Search found 334 matches

by recordacefromnew
14 Apr 2021, 9:51am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Best wishes for Brucey
Replies: 509
Views: 36507

Re: Best wishes for Brucey

I have only just learnt of this - godspeed on your recovery Brucey!
atlas_shrugged wrote: 3 Apr 2021, 10:13am For anyone wanting to create some digital content and wanting to know what format this is the digital photo frame:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Digital-Kenuo- ... f=pd_sbs_2

Videos: MPEG4, MKV, MOV, AVI
Music: MP3, AAC
Photos: JPEG, PNG, BMP, GIF
Resolution: 1920 x 1080 (16:9)

The frame will autoplay from an SD card up to 32GB. You have to change settings to choose which format to autoplay i.e. photos/music/videos.

But please no BBC or iPlayer content (that is a condition of the frame owner i.e. me). From what I know Brucey is very interested in Tour de France, and the Grand Prix.
To acquire entertainment for him, following Brucey's best tradition (he even made his own freehub opener iirc...) perhaps we could start with a suitable tool - there are loads of cycling/TdF videos on the internet, and a small, free, fast video downloader that works on the vast majority is pyIDM/FireDM. The tool gives you a choice of different resolution/file size, by simply entering the URL of the relevant page. You can download it from https://www.videohelp.com/software/pyIDM
by recordacefromnew
23 May 2018, 1:13pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Revos ebike kit
Replies: 1
Views: 374

Revos ebike kit

Just read about it on BR. Claimed weight of only 2kg all in with 100wh battery, 250w motor, (automatic assisted) range of 10 miles or more depending on the size of the bottle cage battery, but I think most significant of all the whole thing can be fitted to (and taken off) most bikes in minutes.

The complete elimination of switchgear by monitoring rear sprocket motion seems like a good idea for the purpose, but since Bosch's and Shimano's 250w (geared) motors weigh between 3 to 4kg, I can't help but wonder where the fly in the ointment is. Thoughts?

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/revolutionworks/revos-transform-your-bike-into-an-ebike?ref=nav_search&result=project&term=revos
by recordacefromnew
9 May 2017, 3:30pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Crank bolt bottoming out?
Replies: 13
Views: 1746

Re: Crank bolt bottoming out?

Derrek wrote:My chainline calculation was based on Sheldon Brown writing " if you install a J.I.S. crank on an ISO spindle, it will wind up about 4.5 mm farther in than it would on a J.I.S spindle of the same length".


The main reason why you are getting a greater chainline than what your calculation suggests, is because while Sheldon's opinion on this is often quoted, it is wrong. See

https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?t=77436&start=15#p801575

If you have a good vernier caliper, you might be able to explain the rest of the difference from careful measurements of the parts you have.
by recordacefromnew
1 May 2017, 8:27pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Fully suspended Spa Tourer
Replies: 21
Views: 3321

Re: Fully suspended Spa Tourer

UpWrong wrote:Well, not quite. With Suntour NRX parallelogram seatpost and Suntour hybrid CR-8 suspension fork


I don't know if you have tried riding it, but those forks will change the handling of the bike as designed, quite significantly.

Suntour is not exactly renowned for offering detailed info on their products, but comparing with the original rigid forks, I suspect the CR8 to have an additional A2C of c60mm, and probably c10mm less offset.

Assuming yours is not a 48mm frame, and the geometry of your frame is the same as the current model's at http://www.spacycles.co.uk/smsimg/uploads/touringgeometry.jpg, an additional A2C of 60mm will give you a 3 degree reduction in head tube angle. Combine that with the difference in offset, the original trail of 62mm, which is normal, will become more like 92mm.

Steering will feel a lot more sluggish, amongst other more subtle changes in reaches/CG etc.

