Cycling UK Forum

I have always been surprised how much upkeep is required for most bicycles. Where I live I see many, many bicycles of every sort used -and neglected- for transport. There are many old-school racing bikes, often equipped with lovely equipment from the 70s and 80s, which clearly never see so much as oil on the chain. Given the knowledge and experience I read about on this rather wonderful forum, it astonishes me that failures of some sort are not a common thing with such bikes, but I don't think I have ever seen such. How come we enthusiasts spend so much time and money looking after our machines when many of a different persuasion just do not? No doubt these bikes run rough and suffer from poor gear changing and so forth, but really, they still go. It strikes me that there is some inconsistency between what people such as yourselves think and what some others -often in the possession of rather nice equipment and who don't know or don't care - think. Or am I wrong?

You can get away with very little maintenance if you are willing to put up with slightly iffy gear shifts.

I've just read this thread viewtopic.php?f=5&t=121812 and been a bit overwhelmed by it. I run a couple of old bikes (my old tourer and an MTB) for day to day use which basically keep going until they don't. But the brakes (and rims) are a constant battle in the wet.

One issue is that if you attempt to do your own maintenance it will be just that: if you take it to a bike shop it is a simple case IMV of new replacement, even to the extent of a whole new bike. It could be that the whole concept of bike maintenance is a non-sequitur.

pliptrot wrote:.... but really, they still go.....

they go, alright.... they go into the scrap pile or they go (slowly, noisily) to the LBS to be fixed, at vast expense. Near to me several LBSs do good trade in fixing bikes like this. Folks often have worked out that a grotty old bike is worth spending money on, in that a new bike is much, much more likely to be nicked than some old nail. The LBS is happy enough to do the work, and they know that the same bike will be back again after another winter, in an equally knackered state....

cheers

i usually have a look at the other bikes on the road as best as i can during my commute and i find that bikes of this ilk usually have at least one part that stands out from the rest as 'new.'

new front wheel, new rear derailleur, new chainset etc

so yes they do 'go' but i always think they do that relatively expensively - more so than one that has a little care.

by the way there is No way on earth i could rode a bike with a squeaky brown chain...!!it would simply do my nut in.

I agree with Brucey,but there's also the value/attachment factor,enthusiasts have these things in abundance for their machines,other people who see their bike as just an a to b means don't and with a less people being of a mechanical aptitude people will ride the bike until it needs serious attention then take to 'the expert's to sort out and the cycle(sorry) begins again.

Some people are like that with their cars so it's hardly surprising that such an insignificant thing as a bike would be treated any better.

pliptrot wrote: but really, they still go. It strikes me that there is some inconsistency between what people such as yourselves think and what some others -often in the possession of rather nice equipment and who don't know or don't care - think. Or am I wrong?

They may still go, but they don't always stop very well. My observation is that the sort of people who can't be bothered to oil a chain, can't be bothered to replace brake blocks either and the common cure for a rubbing brake seems to be to disconnect it
I used to work with someone who commuted 8 miles each way on a Halfords Subway, he'd buy on in the sale for around £180, ride it to death and replace with the same next time they were in the sale. I can't say I approve of such wastage, but it worked for him.
There's also the usage to risk equation, if you only use your bike locally, at a speed where you can stop by putting your foot down, in a way that the efficiency of your gears matters little, on a bike you value so little that abandoning it would be no hardship, or pushing it home a small inconvenience, then the case for having an efficient well maintained machine is harder to make, but it doesn't describe much of my cycling.
There are three recently opened bike shops within walking distance of me, I could go into and buy a sub £150 bike with everything checked and working that would likely do me several thousand miles without requiring much attention, the financial case for paying for regular maintenance if you can't/won't do it yourself is hard to make.

reohn2 wrote:Some people are like that with their cars

But isn't that the point? Cars can be treated like this without the deterioration we are talking about with bikes. Of the friends I have who own cars not one of them can remember when they last checked the oil level (some could not carry out such a difficult task) or indeed when they looked at the tyres. I remember my first car - a 1970s Mini- and all the hassle I had with plugs, points, distributors and king pins. I had to constantly fettle. Things have changed immeasurably in cars but not in bikes ( for very good and obvious reasons, I suppose). This thread was prompted by me seeing a (under the dirt) very nice Italian racing bike hung with Super Record bits and even nice, light tyres which had maybe never been cleaned. After some polite questions it transpires that the owner knew nothing of the bike's provenance or maintenance required, and rode it every day just because... I found this sacrilege more troubling than perhaps I should.

AFAIK (and that's not a lot) disc brake calipers on cars run in constant contact with the disc and the friction is taken up by the engine. The weight is unbelievable.

You have to remember that most people, even if they cycle often, don't put more than 500 miles per year on a pedal cycle. Even for neglected bikes, once per year service at the LBS is generally adequate for that. The bikes still last for years, and only get replaced when the owners want new ones.

