Cycling UK Forum

Brucey wrote: ↑7 Sep 2024, 7:57pm if you have a 110mm x5 chainset and you want very much lower gears you could look at fitting a set of bikeingreen chainrings. Instead of 50/34 you can have 46/30 on the same chainset, making much lower gears possible. This is done by changing the chaineline by about 2mm on the small ring, so the chain can sit alongside the chainset spider instead of on top of it. However, they don't fit every bike and they may require that you use 11s chain, which I don't know will work well with an 8s cassette.

Brucey what would you say works as an acceptable difference between chains and cassettes? I have used a 8s chain on 9s cassette and the chain is a bit too wide but it works, although it's never right and I can tell it's not smooth when shifting.

I have had a 9s chain on 8s cassette and some argue that works better than 8s/8s chain/cassette and for me it worked fine. Perhaps going 2 speeds different is when is causes issues? 3 speeds different? It's not a thinner chain that is an issue it's the thicker chains (like 8s) on the thinner cassette gaps (11s). It's obvious that thin chains on less sprockets is probably OK but a thicker (less speeds) chain on a 10s or 11s cassette isn't going to fit there properly.

Corpulent_Porpoise wrote: ↑7 Sep 2024, 8:59am...spent the last few years devoting myself tirelessly to food and beer with very little exercise.

Drinking wine is the reason my diet still hasn't ended. I'm 5'10" and would have got down to the aim of 10.5 stone by July 23rd (starting the diet around the beginning of March) if it wasn't for drinking wine. The actual end date is going to be more like March 2025. Simply because of drinking wine most nights. Alcohol has a ridiculous amount of calories and the worst thing is, it's 100% useless, zero nutritional value. I think eating cardboard would probably give you more nutrition, but we all like a drink. I even worked out dry wine is about the lowest calorie alcoholic drink - I mean the only calories in it is the alcohol, at an astonishing 7 cals per gram/ml. That's closer to the calories of fat than carbs or protein, it's REAL bad if you're dieting. Can easily totally ruin a diet plan.

I'm only in a caloric deficit of about 250-300 cals per day when I am aiming at 1,000 and it would be if it wasn't for the damn wine. Maybe the worst thing about drinking is, it creates a false sense of being hungry and you eat more after a few drinks. It "lowers inhibitions" well that includes making it impossible to resist eating something. I've had nights where, without the wine and the extra food I have, I'd be consuming 1400 cals less. 1,000 for the wine and 400 from some stupid thing like a Pot Noodle or whatever I had only because I was a few sheets to the wind.

I have got an indoor trainer but, drinking the night before, tend to avoid going on it. That wouldn't be happening if I didn't drink, I'd be on it all the time. I think I need to go to AA or something.

What would I do? Count every single calorie and aim for a 1,000 deficit, but in the 180+ days I have been dieting there's only been maybe 5 days I have actually managed to have that deficit. I think it's relatively safe to do so but it's an extreme deficit all the same and maybe you should make sure with a doctor first before cutting your food intake basically in half. It's nearly impossible, I mean for a start drinking isn't an option, fully stop, then also you need at least a big salad each day as part of that diet. Hard boiled eggs for some reason are a great help and with a salad (100g tomatoes, 100g cucumber, light mayo) can keep you going 6 hours. I found that cutting carbs does work and the food you eat with low carbs can be quite "bad" for you as long as you're sticking to the caloric deficit... kebab meat, Peperami and anything like that with a lot of fat and protein and not much carbs, seems to work quite well.

Good luck anyway Corpulent_Porpoise - it takes hard work.

Don't get a cheap carbon seatpost, or even a carbon seatpost at all, just get a Thomson Elite. Mine is only 285g in the 410mm (27.2mm) version.

I remember biking to work some mornings where I got rained on so much, my pants stuck to my legs and acted as a wetsuit, keeping me warm. Yes you need to have some spirit about you for it to not get you down when you get 100% soaked. Normal rain doesn't bother me, but I avoid it completely now because I'm on an eBike, where I have prized open the display twice in the past so it's not waterproof anymore. I need to pack a sandwich bag for it actually.

The last two items I have bought online are taking a week to get here.

Item 1
Bought: Fri 23rd August
Dispatched: Tues 27th August
Service: 24h
Small 2KG box
Should arrive: Weds 28th / Thurs 29th.

It arrived a day after that. Every other time I have bought this item from this place, if it arrived the next day.

Item 2
Bought: Thurs 29th Aug
Dispatched: Fri 30th
Service: 2nd Class
An envelope.
Should arrive: Tues 3rd.

The place I bought from isn't even 10 miles from where I live. The postman has been and gone today and still no sign of the envelope. Tomorrow it will be a full week since I bought the item and 6 days going through the Royal Mail system.

Anyone else finding their mail is taking 2 or 3 days longer than it should at the moment?

"Claris... ftftftftftftftftft!" sorry just doing my Antony Hopkins impression.

If that's the Claris RD-R2000 it can tolerate up to a 34t low sprocket.

https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/ ... 00-GS.html

I'd chuck this on:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/335301088459 ... 4635468778

Depends if you have the short or medium cage rear mech though and the chain needs to be longer if you're going to a bigger low sprocket like 34t from something like a 28t. That's 1.5" more chain needed.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/285804039121

£22 to have lower gears. You'd also have a brand new chain and cassette that can get to know each other.

