Search found 17145 matches

by pwa
28 Mar 2024, 4:39pm
Forum: Touring & Expedition
Topic: touring wheels upgrade
Replies: 70
Views: 2684

Re: touring wheels upgrade

Mtb tourer wrote: 28 Mar 2024, 4:27pm Most people buy a tourer for going from A to B to C etc. not day runs.
Why buy a full on tourer if it's not used for the job its been designed for?
For us a touring bike with no luggage just does not feel right.
A tourer, put together with lightish components, actually ticks several boxes. I commuted on tourers for 17 years. I have toured on them, with two or four panniers. And I do multi-surface day rides on my current version, using it a bit like a gravel bike. I took one on a tour of Provence, then on a day off touring took the front rack and mudguards off and went up Mont Ventoux, for which the wide gear range was perfect. Unlike most gravel bikes my current tourer will, if I choose, take four panniers and a bit more without faffing about strapping stuff to the top tube. I think it makes a really multi-purpose bike rather than a niche machine good for one thing only. If you can only have one bike, a tourer is a strong contender.

I agree with you that wheels, first and foremost, have to be strong enough for the job. My own are 36 spoke with middleweight rims and tyres voluminous enough to prevent the rims getting a dent. But I don't go for the strongest, heaviest rims because I just haven't found that I need them. It is a case of finding that happy medium that does the job without unnecessary weight.
by pwa
28 Mar 2024, 4:12pm
Forum: Touring & Expedition
Topic: touring wheels upgrade
Replies: 70
Views: 2684

Re: touring wheels upgrade

roubaixtuesday wrote: 28 Mar 2024, 8:13am
531colin wrote: 28 Mar 2024, 7:52am It’s also important to hold on to some idea of the magnitude of the effect of extra weight at the rim.
An extra half kilo at the rim of both of your wheels might make 1% difference but only when accelerating; at least that’s what we said on the previous page.
…accelerating bike and rider, not just spinning the wheels in air.
Absolutely, and the physics helps this; rather than a vague "probably insignificant" or somesuch we can quantify it as you just have.

A kg extra probably does make a difference to "feel" of a lightweight bike, though of course such a bike will almost certainly already have lightweight rims and tyres. If you have such a bike and are considering eg carbon saddle and pedals, or even lighter rims and tyres, it helps understand where to get best bang for buck.

It probably would make a significant difference in a track sprint.

But for touring, where IMO hills when laden are the hard part, it makes no more difference at all compared to weight on the frame.
How many of us have a bike reserved for loaded touring and nothing else? I have a proper "tourer", designed for that purpose, but most of its miles have been lightly laden recreational miles, for which it is also perfectly suited. I knew that was how I was going to use that bike before I put it together. Mostly day rides, but with the capacity for four pannier touring once in a while. So for me, and I suspect for most purchasers of a "tourer", how the bike rides with minimal baggage is just as important as how it behaves with four panniers. Possibly more important. For that reason I avoid riding an unnecessarily heavy lump. It just wouldn't be fun.
by pwa
27 Mar 2024, 9:54pm
Forum: Touring & Expedition
Topic: touring wheels upgrade
Replies: 70
Views: 2684

Re: touring wheels upgrade

roubaixtuesday wrote: 27 Mar 2024, 9:47pm
pwa wrote: 27 Mar 2024, 9:43pm
roubaixtuesday wrote: 25 Mar 2024, 7:13pm

If you're accelerating and decelerating a bit all the time it will cancel out. The only real difference is when accelerating hard.

I agree it's all but irrelevant for touring, but it is good to get the facts straight IMO
So it makes no difference what wheels and tyres weigh? Imagine an extreme example, with wheels made as a solid disc of steel and each weighing as much as a man. Are we to believe that such wheels would be as easy to propel as normal cycle wheels? On flat terrain with junctions. Because if the answer is "No", weight does matter to some extent.
Sorry, you've lost me.

Per posts above, the physics dictates that mass at the rim of a wheel takes twice the effort to accelerate than mass on a frame. At steady pace, whether flat or on a hill, the mass has the same effect regardless of location.
My feeling is that the wheel weight thing matters on a route with lots of acceleration points, and not on routes where momentum can be held for long stretches. Does that make sense?

(Edit. It makes sense to me, but I am tired and I have downed a bottle of Old Peculier :lol: )
by pwa
27 Mar 2024, 9:43pm
Forum: Touring & Expedition
Topic: touring wheels upgrade
Replies: 70
Views: 2684

Re: touring wheels upgrade

roubaixtuesday wrote: 25 Mar 2024, 7:13pm
Thehairs1970 wrote: 25 Mar 2024, 5:03pm Surely on a bike, like any vehicle, you are either accelerating or decelerating most of the time and rarely at a constant velocity? So wheel weight will affect you all the time.

