Cycling UK Forum

http://www.superstringtheory.com/

none of these strings is itself robust, sensible, and long lasting, we think, but each might contain an infinite number of things that are, and some of these might be bicycles.

Length many not be an appropriate measurement for all strings.

Or bicycles, I think....

cheers

I think I'll let you all pull on your strings .............theoretically speaking of course

reohn2 wrote:...
Anyway what's with the ?

just the most appropriate smiley for teasing in my opinion.

Brucey wrote:-image not viewable by non-members it seems

cheers

Sorry it took so long - been trying to sort out some cranks - why do nominally identical Shimano Alivio cranksets have several mm different chainlines

And how much are you marketing pairs of those for

much obliged!

Goodness, you have been busy! Some foolish questions and comments;

I guess there is no danger of the magnets demagnetising with this? (the last genuine 'dynohub' I took apart was forty years old.... )

Is that a RH thread on the generator housing?

Is there any merit in the notion (maybe you are doing this already) that you could use an earth return, and therefore use a single, skinny wire/axle hole?

Could it be easier/better if you used the brake plate off one of the other SA hubs? I'm not familiar with all the variations, but IIRC some have a bigger hole through etc...

nice work though!

cheers

[XAP]Bob wrote:And how much are you marketing pairs of those for

NO! NO! It's not me (I'm still Squeaker on BROL) but Supertramp, so you will have to address your questions to him!
Sorry

reohn2 wrote:A robust, sensible, long lasting bicycle.

I find this question very hard to answer,as what suits one person may not suit another,gears alone are a minefield ie;hub(how many gears)similarly so deraileurs.
Then there's frames,material,design,etc etc..........it's endless and can only be answered in context of whatever suits the rider's intended use for any given machine.
TBH it's a,how long's a piece of string scenario.

exactly! but in the process of the discussion certain gems of ideas can come forth that can be replicated on other people's own machines. this is exactly the point of the thread for me and maybe the forum itself.

excellent reading (so far!) this weekend may well see the mig fixed commuter adopting some of the above ideas.

anyone an experience with the carbon belt drive systems? as reliable and sturdy as the blurb would have you believe?

For your belt drive systems and a definite contender for my low maintenance bike.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=62174&hilit=gates

andrewjoseph wrote:

reohn2 wrote:...
Anyway what's with the ?

just the most appropriate smiley for teasing in my opinion.

I'll have to try and remember that <the most inoffensive smiley IMO

Wanting to celebrate ten years of not owning a car and happy to spend some of the money I would have spent on one, I started with a blank sheet of paper and ended up with this;


As has been said up thread, we're all different, I can see it wouldn't be to everyone's taste, I like it so much my other bikes hardly get ridden. I may at some point change the fork and fit a disk brake, more out of curiosity than any need. Otherwise I can't imagine changing anything.

mig wrote:so the question is - if you were to set out to build a long lasting, comfortable, efficient, all weather tourer / commuter / all purpose / training bicycle what would you choose in every aspect?

I don't understand the "if". It's what all the touring bike makers have been doing for decades (setting out, that is). Money isn't even the problem - you can get a fantastically reliable and efficient machine that is well within the reach of someone on an average wage in the UK should they wish to buy one. In fact, there seems to be a sharp dropping off in comfort and all purpose-ness as the bike gets more expensive. Your question, mig, is the nightmare scenario faced by the manufacturers - where do you go from here? I can't think of many machines today that compare to a bike - maybe an Aga cooker or some such thing. For me the important thing about a bike is that it is at least semi-repairable at home, that parts are easy to come by, maintenance simple and the bike robust. I'm not even sure that I would like a bike more reliable than they are now - it is actually possible to enjoy maintaining one. But if you want specifics ...

Steel frame
Derailleurs
Bar end shifters
Drop bars
35mm tyres (Schwalbe Marathon probably)
V brakes
Very low gears 24 or 27 speed
Brooks saddle
Racks both ends

Oh dear, it's a Thorn Sherpa .... (but a Roberts would do or whatever ...)

PH wrote:Wanting to celebrate ten years of not owning a car and happy to spend some of the money I would have spent on one, I started with a blank sheet of paper and ended up with this;


As has been said up thread, we're all different, I can see it wouldn't be to everyone's taste, I like it so much my other bikes hardly get ridden. I may at some point change the fork and fit a disk brake, more out of curiosity than any need. Otherwise I can't imagine changing anything.

bit heavy that bike though isn't it? it's knocking the road sign over!

reohn2 wrote:

andrewjoseph wrote:

reohn2 wrote:...
Anyway what's with the ?

just the most appropriate smiley for teasing in my opinion.

I'll have to try and remember that <the most inoffensive smiley IMO

when I'm putting in a post, all the usable smilies appear on the right. I don't have to remember to type in ': twisted :' (in the correct format ), i just click on the smiley. like this:

andrewjoseph wrote:when I'm putting in a post, all the usable smilies appear on the right. I don't have to remember to type in ': twisted :' (in the correct format ), i just click on the smiley. like this:

???