If you can't fit them yourself, at least buy the parts so you're not getting charged 2x or 3x more for the parts from the bike mechanic.

None of the sellers of bike lights tell the truth about lumens anyway.

I've got a really cheap "SolarStorm XML U2 LED x2 Front Light" that was under £7 from China and it's bright enough on completely unlit farm roads at night. It shines right down the road. It has 3 levels and I only put it on the 1st level on the roads, it has to be tilted down to not dazzle car drivers, because even on level 1 it will.

It's on Amazon and they claim 5,000 Lumens I doubt it's even 1,000 on full blast.

I found that on level 1 you get about 1hr usage from one 18650 battery. I have a two rubber encased packs of 4 x 18650 and 6 x 18650 so that gives me 10 hours use on the road. If I go off road and use it on full blast then of course the battery life is way less, maybe 1 hour for all ten batteries.

It's never let me down, it's perfect really.

Still less than £11 even today.


If you were doing fast/serious MTB singletrack in the pitch dark then it wouldn't be enough but when you're that serious you spend £200+ on lights anyway, don't you?

Yes I am being sarcastic - I am sure you can spend £200+ on some brand name lights that you can probably get from China that throw out just as much light for under £30. I have no idea what lights they might be, I just know there used to be a huge price difference on lights a few years back, maybe when LED was a newer thing and they could fleece people a lot more.

All I know is I have never felt the need to have anything brighter than the above £11 light on unlit roads. They are decent enough with glass lenses etc. You can feel the heat from it 1ft away.

Gearoidmuar yeah I noticed quite early on in the diet that a salad with only around 300 calories could keep me going for 5 hours whereas something that's mostly carbs and 300 calories I'd be hungry again 2 hours later. For many days on the diet I was having 100g cherry tomatoes, 100g cucumber, 2 hard boiled eggs and whatever light mayo to make it up to 300 calories. The worst one for not having any effect on hunger seems to be McDonalds but I am sure they must put something in it to cause that. If I made my own cheeseburger with the same calories, there's no way I'd want another as soon as I ate it.

It does look like an angle grinder has skidded around on it and they had to abandon doing it.

matt_twam_asi wrote: ↑1 Sep 2024, 8:29pm If it was an attempt to steal the bike, the thief was thick as mince. It would have been far easier to saw through the wooden fence.

He has another lock on it though (the chain to the right). If that's going through the front wheel then they aren't riding it anywhere by only cutting the fence. Also they'd have to ride along holding the U-lock the whole time to stop it jamming up the rear wheel.

I've said this several times in the past on here but my favourite triple ever was 52/38/24. It was the Spa Cycles Zicral square taper cranks. That can't take an inner smaller than 24t. The front mech was an Ultegra R773-2 and I was using flat bar "road" shifters.

Now back on MTB again I'm on 48/36/24 and it's nearly as good, but that 52t outer downhill was great. This was at a time when I had 11-speed and 11-40t at the cassette. 33 gears Best gearing I ever used, but overkill perhaps hence going back to 9s. The 38t middle was also more suited to the road than the current 36t is but whatever.

I'm on an eBike now so the inner and middle barely get used. The only reason I have lower gears is if the motor decides to pack in while miles away. eBikes are suited to close ratio cassettes though because you're on the outer most of the time so you don't really want any big gaps at the cassette. I think I had a 11-21t as a 9-speed at one point on that. 11/12/13/14/15/16/17/19/21. Then I found I was changing gears all the time so, that's a bit overkill too.

Don't get a telescopic (cheap) one. I got the Suntour SP12 NCX. Not cheap but makes a huge difference. Has 50mm travel and never bottoms out. Why I got it - potholes. My bike is 60lbs and I am 180lbs so going over a pothole at the rear is quite the bump.

Is the outer plate of the FD close (2mm) to the outer chainring if you pull the FD out to there?

If you never moved it then it doesn't matter. Just guessing at what it might be.

I ran that same chainset for a while and didn't have the issue, I was on a road FD with flat bar (Road) shifters.

I think 9-Speed is the sweet spot. All the parts are cheaper than 11s.

Sheldon Brown was probably referring to cassettes that didn't have very low gearing, like 32t or more on the cassette. He could have also written that article a long time ago. There might have been a time when 8-Speed was all fancy, but not in 2024.

Having more sprockets only has one benefit - smaller gaps between gears. There is only one cassette I know of on 9-Speed that starts with 11t, ends with 32t and doesn't have a gap of 3 teeth from 17 to 20 or from 18 to 21 - the cheap Shimano Altus CS-HG200-9 that has 11/13/15/17/19/21/24/28/32. This to me is the perfect cassette.

If your triple chainset has a 22t or 24t then there is no real point having a cassette sprocket bigger than 32t, even if you were touring with a load. I went to 11-Speed a while back (and went back to 9-Speed again). Beyond 22x40t it became impossible for me to balance, because I had to pedal like mad, going 3 MPH or less. Not to mention the strain that must put on the chain and the spokes of the rear wheel.

I even had 22x51t at one point, but that was short lived because it's a bridge too far with how low the gearing is.

Cheers Jdsk.

Surely the weather has a lot to do with it, making these yearly cycling distance figures a bit nonsensical?

If it's a summer like this one's been and someone has the choice of car or bike, they are going to stay dry and use the car.

How do they know the distances cyclists are riding?