Cycling UK Forum

Marcus Aurelius

Check the tensioner ( Jockey wheels / the little cogs in the mechanism) for damage, and bearing function. Also, check that the hanger is butted up against the B screw ( check that there isn’t a gap between the end of the b screw and the hanger)

Marcus Aurelius

BigG wrote:Power most certainly does have an element (strictly a dimension) of time despite tatanab's statement. It is work that has no time component. The work done to climb a hill slowly (to allow air resistance to be ignored) is the same whether it takes 1 hour or 10 hours. It is the power that varies being 10 times greater in the faster climb. Tatanab's 100 Watts would require 100 Watt hours of work if maintained for 1 hour. It would require 1 kW hr if maintained for 10 hours. The whole purpose of variable gears is to allow us to match an acceptable work rate to an acceptable cadence.

Different equations. Power being the product of Torque and cadence ( rpm ) minutes ( or seconds ) being the time element, which is a separate animal ( yet attached to ) the measure of effort, which is the product of Power ( Product of Torque and Cadence) and the duration of the applied power. Confusing isn’t it?

Marcus Aurelius

I always forget to adjust at least one of my cycle computers. It freaks me out at first, then I realise how much lighter it is, and I relax.

Marcus Aurelius

Turd polishing.

Marcus Aurelius

I’ve got an old Riverside 3 Hybrid. It’s still in working order, but I have lots of bikes in front of it, in the ‘pecking order’ and never seem to use it.

Marcus Aurelius

I have an ancient steel Pug, 2 full Carbon road bikes, 2 Aluminium road bikes, with Carbon Forks, and 2 Hybrids, with Ally Alloy frames. Every one of them has advantages and disadvantages, over the others, in various aspects. From my personal perspective, I’ve allocated certain types of rides, to each type of bike, and trimmed / tunes the components on each accordingly. I still find that I’m occasionally forced to use the ‘wrong’ bike, for a particular ride. The differences are really just making the ride a bit more comfy / easier, and in reality, ( except for the Hybrids) I don’t have big issues swapping one type for another.

Marcus Aurelius

abzmanc wrote:Cheers for the tips so far guys! I'm in Manchester. Although my scheme doesn't work with Evans I have one nearby so may try and get a test ride or two there.

Was looking at Halfords as it's a convinient location for me to go and they have a reasonable selection of stuff just have not got an idea on the quality!

Personally speaking, I’ve never had an issue with the quality of the Boardman bikes, I’ve had from Halfords. The suspension fork on the MX is actually not too bad at all. As long as the bike has been set up by someone who’s at least reasonably competent, there shouldn’t be any issues. They do give you a free ‘post shakedown’ check and adjust, if anything is amiss.

Marcus Aurelius

It transpires they now think that the child released the handbrake, and the car rolled into the river, and wasn’t “stolen” after all.

Marcus Aurelius

Vorpal wrote:
tatanab wrote:
Mick F wrote:Well, come on then .............

Not maths, just plain simple English.
Power is torque times rpm. There can be no time element in power because I can put out 100 Watts for an hour or for 10 hours, it is still 100 watts.

rpm = revolutions per minute

minute is the time element

If you want to know how much effort went into your ride, you have to be looking at the time component ( duration of the ride )not just the power you were producing,which is the product of your Cadence ( usually measured with a cadence sensor) and the torque ( measured by strain gauges, in the cranks, or pedal axles / bodies). The metric you want, is the number of Joules ( product of Power and ride duration ).

Marcus Aurelius

The only one of those I can comment on from personal experience is the Boardman MX. It’s very good value for money, and pretty robust, with good components. I would say that hydraulic brakes are worth the extra, but only if you use the bike a lot, as Hydraulics are much less of a faff, and don’t need so much adjustment as cable discs.

Marcus Aurelius

Power, is the one that most people I encounter misunderstand. Not just how it’s calculated, but it’s significance ( or lack thereof) on riding a bike efficiently / effectively.

