.

cooper wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 8:34 pm
I was serious. Most people head to the internet to shout into an idiot-filled echobox. Not here--I like this place. I can tune in here and read some pretty deep analyses of a broad range of topics. Usually peppered with some pretty feisty but civil disagreements over fine points. Sometimes people even know what they're talking about. And sometimes it's about guns.

And sometimes everyone's wrong and I have to chime in to give the right answer.

lurker wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 9:32 pm

cooper wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 8:34 pm I was serious.

i was agreeing with you. i've said pretty much the same. seriously.

I was a distance runner decades ago. I found bikes is a good form of exercise that doesn’t stress my old body even with spinal stenosis. Get a bike doc! LoL.

sikacz wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 7:55 am I was a distance runner decades ago. I found bikes is a good form of exercise that doesn’t stress my old body even with spinal stenosis. Get a bike doc! LoL.

While I never really enjoyed running, I definitely appreciated the positive effects of a 5-mile run. My final spring semester in college I was required to take the 2nd of 2 gym classes to graduate--I took "Running to Awareness" and we started in January in Upstate New York--if it was above 20° we ran outside. I had sweatpants, but my only sweatshirt had short sleeves--though I had gloves and a hat. It was harsh but people who began the course unable to run more than 1/2 mile were easily running 3, 4, and 5 miles, by which time it was a LOT warmer! Up there back then (mid-70s), it went from the 20's to the 60's and back down again, overnight--frequently in the same day. That's what they called "Spring". The instructor, who coached long distance runners including marathoners, was actually pretty cool, working hard to help the least fit among us do better, not at all a macho asshole.

Hey. You runners. Get your own thread.

wooglin wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 11:07 am Hey. You runners. Get your own thread.

I'm not a runner--running is a no-no when you have had hips replaced, because it wears them out prematurely, and it is NOT a "fun" surgery. Plus, I couldn't run before, could barely walk--which was why I had to have them replaced. Coming on 10 years for the first, 8 years for the 2nd.

Besides, I've ALWAYS like bicycling more than running, especially when it's hot out. And now, with proper (or at least decent) gear, I can ride down the 30's! (I always hated riding in the cold--made my ears hurt like hell).

Thinking about a bar-end mirror--could make it even safer. I always ride with a strobing headlight and taillights--MOST people in cars see them.

YankeeTarheel wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 12:16 pm

wooglin wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 11:07 am Hey. You runners. Get your own thread.

Thinking about a bar-end mirror--could make it even safer. I always ride with a strobing headlight and taillights--MOST people in cars see them.

I have always preferred helmet- or eyeglass-mounted mirrors. With a bar-end mirror, you have to adjust the mirror to ANY change in posture (say, different grip on the bar) or move your head around a LOT to see what you want to see in the mirror, and even then the mirror is of limited value (can't see what's behind and slightly to your right, for example, since you would have to be looking through your own body).

My head is on "Nature's Gimbal Mount," though, and I can either just move my eyeball a bit to see straight back, or can move my head a little and see a wider section of the environment behind me. My focus is also not as far away from what's in front of me, so that irregular motions in my peripheral vision get noticed more easily if need be.

Which one is certainly a personal choice, just as I won't tell you that choosing CZ over S&W (or the inverse) is the only way to go.

Also: I encourage you to have a look at the videos available on the CyclingSavvy ( cyclingsavvy.org ) site. Lots of good information there that helps cyclists be safer in the real world. When I started using the strategies taught by the CyclingSavvy program, the motorists I encountered got a lot smarter.

But it's good to know that choices are there, and why one person would prefer a choice you might not have considered.

wooglin wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 11:07 am Hey. You runners. Get your own thread.

I'm an ex-runner. LoL. I'm a lot faster doing 50 miles on my bike than I ever was running it!

My two current bikes. The gold one is an at least 40 year old Bob Jackson, repainted and some of the original Campy components replaced to make it a better hill country touring bike with half-step gearing and a front granny ring. My father-in-law gave me the Bob Jackson when I first got into riding back in the early 80s and he had put several thousand miles on it before giving it to me. I’ve added a few thousand more to it since then since it was my sole bike for about 35 years. I’m giving it to my son now that he has figured out that running is destructive testing of the knees. I hope it serves him as well as it served his grandfather and me. The white one is a Specialized Roubaix that I bought as a retirement present for myself 6 years ago. I’m afraid its mileage is in the hundreds, not thousands, fat old geezers don’t crank out centuries with the aplomb of my younger self.

