Cycling UK Forum

There is a very elegant solution that I have seen somewhere, valve caps with a magnet built in. If you manage to attach the sensor within the required distance, not allaways easy.

Well, Rubaixtuesday's last posts appears to contradict my assumption. I recall however seeing magnets with two clearly different grooves.
Also, as someone pointed, why are the grooves parallel to each other if they are meant to go on to adjacent spokes, that are not parallel?

I don't think those magnets are designed to go on two spokes, rather, they have two slightly different grooves to fit snugly on spokes of different gauges. Try fitting it on the other groove.

But isn't Ryde the same, only renamed, venerable Dutch company Rigida that has produced for decades some of the most reliable and highly acclaimed rims for loaded and expedition touring? Their Sputnik and Andra 30 models became the rim of choice for many experienced tourers that built and specced their own bikes for world touring, they were heavy but very sturdy and durable rims that kept going without issues untill the brake surfaces were worn, many tens of thousands of miles.

And now rims by the same manufacturer are bad enough to be ditched before use? as Mick says. Has the quality of Ryde rims deteriorated that much or are they just importing Asian products with poor QC and selling them under a European brand of respectable pedigree? A very common practice in the cycling industry nowadays.

Yes, but Tiagra 4703 is a road groupset with a 30-39-50 triple crank, too high gearing for loaded touring.

As for the drop bar market, it may be on the rise with the increasing popularity of gravel bikes. I never understood why American touring bikes tend to have drop bars whereas most premium German, Dutch touring bikes come with flat bars. But that is another debate.

Triple crankset continue to be standard on many mid-range touring bikes, like tne Trek 520 mentioned upthread, Kona Sutra etc.
Typically they come with the so-called trekking crankset, 26-36-48. The Sutra has moved to a 3x10 drivetrain as Deore was upgraded to 10 speed. I own the previous generation of the Trek 520 and it came with a 3x9 Deore drivetrain and bar end shifters, for the current model, Trek kept the 3x9 system but had to downgrade from Deore level to Sora (road shifters now) and the trekking 26-36-48 crankset is now at Alivio level. They may save on production costs but really there was no option if they wanted to keep the 9 speed drivetrain.

So triple setups are currently available, and will probably be for a while but only at the lowest shimano ranges. The question remains if these Alivio cranksets are adequate for touring, if the new Alivio 3x9 is as durable and reliable as the good old Deore 3x9, as the trickle down theory would suggest. Does it make sense to start stocking up on some 3x9 quality components? I say 3x9 because I am very happy with this drivetrain with its 26-36-48 cranks and bar end shifters on the trek 520, and 3x9 setups offer the additional advantage of compatibility between road and MTB components, if you can source them in the future, that is.

I think X1 systems make sense for mountain biking, for cycling off road in highly variable terrain and gradients where quick reaction and rapid shifting is crucial. For non-competitive road cycling I cannot see any benefits apart from the simplicity of the set up.

I run 3x9 and 3x10 systems in two touring bikes and would never give up the huge range (and straight chain line) they provide for the sake of simplicity. I even prefer the 3x9 with its bar end shifters and friction chainring shifting. I never had to adjust the front mech since I got the bike, years ago. Indexed shifting at the front creates more problems than it solves and that is one of the reasons many people are happy to get rid of the front mech.

If 3x setups disappear it won't be because they are inferior or obsolete for all applications, but rather because the touring market is neglected by manufacturers and we are left in a no man's land trying to mismatch road and MTB hardware that is not designed or well suited our needs. In my view, nothing, except a Rohloff possibly, beats a triple setup for loaded touring.

Triple systems are still offered but only in lower ranges, Alivio, Sora...I just wonder if that necessarily implies a drop in quality or if it is a simple model name rearrangement and today's Alivio and Sora are just as good as the previous generation Deore and Tiagra.

I run a Sora long cage rear mech with a 36T sprocket and it works, even though the theoretical maximum capacity is just 32T.

As for fitting a long cage to a short cage mech, doesn't tnhevlong cage need to be paired with a slightly stronger spring to maintain the same chain tension?

But undoing a hub is normally not an issue, what is crucial is being able to adjust it properly with the correct preload. And these new hubs are more faffy to adjust correctly.

I would give it a shot. Most likely, the longer cage requires more tension from the spring but it may still work adequately.

[quote="Cyclewala"]Have serviced both front hubs back to back I can say the M785 is much easier to work with than the M756.

Sorry to disagree but I think exactly the opposite, the M756 is a lot easier to adjust that any new hubs with locknut-axel cap. I mean adjusting properly, that is, allowing for axel compression, as Brucey explains.

I run the previous Sora 3500 triple groupset with a 12-36 cassette. The 36T cog exceeds Shimano's recommendations for the rear mech but it works OK. Shimano's recommendation tend to be rather conservative I believe.

Brucey's reply is totally accurate. The bar end shifters are Dura Ace and the brackets Sun Race, which can be purchased separately as a spare IIRC.

Ryde Andra 40 are the widest of the Andra range, 25 mm wide and good for tyres up to 69 mm according to the manufacturer.

Hi Brucey,
I ruled out the small pumps mounted on drills because of their very limited flow. I would need to use a pipe/hose of one or two inches diameter to fill a reservoir of around 1000 litres. Those little pumps are not up to the task, if would take ages and they wouldn't last long pumping regularly such an amount of water.
The Archimedes screw is a nice idea, but complex to make. The ones I have seen are designed to move grain, pellets etc and not watertight. Mi best best is probably sourcing a car engine waterpump with a pulley. Most pumps are integrated in the engine somehow but I hope to find one that can be detached from an old scrap engine and is operational as an independent unit.
I miss the days when you could just roam at scrapyards freely and scavenge for parts!