Cycling UK Forum

rdb wrote:...Oh yes, I'm not tied to butterfly bars, I just know I need a more upright option to ease off the pain in my wrists. I realise fit and core strength will help with this as well. I found the brakes on drop handlebars were an issue as well, perhaps it was the bike I was using. I am a beginner so I think the most important thing it to feel comfortable and in control. I'm having fun looking at all of the interesting combinations of handlebars. I'm also looking at an adjustable stem which may provide some more flexibility.

I would suggest that before you start spending lots of money on a new bike or different sets of handlebars, you should try to identify the root causes of your sore wrists and the hip issues you mention in your first post.

You might solve these problems by a process of trial and error involving different bikes and handlebars, but that would be potentially very expensive and might not even solve the problems to your satisfaction.

Quite simply - why are you getting sore wrists? Is this something you only experience when cycling and when using drop bars, or is it something you experience at other times and during other activities?

Depending upon the nature of the problem, it might be worth consulting a specialist, i.e. if it's not cycling specific then your GP or maybe a physiotherapist. If it is cycling specific, then I would suggest a professional bike fit (not one from your local bike shop, but a highly rated specialist).

A good bike fitting by such a specialist won't be cheap, but it will probably be a lot less expensive than buying the wrong bike and spending money on different sets of bars trying to fix the problem.

geomannie wrote:I have just recreated my youth...When I think of a bicycle, this is what is in my head.

Now we're talking. Geomannie, you mustn't go away having teased us with that photograph. I would like to know a bit more about the frame and the options Dave Yates offered or suggested (just asking for a friend, you understand).

What tyre clearance does the bike have? I'm guessing those are Shimano BR650 brakes (with the clearance maximised by having the frame designed so that the brake blocks are at the bottom of the slots), and I presume the tyres are either the 25mm or 28mm version of the Michelin Pro Endurance. Would the bike take 28mm tyres with mudguards?

Are the forks 631 as well? I know that Dave Yates has commented previously that ordinary Reynolds R fork blades are more comfortable than the lighter and stiffer blades like 853, and so much more suitable for long distance audax rides.

I like the colour scheme by the way - the lug lining sets it off perfectly.

althebike wrote:I used to tour in the 1970s, but sold my bike when I got married. Now retired I am riding again . I have a nice carbon go faster thing with lots of gears, but..... I miss my old bike. It was steel, large flange wheel hubs, shiny chrome bits, center pull brakes, and 10 gears.. but.
I do not ever remember changing the chain,in fact I did not clean it very often, the cassette never wore out, it was comfortable and , although it must have done, I do not recall even a puncture. Looking at modern bikes, it seems like buying an old Ford, what shade of black would you like (OK there are a few exceptions) .You have cycled though a puddle? you need a strip, clean and degrease.
Well I exaggerate a bit, but the old stuff had a lot going for it .

Your carbon go faster thing with lots of gears is more analogous to a Ferrari than a Ford, and similarly needs and demands a higher standard of care and maintenance than the average runabout.

You can buy touring bikes now that are much better than what you had in the 1970s, with kit that is pretty durable/forgiving of less TLC than a race bike.

I think that the high sales of carbon race and performance bikes reflects the fact that a lot of cyclists (and potential new cyclists) are relatively cash rich and time poor: they can afford an expensive bike, but can only spend a few hours at most on it once a week, and so they choose the race bike for the extra speed it gives, especially if they ride with mates who have similar bikes.

However, in your case OP, since you have retired you presumably have more free time and can go for longer rides. In your shoes I would get a tourer or audax bike like those offered by Spa Cycles. It would probably also make you appreciate and enjoy the extra speed of the carbon bike when you ride it.

If it's 15mm, this TA spanner should fit:

https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/tools/ta-15-mm-bottom-bracket-axle-bolt-spanner/

SJS are in Bridgwater, so might be close enough for you to visit in person and check it's the right tool.

They also sell various brands' versions of the crank extractor tool, some of which also incorporate a socket for 14mm crank bolts:

https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/tools-chainset/

drossall wrote:What about the good-quality chrome leather straps that come/came with such bags? Are they any good?

They are fine for the purpose for which they are provided, i.e. to suspend a saddle bag from saddle loops and fasten it to a seatpost to limit sway, but they are no good for securing an Uplift to prevent it bouncing. Unlike a toe strap, the straps provided with the saddlebag are too short to fasten the Uplift (or the saddlebag mounted on an Uplift) to the top of the seatpost, and the buckle fastening with holes at set intervals cannot be pulled as tight as a toe strap. Carradice supply their updated version of the Uplift with a webbing strap and Fastex type buckle, but I doubt that even that would be as good as a good quality toe strap.

Incidentally, the thickness of the chrome leather straps has reduced a lot. I have an old strap which is 3.6mm thick and a relatively new brown strap for a green saddlebag which is only 2.7mm thick.