This brings me to the perennial question of concealed carry while riding. I have had several scary incidents on my bike and got a CC permit to have some way of defending myself from muggers and dumbass rednecks who think it is fun to mess with an old guy on an isolated country road. I’ve looked through many (but not all) of the threads on this forum about CC and bikes. Most of them seem to be at least 5 years old and it looks like there has been a lot of innovation in CC gear since then. Has anyone found a better way of carrying a small pistol (Springfield Armory XdS) than my current ‘Sticky holster stuck in my jersey pocket’ method? I ride in lycra, I don’t see how anyone can ride in cargo shorts with seams under your butt and no chamois or gel pad to help prevent chafing. I tried mtn. bike shorts but they seem to be all style and little function; while they have gel pads the pockets are tiny, they always feel like they’re falling off and the legs are big enough for a baby elephant.

oldhacker wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 3:21 pm foo.jpg

My two current bikes. The gold one is an at least 40 year old Bob Jackson, repainted and some of the original Campy components replaced to make it a better hill country touring bike with half-step gearing and a front granny ring. My father-in-law gave me the Bob Jackson when I first got into riding back in the early 80s and he had put several thousand miles on it before giving it to me. I’ve added a few thousand more to it since then since it was my sole bike for about 35 years. I’m giving it to my son now that he has figured out that running is destructive testing of the knees. I hope it serves him as well as it served his grandfather and me. The white one is a Specialized Roubaix that I bought as a retirement present for myself 6 years ago. I’m afraid its mileage is in the hundreds, not thousands, fat old geezers don’t crank out centuries with the aplomb of my younger self.

This brings me to the perennial question of concealed carry while riding. I have had several scary incidents on my bike and got a CC permit to have some way of defending myself from muggers and dumbass rednecks who think it is fun to mess with an old guy on an isolated country road. I’ve looked through many (but not all) of the threads on this forum about CC and bikes. Most of them seem to be at least 5 years old and it looks like there has been a lot of innovation in CC gear since then. Has anyone found a better way of carrying a small pistol (Springfield Armory XdS) than my current ‘Sticky holster stuck in my jersey pocket’ method? I ride in lycra, I don’t see how anyone can ride in cargo shorts with seams under your butt and no chamois or gel pad to help prevent chafing. I tried mtn. bike shorts but they seem to be all style and little function; while they have gel pads the pockets are tiny, they always feel like they’re falling off and the legs are big enough for a baby elephant.

Looks like a really nice bike, nicer than the Concord I put back together, but that's a nice old 10 speed, too. Found it on street--owner said he put it and a Trek 820 women's mountain bike out for collection--just wanted to be sure. The Concord needed rims, tires, tubes, cables, and, of course brake pads, plus the B/B and hubs broken down, cleaned and repacked. The Trek needs less but is trickier to work on. I needed to invest in a modern took kit to take it on, But I think it only needs brake pads and cables--plus the same treatment to the hubs and bottom bracket. First cassette I've worked on, first cant brakes, and first woman's bike.

Oooohhh, I love the Bob Jackson frames! He was a higher-end semi-custom builder for a LONG time! A local guy has a couple of their bikes, and the fit and finish are amazing! The "wavy" chain stays were cool-looking, even if they didn't make huge improvements in the ride of the bikes.

I sold Specialized bikes for a few years in shops where I worked, and always appreciated the Roubaix series. Since my long-distance/performance bikes have been recumbents for the last thirty or so years, I never bought one, but I test rode a few after assembling or doing service work on them. Nice bikes, to be sure!

BearPaws wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 5:43 pm Oooohhh, I love the Bob Jackson frames! He was a higher-end semi-custom builder for a LONG time! A local guy has a couple of their bikes, and the fit and finish are amazing! The "wavy" chain stays were cool-looking, even if they didn't make huge improvements in the ride of the bikes.

I sold Specialized bikes for a few years in shops where I worked, and always appreciated the Roubaix series. Since my long-distance/performance bikes have been recumbents for the last thirty or so years, I never bought one, but I test rode a few after assembling or doing service work on them. Nice bikes, to be sure!

I wish I had kept the original Campy components on the Bob Jackson, but when I moved to NC from Texas I decided I needed more help on the hills around here and went to a weird gearing I had read about in Bicycling magazine that required a rear derailleur that would wrap LOTS of chain. I used the Campy derailleur on a bike I refurbished for my wife's cousin to use on a supported Pacific to Atlantic ride.

I bought a recumbent some years ago. It was a low-end/cheap one, Bike-E, if I remember correctly. It occasionally developed a rapid front wheel wobble at speed, once resulting in road rash and a new helmet for me. Finally, I pulled into an asphalt parking lot and the little front wheel slid out on a painted lane marker (dry). I dislocated my little finger trying to break my 12" fall. I gave it away shortly after that and returned to riding my Bob Jackson.

oldhacker wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 9:33 pm

BearPaws wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 5:43 pm Oooohhh, I love the Bob Jackson frames! He was a higher-end semi-custom builder for a LONG time! A local guy has a couple of their bikes, and the fit and finish are amazing! The "wavy" chain stays were cool-looking, even if they didn't make huge improvements in the ride of the bikes.