Also the CR8 forks, at c2.4kg, are nearly as heavy as the nice, light steel frame you have got, yet has only 40mm/50mm of max travel. Some might consider it preferable to adopt bigger tyres running at lower pressure instead, even if it meant acquiring a pair of suitable rigid forks and/or different mudguards for additional clearance. Bigger tyres might also let one do without a suspension seatpost, which are never light, and don't keep a constant "seat height" (saddle to bb distance).
by recordacefromnew
23 Apr 2017, 10:57am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Deore hub failures
Replies: 9
Views: 2969

Re: Deore hub failures



Yeah, that link gives you the "correct" part numbers. That is not to say using those part numbers will necessarily give you the correct parts from Shimano's parallel universe... For the freehub e.g., the part number leads to:

https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=112398 :lol: :twisted:
by recordacefromnew
21 Apr 2017, 8:49pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Advice needed on derailleur
Replies: 8
Views: 640

Re: Advice needed on derailleur

CJSIMPSON wrote:How about this as I can get free next day delivery and I was reading and it appears that this is the replacement for the TX35.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Shimano-Rear-M ... no+tourney


It would be a fine replacement, good value with Prime too.
by recordacefromnew
19 Apr 2017, 8:18pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Deore hub failures
Replies: 9
Views: 2969

Re: Deore hub failures

peetee wrote:I have come across a lot of Deore M525 8/9/10 speed hub failures where the seals have failed to keep the water out and the cones have worn or pitted. Usually, but not exclusively rears. Sometimes at quite low milage for what should be a reasonable quality hub (or perhaps Deore doesn't amount to much these days?)


gaz wrote:One oft quoted source of spares is to buy a whole NOS hub. You get the part you want now and some more parts for stock or re-sale.


If only one could easily/cheaply. The M525 hub has essentially been out of stock (NOS or otherwise) for a couple of years - I have a number of orders from UK as well as German vendors and the resulting returns to prove it. What happened, is that Shimano quietly withdrew the FH-M525, and replaced it with the FH-M525A, a rather different, more cheaply made (surprise surprise :roll:), and imho poorer hub in terms of seal against elements. Unfortunately, many vendors (including ones I bought from and had to return M525A's supplied) are still marketing these M525A as M525 today - so watch out, and make sure you make them check the marking on the hub shell and confirm in writing before ordering. If you bought a M525A, and use the incompatible parts on the older, imho better M525 hubs, chance is you are going to end up with sealing problems.

Parts, on the other hand, are still mostly available for the FH-M525 afaik. They are worthy of and will reward proper setup and maintenance as suggested above.

You can see the differences below:

Image


Image
by recordacefromnew
30 Mar 2017, 11:34am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Reinventing the wheel - Cannondale AI
Replies: 36
Views: 3132

Re: Reinventing the wheel - Cannondale AI

531colin wrote:Not just the rear triangle, they are moving the entire drivetrain 6mm to the right. (Crankset, cassette, F. & R. mechs.)
They say they are keeping the same "Q" factor, but I don't see how that works?


Quite easily, I would have thought.

What is important to note is that the system is allegedly for 2 rings. For a double chainset, the outer ring is typically c4mm inboard that of a triple that is otherwise identical, so by shifting the "whole drive train" outboard by 6mm, we are only talking about an outer ring that is c2mm outboard that of a triple.

Same Q? The fact is different mtb chainset models with the same chainline, from Shimano e.g., can have Q differing by 10mm, so eliminating/hiding/pushing 2mm, is really neither here nor there.

Obsolescence, sure. But for someone who pays £X000 for an XC bike made of plastic, that of the rear triangle/wheel should be the last of their worries! :wink:
by recordacefromnew
18 Mar 2017, 11:40pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: MTB trigger shifter and road front derailleur
Replies: 6
Views: 1136

Re: MTB trigger shifter and road front derailleur

rjb wrote:Front mechs fitted to trail bikes with flat bar shifters all use MTB cable pull standards, so any MTB shifter should be compatible. Shimano called these front mechs road mechs because they were designed for road sized chainrings. This caused a lot of confusion as it implied they were compatible with road drop bar sti shifters which they were not. So if you are using the original front mech then any MTB shifter will be ok.


The OP's original flat bar front shifter (SL-4600) was actually a flat bar shifter for road fd, i.e. it has road cable pull, and the OP had/has a road fd. See http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/shim ... -prod69502

It used to be otherwise, but Shimano has been selling a few different flat bar front shifters with road fd cable pull for a few years.

However, because/if the OP only has two rings, any mtb/hybrid front shifter with 'excessive' cable pull can still be made to work perfectly without issue, because with two rings the fd's small ring position is not controlled by cable tension, but by the fd's L stop screw, where the cable can be allowed to be a little slack, so that it is not overly tensioned when stopped by the H screw for the outer ring.