Woodtourer wrote:We have decided to take a bus or train to Portsmouth

I doubt that you would be able to transport your bike by bus or coach. The train should be OK, but sometimes there can be issues with taking a (non compact folding) bike on the train, e.g. not on journeys into London during peak commuting hours from stations close to London and not on replacement bus services laid on when part of a rail line is closed for engineering works (although that's usually only at weekends).

There are others on this forum who will be far more conversant than me with taking bikes on trains, so I would recommend that you post another thread asking for help on that point. If you give the date and estimated time of landing for your flight at Heathrow, that will probably help.

That said, as of today it's not yet possible to book trains any later than the 2nd of August according to https://ojp.nationalrail.co.uk/service/farefinder/search, so it might be best to wait a couple of weeks before posting a new thread, i.e. wait until the date you will be travelling becomes available for booking on the rail website.

Brucey wrote:Based on my experience I'd expect it (with a modest load of 10lbs or so) to rattle over bumps, something you can mitigate perhaps by padding the saddle rails with rubber or something.

drossall wrote:I'm not sure I'd have used it off road, mind. The bouncing would probably strain the loops.

One of the bikes I use with an Uplift is a roughstuff/gravel style bike which I use on gravel tracks, and I do not have any problem with bounce or rattle (that said, although there is no actual movement, I do worry a bit that the extra stress of riding off road may eventually cause the saddle loops to break).

To eliminate/minimise any bounce and movement, use a toe strap to secure the saddlebag (not the Uplift) to the top of the seatpost, using the leather patch at the front of the saddlebag (i.e. instead of using the patch to strap the bag to the Uplift as shown in the image below). This allows a much more secure fit. The toe strap used needs to be of good quality: it's no good if the material stretches under the high tension or if the buckle gradually loosens (I use some old very high quality Alfredo Binda toe straps which have a layer of nylon sandwiched between the leather).

tatanab wrote:Beware that some Brooks saddles changed in the 1970s and the wire frame is a lower profile than on older saddles. This is certainly true of the Pro and may be with other types. Just possibly this would mean that the horizontal part that butts against the saddle rails may be too low when using an old uplift on a new saddle. Just possibly.

My two Karrimor Uplifts are fitted to a 1980s B17 Narrow and a modern Team Pro Titanium, and the angle/support provided is pretty much the same for both saddles.

Si wrote:Thanks, yes, i'll be using a toe stap as my mount is one of the old ones (got it in a jumble for a quid), also got the carradice clamp on adapter for loopless saddles.

I have a couple of the old versions on bikes with Brooks saddles. I'm not sure how well they would work with a modern saddle with a shallow profile/depth to the rails: the two metal tabs which are slotted into the saddle loops effectively act as a point around which the rack pivots until the horizontal bar at the front of the rack comes up against the saddle rails. If the saddle/rails are a lot shallower than a Brooks, then the rack is likely to be tilted backwards and the bottom of it will not provide a horizontal platform to support the saddlebag.

I probably have not explained it very well, but I think you can see what I mean from this side on photograph of the new version of the rack, which shows how it is designed to be reasonably level when used with deep saddle rails like a Brooks:

Of the three main components that I think of as defining fitness - stamina, speed and power - stamina is the one that improves most quickly to begin with when new or returning to cycling, which is something in your favour.

Stamina means being able to sit on that saddle with your hands on the bars and being able to turn the pedals round. I appreciate that that is patently obvious, but it determines how you should be training/preparing for the ride:

1. You need to build up the time you spend on your rides, to acclimatise your backside to the saddle and to the pressure of supporting your bodyweight, and your body and muscles to the position on your bike. It won't matter how fast you can ride, if after several hours you have back ache or neck ache that forces you to stop.

2. Concentrate on keeping in a gear that feels like it's no real effort, so that your legs are spinning round without even trying. Higher gears may feel good at the start, but are likely to tire you more quickly.

3. Make sure your bike has low gears. When you come to a hill, no matter how short or slight the gradient, don't be afraid to drop straight into a very low gear and make slow progress just spinning the pedals.

In other words, it's better to go out for a 4 hour preparation ride and pootle along at an average of, say, 9 mph, than to go out for a couple of hours and maintain a 12 mph average. Think hare vs. tortoise.

Brucey wrote:

Samuel D wrote:...Brucey: why? I’m not a fan of zip ties at the best of times!....

I look forward to pumping this sucker full of fresh grease on a far-too-frequent basis. I want this headset to last a long time. Preload will be meticulously set too.

I think that the port cover will probably be the first part that gives trouble anyway. To fit a new one (not that it will be easy or cheap to source such a thing in all probability) requires that the forks come out. You can buy blue zip ties that won't stand out; in fact most folk won't notice they are not the right thing unless they are looking very closely.

The sealing ring on my bike is 18 years old. It's still OK, but it's probably quite a bit less stretchy than when new. Since the same ring is used for both sizes of headset, it's going to be stretched more on the 1 and 1/8" headset, which I guess will reduce its lifespan.

