Cycling UK Forum

Coincidentally I am just replacing a pair of carradry rears due to wear. I bought them in July 2017 and have used them for a daily 12 mile RT commute since then. They tend to not very full outside of Monday and Friday but I do carry round a load unnecessary extra jerseys, coats etc. Sometimes a non-lightweight laptop.

I prefer Alturas' QR clips but find the Carradice ones perfectly serviceable. The rail for the lower hook was damaged in an accident after about a year. When I contacted Carradice about replacement they suggested getting them to fit it. I paid for shipping to them and they supplied the part and fitted for no charge which impressed me as it was clearly accidental damage, One of the bags never sat as well as the other and has developed small tears in the fabric at the front and rear inside edge corners where the fabric is stressed by the movement. In very heavy rain they will ship some water which sloshes around at the bottom. I have always used plastic rubble sack liners in all my panniers and the water has never penetrated these. I noticed a tiny area on one of the lids where the fabric seems to be delaminating. It is on the edge so I don't think it would enter the body but would rather drip down the outside.

I paid GBP60 for them and have been broadly happy with the value and performance. I am not intending to contact Carradice about the fabric failures but will probably try a contact adhesive patch and will demote them to backup duty. I am looking at Back Roller Pros because I love always having plenty of space.

Well it has been a project with plenty of pauses but the bike is back on the road. All the pictures (from start to now) are here



It doesn't look that different to before except it has far less caked grease/road filth. It also has a 3 speed rear hub (the wheel needed a rebuild and I couldn't get the freewheel off the rear hub. The 3/16 drive train runs ok on the 1/8 sturmey archer sprocket. The SA hub is 1985 and the trigger shifter is modern style. I have a 22t sprocket to put on it some time.

One day I may replace the trigger shifter and cable pulley with something more vintage. I may also rebuild the back wheel with the original rim (similar condition to the front rim)



Thanks for your offer Nigel, I would be interested to see the 1960 catalogue. I have a copy of the 1952 catalogue where the Model W also looks pretty similar (probably from VCC or oldbike.eu so perhaps from your research anyway).

I am not aiming to restore it much further. I am using it for local trips/errands around the village for which it is well suited. Maybe I will take it out further when I have changed the sprocket for the larger size. I have since acquired a pair of older roadsters to not get around to restoring first (1932 Elswick 18L and a 1922 Raleigh Tourist)

Once I finally sent the pannier in for repair, Carradice turned it around very quickly and shipped it back with a new rail fitted. It was fixed under warranty despite being outside what I would class as fair wear and tear.

Carradice have been in touch and offered to send out the replacement part or fit it as a warranty repair if I send the bag in. Well done Carrdice

John_s asked about cheap dyna wheels from Rose for GBP60.

Last time my Shimano dynahub died I priced up building a new one only to find Rose were selling a built wheel using the components I was looking at for less than the cost of the components (even from Rose). The wheel is still true after around 8000k of commuting.

It occurred to me to share the dyna-wheel with my backup bike to save on battery lights but then I noticed Decathlon selling a 700c dynahub wheel for GBP30 (also in 26") which seems hard to beat for a backup. Obviously it is a low end dynamo and the wheel doesn't come with a skewer or the plastic dynamo connector plug but still..

Thanks all, it was the lower rail which broke. The Carradice rail is visually more similar to the Ortlieb part than the one which I identified as Rixen Kaul but which seems actually to be an Altura part. Those rivets are still going to be a pain to drill out

My carradry rear panniers were damaged last week in a crash. The lower rail (for the stabilising hook) is broken. Carradice seem to offer only the hook as a spare (which makes some sense as the rail appears to be riveted on). It looks as though it is about the same length as the Rixen Kaul equivalent (although the RK part has three screw mounts rather than the two on the Carradice part). Anyone have any experience of replacing this (I have asked Carradice if they supply it but before I noticed it is riveted)? I am thinking probably to buy the RK part and seal any holes with silicone sealer

pete75 wrote:Don't worry about it just swallow a spider to catch the fly.........

that never ends well in my experience

Quite right MikeF, I changed from a guarded ring to an unguarded ring (which happened to be quite a bit cheaper). The pin on the big ring is not big enough to catch the chain (I discovered, when adjusting the front derailleur) but it is big enough to stop the chain from being picked back up by the derailleur after over-shifting outwards so whilst the chain I wasn't fussed about the chain guard as a trouser protector it seems it was more use as a chain guide. Maybe I will try drilling and tapping the new ring to take the old guard