I sold Specialized bikes for a few years in shops where I worked, and always appreciated the Roubaix series. Since my long-distance/performance bikes have been recumbents for the last thirty or so years, I never bought one, but I test rode a few after assembling or doing service work on them. Nice bikes, to be sure!

I wish I had kept the original Campy components on the Bob Jackson, but when I moved to NC from Texas I decided I needed more help on the hills around here and went to a weird gearing I had read about in Bicycling magazine that required a rear derailleur that would wrap LOTS of chain. I used the Campy derailleur on a bike I refurbished for my wife's cousin to use on a supported Pacific to Atlantic ride.

I bought a recumbent some years ago. It was a low-end/cheap one, Bike-E, if I remember correctly. It occasionally developed a rapid front wheel wobble at speed, once resulting in road rash and a new helmet for me. Finally, I pulled into an asphalt parking lot and the little front wheel slid out on a painted lane marker (dry). I dislocated my little finger trying to break my 12" fall. I gave it away shortly after that and returned to riding my Bob Jackson.

So...recumbent bikes have too little weight on the front wheel? That makes me concerned about front braking. On regular bikes and motorcycles, 70% of your braking force is from your front brake. COG is always best in the middle but if you lighten up your front by shifting COG backwards it should not only affect braking but also handling negatively.

YankeeTarheel wrote: Sun Apr 25, 2021 10:38 pm

So...recumbent bikes have too little weight on the front wheel? That makes me concerned about front braking. On regular bikes and motorcycles, 70% of your braking force is from your front brake. COG is always best in the middle but if you lighten up your front by shifting COG backwards it should not only affect braking but also handling negatively.

Well, "it depends."

There are different configurations of recumbent bikes. The bikeE that OldHacker was discussing was, indeed, a lower-priced model. I sold them for a couple years, and had one of my own that got a fair bit of commuting use. A few folks had challenges such as OldHacker described, but I was never able to figure out exactly why.

The bikeE format was considered a "compact" recumbent, with Above-Seat Steering. Most of the more modern recumbent bikes (or 'bents, as many aficionados call them) are Above-Seat Steer (or the unfortunate acronym ASS). My Vanguard is Under-Seat Steer, or USS.

Wheelbase is another variable, with Long Wheelbase (LWB) and Short Wheelbase (SWB), in addition to the compact mentioned above. An example of LWB would be my Vanguard, pictured earlier in this thread. The yellow Bacchetta someone compared to getting going on a unicycle is a SWB bike.

Crank position is yet another variable. That yellow Bacchetta is a high-crank bike, commonly referred to as a "High racer" position. An example of a low-crank SWB bike would be my old RANS V-Rex.

Back to the braking issues: My Vanguard is, indeed, lightly loaded on the front wheel. In the tens of thousands of miles I've put on that bike, though, front wheel braking has never been a problem in terms of front wheel loss of traction due to weight distribution, and I have done a LOT of commuting on that bike. I did, however, find that with a certain tire, I had some unnerving understeer. That problem went away when I changed to a softer tire compound. The weight distribution on that bike is probably in the 80/20 range, heavy to the rear.

Indeed, part of the reason for the resurgence of the LWB format in the 1970s was that David Gordon Wilson, an engineer who taught at MIT, thought that "headers" from TOO-good braking on conventional bicycles was something to be avoided.

On my SWB bikes, like the blue-flame thing I showed off in one of my first posts in this thread, I've lifted the back wheel in panic braking exactly once, out of a number of hard-braking situations. My two crashes on that bike had nothing to do with braking, though. One came about due to a sudden loss of front tire pressure in a sweeping turn, the other was pure rider inattention to the correct visual inputs.

And, falls from such bikes rarely result in the broken bones (like broken collarbones) that are sadly not uncommon with falls from conventional bikes. It's usually hip/thigh scrapes. Recognizing that hip replacements in one's history would lead to extra (and valid) caution, even these falls are not over-frequent.

The weight distribution on most conventional bicycles runs 60/40 give or take a bit with more weight on the rear wheel. Hard braking shifts the weight forward, sometimes inducing the face-plant over the handlebars. I don't think I've heard of more than one or two face-plant crashes from a recumbent bike in thirty years, although I also admit that my sample is not complete.

I must admit to being more knowledgeable about front braking on motorcycles than bicycles. In fact, I've never heard of a motorcyclist flipping over the front wheel. In fact, lifting the back wheel off the ground is called a "stoppie".

YankeeTarheel wrote: Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:16 am I must admit to being more knowledgeable about front braking on motorcycles than bicycles. In fact, I've never heard of a motorcyclist flipping over the front wheel. In fact, lifting the back wheel off the ground is called a "stoppie".