However, I think this is quite an irrelevant fact as toughness/reliability are more significant for tourers.
If you're accelerating and decelerating a bit all the time it will cancel out. The only real difference is when accelerating hard.

I agree it's all but irrelevant for touring, but it is good to get the facts straight IMO
So it makes no difference what wheels and tyres weigh? Imagine an extreme example, with wheels made as a solid disc of steel and each weighing as much as a man. Are we to believe that such wheels would be as easy to propel as normal cycle wheels? On flat terrain with junctions. Because if the answer is "No", weight does matter to some extent. Where I live we have lots of junctions to deal with on an average five mile trek, and some require slowing down, then building up speed again. In between are bends and other reasons to slow and quicken the pace. Momentum is often lost through braking, so the theoretical plus of a heavy wheel is not realised in practice. If one's journey consisted of a ten mile straight line with no interruptions, the heavier wheel might perform well, but on a route with lots of quickening and slowing I would expect a lighter wheel to perform better.
by pwa
27 Mar 2024, 11:31am
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Jihadi Brides and their Children.
Replies: 576
Views: 24181

Re: Jihadi Brides and their Children.

The legality of the thing is one consideration, but the morality of it is another. I hate what Begum did, and even though she was young at the time I don't spend time agonising over her fate. But somebody somewhere has to have her on their territory, and why should we demand that it be another nation? She has created a mess, but it is our mess, nobody else's. Out of consideration for the people of the place where she currently is, I think we should bring her back to the UK. Not her for sake, but for theirs.
by pwa
27 Mar 2024, 10:56am
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Thorn / St John St cycles - response to f'back
Replies: 23
Views: 1523

Re: Thorn / St John St cycles - response to f'back

Without SJS a lot of us would have great difficult getting those obscure little bits and pieces that can't be found in most bike shops. I can't think of another UK retailer with anything like their range. And to keep them buoyant so that they are there when we need them, we might consider also going to them for the odd item we could get elsewhere, even if it means paying a little more.

I must say that I can't remember ever getting agitated over one of their items taking too long to get to me. I suppose I never need an item instantly anyway. I can always wait four or five days, having spares for chains, tyres, etc in the back of my garage, and just topping that up as and when. I try not to leave my ordering so late that it requires a blue light delivery.

My purchases from them have always resulted in good items arriving at my doorstep in reasonable time, reliably. So they are always near the top of my list of suppliers.
by pwa
27 Mar 2024, 10:00am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Noisy freehub - quieten with grease?
Replies: 35
Views: 1521

Re: Noisy freehub - quieten with grease?

Reading people's thoughts on this subject, over several posts and several years, the conclusion that I have arrived at is that if you value a quiet drivetrain (as I do) the only simple way is to have a Shimano rear hub. And for me that resulted in a cost saving, when I told myself that attractive Hope hubs would not give me the low noise freewheeling I enjoy with Shimano.
by pwa
24 Mar 2024, 9:28pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Air Pollution - Will They Act Now?
Replies: 151
Views: 8952

Re: Air Pollution - Will They Act Now?

Biospace wrote: 24 Mar 2024, 5:21pm
pwa wrote: 23 Mar 2024, 6:11am
Biospace wrote: 22 Mar 2024, 1:50pm ...
I can't help but feel carpets and stoves in the same room/same floor aren't the best bedfellows. Or is it possible they trap particulates until vacuumed, which would otherwise remain in circulation?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... od-burning
That article is all over the place and raises more questions than it answers. But regarding Irish homes burning wood and coal, I have been in a few Irish homes that have been definitely affected by smoke from open fires or faulty stoves and flues.
...
You can allow fumes into your home if you burn wood, but it isn't compulsory or inevitable that you do it to a significant degree.
Yes, I agree. The pollution from wood burning stoves has grown as energy bills have increased, it hasn't helped that they've been promoted as an environmentally friendly way of heating the home - which it is for some, less so for others.

I've witnessed someone in a modern home with typical minimal ventilation, but with the obligatory vent installed with the stove allowing an icy blast directly into their living room. The stove was running with the vents open ("we like to see flames") so very possibly resulting in a net cooling of the centrally heated house.