Coincidentally I fitted the almost the exact same set of chainrings (only 48/36/26) to a similar chainset this afternoon and fussed about the same questions. I think the right answers have already been covered and the only point I would add is that when you refit the rings, Brucey mentioned that all three have a correct rotational position as well as the other changes mentioned. You already spotted the chain catching pin on the outer ring but the inner two rings also have a tab (part of the ring itself, not a pin as on the big ring) which should line up with the pin on the outer ring. Coincidentally you have the inner ring 180°out so the tab is visible in your photo. The middle ring has a similar tab (I think the big ring may have one as well). The tabs on the inner two should line up with the chain catcher pin on the big ring and all three should be behind the drive side crank arm.

hth

nope, I really do mean 3/16


I am wondering if a 1950 3/16 is likely to be the same as a modern one. The side plates on mine are not asymmetric as in the link for a start.

This BMX 3/16 chain (next to a 1/8) looks visually similar to mine but just not sure of it is similar enough.



This Park tool model species 3/16 but is a little expensive for a nearly one-off use

Can anyone confirm if a 1950 3/16 chain is the same spec as a modern BMX 3/16 chain in terms of chain crackers? I need a chain tool to cover one and since I don't expect to use it much again after I size the chain to a new rear sprocket (rear seat stays are bolt on) I want to get a cheaper one than the Park tools models, which do specify 3/16 compatibility, if possible. Looking in cycle republic at lunch time, the PT roadside tool and a Topeak and an own brand model (all at GBP8-12) all had quite wildly different spacing in their teeth but there wasn't a mechanic available whose knowledge went much further back that 1/8 chains and none of the product packaging specified 3/16 explicitly. The cheapo cracker that I already have wouldn't fit the plates between it's teeth and the push pin wasn't long enough to drive the chain pin far enough.

As a side question, anyone know how to escape a foreslash in a search string on this board? The search stripped it from my '3/16' search and then said the strimg was too short and in any case 3 16 wasn't specific enough to get out of bed for.

The utility cyclist wrote:

MikeF wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:
Because they've been overtaken by a person on a bike a few times and also 'cut up', because obviously motorists have never ever done that despite speed limits ...

We don't know the reason for asking. He may be a cyclist, but I suspect not. He could be a pedestrian who's been nearly hit by a fast cyclist. He may be an anti cycling car driver as you suggest. It's a strange request and looks like he may want to mount a campaign.

If you read it he specifically states he's being overtaken and cut in on by people on bikes whilst driving, that's how I read it anyway and hence why i thought it was part/(all?) of the reason.

Where did you read that? Have you a link? It doesn't say that on the FOI request.

The South Ayrshire response contains a comment from another user of the site that nearly says what is claimed:

EyeSpy left an annotation (19 June 2017)

Thank you. An interesting question, as I am often cut up, undertaken by cyclists when driving, but also as a pedestrian I have had near misses with cyclists ignoring red lights. I would find it interesting if byelaws were in place, how without the easy identification of a licence plate, any cyclist who is not caught in the act by an enforcement officer (who if working for the Council may not even be able to stop a person from just cycling away and ignoring them - as per police would be able to). Issues with individual bad cyclists are something which clearly present a danger, but there is no obvious solution as I am not sure that speed limit byelaws would in reality prevent dangers due to difficulty in enforcement.

I assume you are familiar with the mechanism but for the benefit of people who are not, there is a barrel that fits through the top-front of the lever that engages with a notch in the lever body. The barrel can be pushed from side to side so that the end emerges only from one side or the other of the lever. The notch in the body is positioned differently on each side so that the lever rests at a different position depending on the position of the barrel:



The barrel has a couple of circumferential grooves and has some sort of collar around it inside the lever such that it positively engages at either end of the travel and will not push fully through the lever. This collar appears to have been lost on one side (I noticed last night) such that the barrel was held only by friction arising from the return spring pushing it against the stop notch. I am not sure how long ago this happened as I rarely release the left lever. I also can't see in the right lever exactly what the nature of the collar is nor how you would disassemble it. Anyway, the left barrel fell out today which leaves the left lever even further released. I will probably jury rig it with a cylinder that is a tight enough fit to hold its position for now.

Drifting the thread slightly, the quick release machanism on one of my Tektro RL340s broke today. I like the levers for feel and look and they can be had for as little as a tenner but I also quite like non-aero levers for a mixture of aesthetics and cable routing reasons. These seem to hit the spot roughly for budget and having a quick release but I wondered if the collective wisdom of the board had an opinion on on alternative candidate levers or on any other advantages and disadvantages of non-aero levers for me to factor in.

My lever criteria are

• cheap (<GBP25)
• Silver
• has quick release

I regularly ride a bike with non aero levers so I know I am happy with the feel