Even with 3 rings, it can still be made to "work", as long as one doesn't mind over-stressing the shifter/cabling when on the large ring, because correct cable tension is only required to set the fd's middle ring position, while the other two are determined by the stop screws. It is the other way round (i.e. road shifter pulling inadequate cable for mtb/hybrid fd) that never works without bodge.
by recordacefromnew
17 Mar 2017, 1:31am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Shimano freehub bodies.
Replies: 8
Views: 1410

Re: Shimano freehub bodies.

blackbike wrote:Thanks for the info.

Those previous threads are very short, which makes me suspect that not many people have much knowledge of this subject, and why my new thread hasn't had many replies.

Even Sheldon Brown doesn't have much to say except that that Shimano freehubs are usually interchangeable - except when they aren't.

I might need to make a very rare visit to a local bike shop to make sure I get the right thing as it is impossible to be sure via mal order.


Chance is, if you have a somewhat random collection of wheels over the years and they have interchangeable Shimano freehubs, then the freehubs would be the 10 spline ones (i.e. same as the one in your link), and the axles M10.

But as Brucey indicated, the difficult issue is not whether the freehub is compatible at the interface with the hub-shell, but whether you can find one easily that happens to deliver a good weather/dust seal, without clash, with your existing drive side cone/seal/dustcap arrangement on your axle; yet we have not even been given the faintest clue what you have there, when asked to recommend a suitable freehub...

A solution to circumvent that problem, and it is essentially better than free if you are happy with just contact seals*, is once you have established that your freehub / hub shell interface is 10 spline, you can follow Sheldon's advice and just go ahead and buy any one of their hubs with the 10 spline interface, e.g. FH-M475 (135mm OLN). It is free because some of these hubs should only cost pennies more than a new freehub from your LBS, if not cheaper. However now not only do you have a new compatible freehub, you also have new and compatible drive side cone/seal, axle (if you pick a hub with the same OLN), two sets of 9 new bearings, and a new non-drive side cone which might come useful on some hub some day.

* because unfortunately, imho Shimano has downgraded the design of their recent low/mid level hubs, only having simple contact seals at the drive side for nearly all of them if not all of them, while not so long ago most had a labyrinth-like arrangement, as can be seen in the EV of e.g. the Alivio FH-MC18.
by recordacefromnew
15 Feb 2017, 10:00pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Common Shimano freehub replacement (Y3A398020) found unfit for purpose
Replies: 2
Views: 957

Common Shimano freehub replacement (Y3A398020) found unfit for purpose

I think it has been for over a year now, that one of the most common freehubs sold by Shimano is different to the original it is supposed to replace, and therefore incompatible to many hubs it is supposed to fit. The freehub in question is Y3A398020 - it is standard replacement part for the FH-M510, FH-M525, FH-MC18, FH-C500, FH-C501, and it also (should) fit numerous other Shimano rear hubs because these hubs have the same drive side cone, seal/spacer and dust cap adjacent to the cone. These include the FH-M756, FH-M755, FH-M752, FH-M570, FH-M555, FH-A416 etc. etc.

What is the problem with the part? The difference between the part and the original it is meant to replace is shown in the photo below. Essentially the integral dustcap of the freehub of the “replacement” (lower) is c2.5mm proud compared to that of the original freehub (on a brand new Deore FH-M510 hub).

In practice that means, that the drive side dust cap on the axle on top of the cone, spacer and rubber seal will clash with the lip of the “replacement” freehub’s integral dustcap.

What to do? If you are very lucky, you might find that you have a spacer of suitable thickness above the dustcap (on top of the cone) that can be shifted to below the dustcap. Unfortunately, that spacer is not of standard thickness between hubs – it varies e.g. based on the position of the drive side hub flange. Consequently, afaict it is nearly always either too thin or too thick. If it is too thin then the clash will persist, and if the spacer is too thick the seal against grit and weather will be poor.

Any sure fire solutions? Apart from finding a “new old stock” replacement freehub, I suppose one can machine a spacer of correct thickness/diameters and introduce it just above the cone, and then thin out the outer spacer/locknut to retain the 5.5mm of exposed axle beyond the driveside locknut to maintain the rim’s centred position. M10 spacers of particular diameters and thicknesses are not easy to find, afaik.

I think it is a surprising cock-up by Shimano. Hopefully Madison / Shimano will do something about it.