Marcus Aurelius

There are too many variables involved in the experience of riding a bicycle, to nail one particular attribute, to a specific component. But if you keep absolutely everything the same( tricky to do at the best of times ) and change the one thing you are trying to ascertain the effect of, you can get an idea of the various components differences. But it’s only an idea, because something you thought was constant, has actually changed more significantly than you assumed, in between changing the component you were trying to test. Bike testing / component comparison tests are fun fun fun.

Marcus Aurelius

Brucey wrote:
Marcus Aurelius wrote:
Spot on. One of my full Carbon bikes is from 2014, the tech moves on so fast, it already looks / rides like an antique. I keep it for no other reason that it cost me nothing ( I won it in a competition).

Ah. Comments like that betray the fact that you have been successfully fished in by the technobabble-ridden world of bicycle hype. The bicycle trade (and the sycophantic press which is beholden to it) would love you to believe that they are making real progress and that your nice new (plastic) bike ought to be replaced as often as your crappy 'smartphone' (a misnomer if ever there was one) if you want it to work properly.

If you buy a decent bike (rather than something so rubbish it is going to fall apart anyway) nothing could be further from the truth. Outside of the highest level of competition, if you think that a properly serviced bike that is five, ten or fifteen years old is going to be noticeably different to ride or going to go at a different speed you are basically delusional. The bike trade loves people like you...

cheers

I’ve got some bikes that are 30 years old, they are truly dreadful, when you ride them after the more ‘modern’ versions. Clangers, friction shifters on the down tubes, and 6 speed drive trains, became obsolete for a reason. The majority of people who’ve appeared on the scene since 2012 ( that’s quite a few / the majority I tend to encounter on bike related internet sites) and like to share their ‘experience’, wouldn’t know what to do with ‘L cranks’ or a pneumatic / air driven groupset, let alone have ridden with them. Flexy Aluminium rims take some getting used to as well. The less said about centre pull brakes the better. Old stuff is crap, too many people view it with rose tinted specs, the only old stuff that I will agree is actually better than modern, is a properly built steel frame, but that’s as far as my concession goes.

Marcus Aurelius

reohn2 wrote:
Marcus Aurelius wrote:........One of my full Carbon bikes is from 2014, the tech moves on so fast, it already looks / rides like an antique. I keep it for no other reason that it cost me nothing ( I won it in a competition).

Whilst I can understand a paint job looking "so last year" such is fashion,but in four years has the technical advance in CF bike manufacture moved on so much as to leave your bike's design obsolete in a technical sense?
If so I'd like to be educated on the advances that would improve any given make and model of frame so much it would render a four year old bike an "antique".It's serious question I'm not being facetious.

It’s things like the design of frame ( re seat stay positions for example) and the design of the tubes, things like the clearance for fatter tyres, the area around the bottom bracket ( which tend to be better enegineered / less flex now). And a Miriam of changes in the materials used, at the level of frame I’d be interested in, that really do add up to a more comfy / efficient ride.

Marcus Aurelius

djnotts wrote:""advice needed - upgrading to my first carbon road bike"

with respect

Don't ......"

With experience, DO. Even the lower end simply ride better than anything other than, maybe, a very well put together 531C or Columbus SLX or some Ti. The carbon will in any event be lighter. It will also be cheaper. Almost certainly will last a few years - and most folk really don't want the same old bike for longer than that.

Spot on. One of my full Carbon bikes is from 2014, the tech moves on so fast, it already looks / rides like an antique. I keep it for no other reason that it cost me nothing ( I won it in a competition).

Cycling UK Forum

Search found 1865 matches

Re: Gears feel rough

Re: Misunderstood terminology

Re: Clocks Going Forward

Re: Up cycling

Re: What's your most neglected bike? (that still works)

Re: Changes to aluminum frames?

Re: Yet another noob looking for a hybrid..

Re: Tragedy in Cardigan

Re: Misunderstood terminology

Re: Yet another noob looking for a hybrid..

Re: Misunderstood terminology

Re: Changes to aluminum frames?

Re: advice needed - upgrading to my first carbon road bike

Re: advice needed - upgrading to my first carbon road bike

Re: advice needed - upgrading to my first carbon road bike