bois 700x28c and had run Panaracer
Pasalea TG 700x28c tires and I can't see how there is enough room for
a fender to fit underneath the brake bridge.  I think I am going to
buy a set of fenders and just try it out.  There might be room in the
front but the rear is a def no go.  I should grab some pics and show
what I mean.  I think another issue I might have is with the brakes.
I have some ultegra/600 brakes on the bike right now and would really
rather not go back to single pivot side pulls.

Do the tires I use run "actual" size as opposed to undersized?  Is
there a fender trick that I am not thinking of?  Two responses with
two separate kinds of fenders gives me hope.  Not that the bike isn't
great without fenders.

Jason




On Nov 19, 5:44 pm, Jim Cloud  wrote:
> I have a Rivendell Road Standard, purchased in 1996, equipped with
> Suntour Superbe Pro sidepull brakes (reach: 49 MAX, 39 MIN).  The
> bicycle is presently fitted with Honjo hammered fenders (45mm width)
> and tires marked 700Cx28 (Panaracer Category Pro).  I've actually
> measured the tires and they are 25mm in width and height.  I believe,
> just eyeballing the present configuration, that I'd be able to fit a
> set of 28mm tires (Grand Bois Cerf, for example), while keeping the
> fenders mounted.  Certainly, there wouldn't be sufficient room to fit
> 32mm tires with fenders mounted.  Here's a link to a photo on flickr
> that shows the bike with fenders mounted:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/37964...@n05/3633237391/in/set-721576197...
>
> Jim Cloud
> Tucson, AZ
>
> On Nov 19, 1:54 pm, J L  wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
>
> > Im sure there are multiple factors here but what is the biggest tire that
> > will work with fenders and short reach (at 49mm) brakes?  I would love to
> > get some 28's underneath fenders on my road standard but it looks like it is
> > only possible with the front.  I don't want to "make" the fenders work with
> > alternative placement, so my next option is to use smaller tires.  Anyone
> > have success with fenders and this little brake reach?
>
> > Jason

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=.