I fear this is an all too common scenario, with food wrappers and contaminated wood adding to the problem, I hear of more situations in which people are complaining to EH about smoke nuisance aggravating asthma and other conditions. If they don't fall out of fashion for those who see them as a lifestyle accessory, with ever greater population densities there is likely to be legislation mooted.
I agree that population density is an important factor. Some of the worst cases I have heard of seem to be where (not in the UK) there are whole towns where wood burning is the main source of heating. At the opposite end of the spectrum, I know of isolated houses surrounded by countryside, where any fumes are dissipated long before they can reach neighbours. I lean towards the "smokeless zone" approach myself.
by pwa
23 Mar 2024, 6:34am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Can you judge hub quality by how long the wheel spins freely?
Replies: 15
Views: 9045

Re: Can you judge hub quality by how long the wheel spins freely?

Hung up on a garage wall we have a cheapo MTB I rescued from a skip about ten years ago, to use as a hack bike. In truth it has never been used much. I fettled everything on it, including the bearings, and it is about as good as it can be given its starting point. The hubs spin very freely. With wheels off the ground they will spin and spin, like the best quality hubs. But they are rubbish. Zero sealing and play that cannot be adjusted away without introducing unacceptable drag. So free spinning on its own does not mean good quality. But absence of free spinning is a sign of something being wrong in an otherwise decent quality hub.

As already pointed out, seals create drag. There is a trade-off between sealing and free spinning. The good quality wheels with the the most freely spinning hubs used to be on track wheels, set up without proper seals to be used only indoors and with frequent attention. And of no use to those of us who use our bikes in sub-optimal conditions. Does anyone know if track wheels are still set up without decent seals?
by pwa
23 Mar 2024, 6:11am
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Air Pollution - Will They Act Now?
Replies: 151
Views: 8952

Re: Air Pollution - Will They Act Now?

Biospace wrote: 22 Mar 2024, 1:50pm More gloom from the Guardian with respect to wood stoves.

Something I note is that the quality of installations, stove design and maintenance, the way they're used, local air behaviour and the amount of chimney draw can all affect internal air quality. I've been in some very smoky-smelling, dusty homes with stoves and others which have been felt far cleaner than those without any wood burning.

I'm not convinced with the article's scientific approach, "As a group, people with central heating also had an increased risk. This was thought to be due to the large number of Irish homes with central heating who also used open fires for secondary heating" - was there clear evidence it was mostly the Irish who were at increased risk with CH?

Additionally, has anyone quantified particulates in homes with dogs vs none?

I can't help but feel carpets and stoves in the same room/same floor aren't the best bedfellows. Or is it possible they trap particulates until vacuumed, which would otherwise remain in circulation?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... od-burning
That article is all over the place and raises more questions than it answers. But regarding Irish homes burning wood and coal, I have been in a few Irish homes that have been definitely affected by smoke from open fires or faulty stoves and flues. Open fires don't give off much heat, either, so I don't get why anyone would want one. I spent last evening in somebody else's home, with a lovely modern log burning stove with a crystal clear glass front, and no tell-tale whiff of wood smoke, all evening. You can allow fumes into your home if you burn wood, but it isn't compulsory or inevitable that you do it to a significant degree.
by pwa
20 Mar 2024, 8:32pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: State Pension
Replies: 258
Views: 20665

Re: State Pension

pete75 wrote: 20 Mar 2024, 8:25pm
al_yrpal wrote: 8 Mar 2024, 4:52pm Yes, cant imagine how I missed that? I remember being pleased when the tax free allowance was last increased but missed the fact that it wouldnt change for many years. I suppose that they must have imagined that inflation would remain very low, but, suddenly we have had an enormous increase in inflation. So, perhaps they should revise that decision and increase the tax free amount. Bet on that just before the forthcoming election - vote winner!

Al
Thinking inflation would remain low - hardly. The freeze was intoduced in 2021 and wa sto last until the 2025-26 tax year. Inflation at the time was about 3.5%. In 2022 when inflation was running at over 10%, the freeze was extended to the 2027-28 tax year.

People earning over about £125,000 a year don't get any tax free allowance, in other words the freeze won't affect the people the Conservative party represents. From a Tory point of view it's a perfect tax rise, the poor pay more and the wealthy don't.
Until election time, when people on modest incomes take stock and decide that they don't actually like having an ever increasing proportion of their income going as tax. Even the Tories can't get elected with only the better off supporting them.
by pwa
14 Mar 2024, 10:33pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: The "Royals" Thread
Replies: 1350
Views: 54879

Re: The "Royals" Thread

Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Mar 2024, 8:20pm Fairly or not she was criticised for delaying her visit for 8 days though.
A daft criticism, I have always thought. During that first week, unless she turned up with a spade and ready to dig, what was she going to do, except hinder proceedings? I have never heard serious criticism of her, here in S Wales, for that delay. All the serious criticism was directed at the Coal Board, for allowing the disaster to happen, and the Labour Government for clawing back funds raised for the community in the aftermath.
by pwa
13 Mar 2024, 10:14am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Filthy bridleway
Replies: 61
Views: 2739

Re: Filthy bridleway

rareposter wrote: 13 Mar 2024, 9:44am
pwa wrote: 13 Mar 2024, 9:08am if signage does not indicate otherwise, I would take to have tacit acceptance of cycling. Where the tracks seem to be of adequate width to allow walkers and sensible cyclists to pass comfortably. That is my default approach in public access forests without signage to indicate otherwise.
I agree with that comment and in fact if a signposted FP is of suitable width and surface to permit cycling, I'll often just ride it - with suitable regard to weather conditions, how busy it is and so on.