The £3.99 that Sigma are asking for the sealing ring looks quite reasonable compared with Mercian's price of £10 .

http://www.merciancycles.co.uk/online-shop/campagnolo-seat-pin-headset/hs-or005/

Samuel D wrote:I’ve ordered a Campagnolo HS00-RETHOS for my bicycle.

I would recommend when you fit the headset that you remove the sealing ring so that you can see the grease ports. This will allow you to ensure that you do not position the grease ports so that two of them are in the same plane as the frame, i.e. with one port at the front and another pointing directly towards the down tube, because in that event the down tube would prevent your grease gun nozzle being lined up properly to use that rear facing port.

Gattonero wrote:What I mean is what you have seen: the holes in the Record headset are only a few mm away from where the ball-bearings actually are. But if you fit a grease-port in the frame, this has to be past the insertion of the headset cups, which means you have the grease port almost 2cm aways form the bearings.

My apologies, I hadn't read the thread carefully enough and failed to appreciate you were referring to a grease port in the head tube.

Gattonero wrote:Not really, the CK bottom bracket will use fairly small bearings which are not much different from their headsets. The volume of grease is not big as they use a resin cage

Having looked at some Google images of CK BB bearings, I see what you mean.

Gattonero wrote:The reason to remove and push again the tool on a different angle I believe is because the 4 holes get a higher pressure of the grease which in turn will purge better the contaminants.

Ah, now for once I think I have got something right. CK state in the instructions for the tool (https://chrisking.com/files/public/content/media/document/7/d/threadfit_24_manual_10-16_final.pdf):

"Between pumps, turn the bearing by rotating the injector tool back and forth. This motion allows the new grease to be evenly distributed within the bearing, and to completely purge the old grease and contaminants through the front seal. This motion also helps prevent the black rubber seal from accidentally dislodging. "

Moreover, I think it is pretty clear from these videos that if you don't rotate the tool, contaminated grease furthest away from the 4 holes may not be purged, probably especially so if - like in the second video - it's the larger version of the tool for 30mm bottom brackets with a correspondingly greater distance between the holes.

From about 3.10 onwards in this video, in which the reviewer doesn't rotate the tool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGJxPQtzYW8

From about 4.10 onwards:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WTsSjGw5Kk

Prompted by this thread, I re-greased my 1" Campag Record headset with its grease holes today, and the volume of grease purged using a Finishline grease gun was comparable to the amount in the photograph above of the CK BB (whereas a lot more grease was purged in the above two videos, although they used guns with hydraulic couplers rather than a nozzle).

One thing I initially forgot to do was keep the sealing ring in place covering the other three holes while pumping in grease, with the result that grease exited from those holes instead of from the bottom of the headset .

mercalia wrote:re the Next version , I think it is the simplicty of servicing the basic version that makes it so appealing ; the Next version says it has triple seals. I wonder what servicing is like , and how easy it is to replace the bearings?

MKS provide details of the different bearings they use here https://www.mkspedal.com/?q=en/product/term/24. The webpage for the Next Touring pedal (https://www.mkspedal.com/?q=en/product/node/331) states:

"※Do not dismantle the cartridge sealed bearings since these items are accurately adjusted maintenance free parts.

※Do not inject lubricant into cartridge sealed bearings because lubrication fluid stimulates grease leakage and shorten bearing life span.

※Dust seal cap also work as bearing adjuster.
If you loosen the cap, it may cause over play."

mercalia wrote:is there any reason why they make pedals with no shoulders like the Sylvan?

I suspect it's simply that it's an old design which dates from when pedal washers were more commonly used, and they have not felt it necessary to update the design, at least not yet. There are plenty of other MKS pedals which do have full shoulders and cost the same or less, e.g. https://www.tredz.co.uk/mks-cage-pedals#. If you are prepared to pay a lot more, there are now premium versions of the Sylvan range, designated 'Next' which have sealed cartridge bearings and which do have full shoulders (https://www.tokyobike.co.uk/mks-pedals- ... quantity=1).

On one bike I have a pair of the Prime version Touring pedals which I picked up for the same price as the standard version. Like Sweep I thought that there wasn't much grease in them, so pumped in some Finishline teflon grease at both ends. I'm not planning on using that bike in bad conditions, otherwise I might have considered drilling the dust cap and pumping them full of grease.

For me the big advantage of the Touring model is its width, which makes it convenient to use with ordinary shoes, sandals and even lightweight walking boots, providing they are not fitted with metal toe clips which are sized for narrower cycling shoes (I've fitted Zefal plastic toe clips and nylon straps to mine - https://www.tredz.co.uk/.Zefal-Toe-Clip-43-515-Strap-Set_50815.htm). Yesterday I rode 50 miles on that bike wearing Keen Newport H2 sandals, and the combination worked well.