Image
by recordacefromnew
20 Jan 2017, 11:50pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Incredibly cheap tools on ebay
Replies: 69
Views: 4768

Re: Incredibly cheap tools on ebay

fastpedaller wrote:
Annoying Twit wrote:There are some tools on ebay that are ridiculously cheap. E.g. this cassette removal tool which someone won for £0.01 + £0.85p. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bike-Bicycle- ... Swp5JWYmeG

It is said 'buy cheap: pay twice'. However, some of these tools are so cheap that it would seem worthwhile seeing if they are OK for occasional use.

What do people here think?


I've just found the same and bid 5p for it :lol:


I am sorry to have to tell you, not only do you not need to "bid", even the OP has seriously overpaid for his. :lol:

For such stuff (whether bike related or not), I reckon loads of people on ebay simply source them on Aliexpress (or wherever Aliexpress sellers source them) and slap a huge margin on it (or simply so as to pay ebay for their higher fees). If you proceed onto Aliexpress and do a search for e.g. Cassette tool, change the currency to whatever suits you best (e.g. £) and sort based on price, you will find you can get one for circa 70p including p&p. The currency bit is important in that your credit card might otherwise charge you more than that for foreign exchange fees!

Unless the ad specifically says it is by air, it might take 40 to 50 days to reach you, but it is no worse than on ebay for similar seller location and p&p terms.

I have never encountered problems (or more problems) on Aliexpress that I haven't encountered on ebay, or found it more problematic to get redress. But the usual health warnings do apply (on either site), e.g. I definitely would not touch helmets from less than stellar sellers with a barge pole.

What is incredible, is how many things can be bought for less than just the relevant postage would have cost within e.g. UK.
by recordacefromnew
19 Jan 2017, 11:04pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: HELP NEEDED! ... FIRST TOURING BIKE BUILD
Replies: 11
Views: 1377

Re: HELP NEEDED! ... FIRST TOURING BIKE BUILD

531colin wrote:First bike build and looking at making up your own drivetrain? this may not be a good idea.
Why don't you read up a few threads currently on the boards looking at front mechs, chainline, etc.?
http://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=111766
http://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=111697
http://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=111377


+1, I do appreciate that's why you are asking here, but be aware that not all the answers are correct all the time.

Another thread you should read due to your interest in the 4700 is at viewtopic.php?f=5&t=111237

I think only sram can give you a truly self consistent double drivetrain mixing road and mtb for low gears with sti, although other workable mix and match options exist.
by recordacefromnew
17 Jan 2017, 9:47pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Do shimano sti shift levers work with DX cranksets?
Replies: 30
Views: 2850

Re: Do shimano sti shift levers work with DX cranksets?

To be safe, it might be best to remove the inner ring of the existing chainset, torque it up, and do some careful measurements to find out what chainline is needed for what inner ring size. Each additional tooth increases the radius by 2mm.

If going for the square taper route to game the chainline (and to test the road fd's limit :shock:), the chainline increments for 115mm/118mm/121mm from 113mm UNxx are 0mm/2mm/5mm respectively. But chainset and spindle manufacturing tolerance meant ymmv slightly.

Not sure if the op can look at some mtb fd's, based on what the cable run is like, but it might also be worthwhile considering modding a mtb fd to match the 4700 fd cable pull (see e.g. http://forums.mtbr.com/shimano/successf ... 33644.html). The merit of the mod is you can then use a mtb chainset with properly low gears with no shift performance compromise due to chainset / fd cage profile mismatch.
by recordacefromnew
15 Jan 2017, 5:33am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Shimano free hubs. 7 & 8 speed differences
Replies: 12
Views: 2564

Re: Shimano free hubs. 7 & 8 speed differences

ardeidae wrote:A further question.

Can 105/Ultegra rear hubs 5600/6600 onwards be respaced to 126mm? I have got spare 7sp HG freehub bodies.


To my mind whether it is 5500, 5600 or 6600, they are all eminently respaceable to 126mm with a 7sp freehub, for the simple reason that we are talking about shrinking only 2mm a side, while a) a 7sp freehub is more than 2mm shorter than the original 8/9/10 one, and b) all these hubs have ample sized spacer on the left to be thinned out by 2mm.

As a matter of fact, to minimise dish for a stronger wheel, you should find that once the 8sp freehub has been swapped with a 7sp, the oln distance ought to be close enough to 126mm without messing with the spacer on the left.

The key question is in fact what the 7sp freehub model is, because this determines whether it has the same typical hub/freehub interface, and whether drive side spacers and seals of the 8sp hub can be utilised if the 7sp freehub did not come with a matching set.