Not far from mine there's a stretch of moor with two parallel tracks, one a well-surfaced FP, one a muddy BW. The BW is the legal route for bikes. No cyclist uses it because it's on a peat / grass base, is muddy, bumpy and slow. The FP is on a rock base so its pretty much impervious to erosion, it's wide and well-cared for cos it can (at popular times) get a lot of walkers along it but at quiet times, given a choice of the two, which would you ride?!

No-one bothers about it, the legal designation is effectively understood to be a historical hangover from way before bikes were invented so the sensible approach prevails.

In fact, the more cyclists ride routes like that, the more clout there is to get trails upgraded. This case for example:
https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/success- ... walla-crag
The whole Rights of Way thing is a bit of a tangle of imperfect law and varied practice, wonderful but deeply flawed, and a bit of discretion is required to get the best out of it. To go to an extreme example to illustrate a point, a Public Footpath that I would definitely not cycle on is a stretch of the Wales Coast Path a couple of miles from here, where the surface is dense clay (slippery after rain, soft after weeks of rain) and the path is a narrow channel between a fence and gorse/ blackthorn. It is well used by walkers. Opposing walkers can pass with care, but the introduction of wide MTB bars would create an awkwardness that would be unwelcome. If that stretch ever became popular with MTBers (which it, to their credit, hasn't) that would be a cause of friction.https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4001746 ... ?entry=ttu

But as you say, other Public Footpaths are different. It is a case by case thing. And many Public Footpaths are officially open to cycling because of other reasons. I will be walking on one such this afternoon, in publicly owned forestry. And if I meet anyone on a bike, from experience I can say that I will gather up my whippet, the cyclist will say thank you, we will probably find something friendly to say to each other, and everyone will be happy.
by pwa
13 Mar 2024, 9:08am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Filthy bridleway
Replies: 61
Views: 2739

Re: Filthy bridleway

jgurney wrote: 12 Mar 2024, 10:51pm
drossall wrote: 12 Mar 2024, 10:15pm
Pete Owens wrote: 12 Mar 2024, 10:04pmBut just because a route is designated as a public footpath does not mean of itself that cycling is illegal. For that you need explicit no cycling signs.
I'm not sure I understand this. As I see it, if a route is designated as a public footpath, there is no more reason to believe that cycling is allowed than for cutting across a random field where no rights of way are designated at all. That way lies anarchy, surely? Unless we are going to deny property rights at all, we have to have some respect and ride where we actively know that we are allowed to do so, rather than anywhere except where we know that we cannot.
You are both right. A route being a public footpath does not create any reason to suppose that cycling is allowed there, and neither does it of itself mean that cycling there would be an unlawful act.

A public footpath may, for example, also be a permissive bridleway or pass over land owned by a local authority (e.g. in a park) which allows cycling there without creating any permanent right to do so.

I tend to agree that in the absence of reasons to think otherwise it is wiser to proceed on the assumption that cycling is not allowed anywhere which is not a highway or other right of way.
Me too. But in the case outlined in the original post, we seem to have a block of forest with a Restricted Byway (green light for cycling) and other tracks that, if signage does not indicate otherwise, I would take to have tacit acceptance of cycling. Where the tracks seem to be of adequate width to allow walkers and sensible cyclists to pass comfortably. That is my default approach in public access forests without signage to indicate otherwise.
by pwa
12 Mar 2024, 6:57pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Filthy bridleway
Replies: 61
Views: 2739

Re: Filthy bridleway

Nearholmer wrote: 12 Mar 2024, 5:54pm If ever I do get taken to court over pushing my bike along a rural footpath, I shall argue in my defence that a bike is very much my usual accompaniment when walking in the country, because the only reason I walk in the country is to get between bits of bridleway where I cycle. Anyone’s guess as to whether it will succeed as a defence.
The chances of you being asked not to push your bike on a public footpath are vanishingly small. People are more likely to appreciate you getting off and walking, making things safer and easier for other walkers.