People who ride much more than that, or think 10 miles is a reasonable commute, generally learn to do their own service.

pliptrot wrote:

reohn2 wrote:Some people are like that with their cars

But isn't that the point? Cars can be treated like this without the deterioration we are talking about with bikes.........

Yes it is the point,and some people don't check much on much these days.
Some people can't spell maintenance let alone carry out any.Take a walk down any street and check how many bald/illegal tyres you spot on the cars parked up,it's a shocking eye opener made even worse by the fact its £60 + 3points a pop if they're caught.
I disgree that cars can be treated so badly these days,small problems lead to big ones with anything mechanical.

A while back someone was riding in the opposite direction to me on a mountain bike with a 26" rear and 20" front wheel and their feet on the floor were their only form of braking. Their bike certainly went but you wouldn't want to ride up or down any substantial incline or travel any more than a couple of kms at a go. The owner will probably upgrade to better model as soon as the bolt croppers provide an opportunity.

horizon wrote:AFAIK (and that's not a lot) disc brake calipers on cars run in constant contact with the disc and the friction is taken up by the engine. The weight is unbelievable.

They shouldn't be in contact, as like bicycle hydraulic disc brakes the idea is that the compliance or 'spring' in the rubber piston seals is enough just to pull the pad back from the disc. However, often they do touch, usually due to poor maintenance, disc run-out, knackered piston seals, but also rust or dirt between the pad and disc.

It always amazes me when I see (hear) people on expensive carbon road bikes with all the gear but an awful squeaky dried out chain! That would drive me nuts! I am sometimes tempted just to carry a small tube of chain lube with me and stop these people mid ride and offer to oil their chain for them (no euphemism!) - like a chain-lube vigilante!

I think there are some of us, maybe with an engineering/technical bent, who take pride in their bikes and the condition of them, both mechanically and physically/aesthetically. I personally also find having a clean, smoothly running bike gives me a psychological boost but if there is a niggling noise or problem I tend to slow up!

I will maintain my 'weekend' (i.e. longer rides) bike before and after every ride, to some extent, and I would never leave a bike dirty in the garage after a ride, particularly in the winter. Ironically though, for my commuting bike, that I ride Monday to Friday, I don't want the constant up-keep and daily or weekly maintenance hassles - this is why for my latest commuter I designed/specced it myself as a low maintenance machine with corrosion resistant parts, belt drive hub gears etc and so far this has worked superbly. Virtually no maintenance required in the first three years of daily riding!

shutuplegz wrote:

horizon wrote:AFAIK (and that's not a lot) disc brake calipers on cars run in constant contact with the disc and the friction is taken up by the engine. The weight is unbelievable.

They shouldn't be in contact, as like bicycle hydraulic disc brakes the idea is that the compliance or 'spring' in the rubber piston seals is enough just to pull the pad back from the disc. However, often they do touch, usually due to poor maintenance, disc run-out, knackered piston seals, but also rust or dirt between the pad and disc.

Atmospheric pressure also causes the pistons to retract but that is not enough to ensure that two pistons on the same circuit retract evenly; if this were the only source of retraction then one piston only would move in most cases, since the pistons would stick/slip against rigid seals. As per the comment above the seals change shape and their elasticity ensures that the pistons all retract under normal circumstances. The illustration below shows how this can work



There are numerous slight differences possible in the seal groove design which help ensure a good seal and a positive retraction. For cost and assembly reasons the seal itself is usually a uniform square section and the clever bit is in the groove design. It is not a new idea, BTW, I recently overhauled a set of ford Cortina calipers and these had asymmetric grooves in the caliper body, intended to give positive pad retraction.

In a car disc brake pads can remain in contact with the disc and/or a sliding caliper may be off to one side, when the brake is released. These parts are usually soon 'knocked back' so that the drag is non-existent. It is in fact extremely rare that the pads remain in contact with the disc; the reason is that the discs only have to run true to ~0.25mm (~0.010") or something and yet they must be the same thickness to some fantastic tolerance (in some cases ~ 0.0005" springs to mind but I need to check that). If the pads are in contact with the disc when the brake is off, the pads tend to kiss the high spots and the disc thickness soon goes out of spec, (often known as 'DTV' disc thickness variation) resulting in violent brake judder.

Obviously if the pistons don't retract fully then you tend to get juddery brakes but it is unlikely that 'the disc has warped'; it is more likely that the disc was normally/tolerably warped all along and the real problem is that the brake pistons are not retracting fully, or the caliper isn't sliding, or something. At some expense the discs can be machined true in situ but this is unlikely to be a permanent solution; whatever problem there is will only get worse over time.

The weight of car brakes is very large but is small as a fraction of the laden weight of the vehicle.

Bicycle disc brakes also suffer from sticky pistons (not least because they have no boots) and can even suffer from DTV too.

cheers