Neat thing about motorcycle suspensions--they allow for forward weight transfer without (usually) seeing a resultant "Nadia Comenici over the handlebars" maneuver. Also, the additional weight of the engine and transmission and heavier wheels has the center of gravity much lower than on a conventional bicycle, which helps a LOT.

So now I am working on restoring this older Trek 820 WMB. I'm guess from the 90's.
While the tires are flat, they appear to still be good and so seem to be the tubes. 26x1.95.
Getting the pedals off was a pain--might well have been on with Red lock-tite! They are crappy plastic pedals and the bearings are messy and notchy--planning on replacing them.
The cranks were also on super-tight. Usually I can get them off without special tool but I had to buy a tool kit kit and have had to use many of the tools so far. It's not a Park kit but it was less than 1/3 of the equiv Park. I don't work on THAT many bikes.
Then it was on to the rear wheel. The tool kit and the whip got the cassette off, and I was able to remove the cassette hub as well. Everything soaked, cleaned and re-lubed. and re-assembled, including the hub bearings. I did NOT attempt to disassemble the cassette hub. Luckily the wheel is close enough to true that I don't need to mess with it.
Now the bottom bracket. The left came off fairly easily but the right, even with a two-foot long breaker bar was a bear to break loose--reverse threads. Found a vid on how to disassemble the bottom bracket cartridge which was very notchy and it's now soaking.
Brake pads are off. The brake cables are all gummed up, but other wise seem to be fine. I may try to salvage them and the casings, but will need new end cable caps. Pads, of course, will be replaced.
Kick stand is off, too.
After the bottom bracket is back, I'll work on the front wheel's hub and bearing.
Steering head bearing seems fine, not at all notchy or tight.
I'll probably cut the chain and soak it...and decide if I must do the same with the shifters.

My goal is to replace only the brake pads and cable tips, and restore everything else.
Not sure what I'll do with it, although I may convert it to an eBike, possibly a rear hub drive rather than a front hub drive. Long ways off, though.

YankeeTarheel wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 2:12 pm TrekWomansBike.jpg



My goal is to replace only the brake pads and cable tips, and restore everything else.
Not sure what I'll do with it, although I may convert it to an eBike, possibly a rear hub drive rather than a front hub drive. Long ways off, though.

I used to sell Trek bikes. The brakes (linear pull) suggest that it's post-1999, but I didn't sell enough of the 820 to remember what year it was that color.

The Park Tool web site has a LOT of great how-to information on bike repair and service, as does the Sheldon Brown site. An important tip: Small angles rather than big angles for pedal wrenches and hub wrenches (acute angle between the wrench and the opposite crank arm, or between two cone wrenches when working on hubs). It's not a bad idea to have the chain on the largest chainring when trying to remove pedals, to limit how deep the chainring teeth can bite (don't ask me how I know this).

BearPaws wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 5:29 pm

YankeeTarheel wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 2:12 pm TrekWomansBike.jpg



My goal is to replace only the brake pads and cable tips, and restore everything else.
Not sure what I'll do with it, although I may convert it to an eBike, possibly a rear hub drive rather than a front hub drive. Long ways off, though.

I used to sell Trek bikes. The brakes (linear pull) suggest that it's post-1999, but I didn't sell enough of the 820 to remember what year it was that color.

The Park Tool web site has a LOT of great how-to information on bike repair and service, as does the Sheldon Brown site. An important tip: Small angles rather than big angles for pedal wrenches and hub wrenches (acute angle between the wrench and the opposite crank arm, or between two cone wrenches when working on hubs). It's not a bad idea to have the chain on the largest chainring when trying to remove pedals, to limit how deep the chainring teeth can bite (don't ask me how I know this).

I had to look up linear pull brakes but you're right--that's what they are. How they work is clearly obvious. Supposedly, they apply more force than center-pull cants, but that's just what I've read.

I've worked (I guess) tens of thousands of nuts and bolt on and off over my lifetime--maybe more. I WAS able to remove the pedals but the flat cone wrenches simply don't give sufficient leverage, so I clipped off a bit of the plastic to allow a proper open-end wrench to get in. On the rear axle, the lock-nut and the bearing cone were SO tight I had to lock the cone wrench in my bench vise to break it loose. I expect this bike hasn't been dis-assembled since it was assembled. At least I won't have to re-spoke these wheels--did that on the Concord--new allow Weinmann rims.

YankeeTarheel wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:54 pm

I had to look up linear pull brakes but you're right--that's what they are. How they work is clearly obvious. Supposedly, they apply more force than center-pull cants, but that's just what I've read.

I've worked (I guess) tens of thousands of nuts and bolt on and off over my lifetime--maybe more. I WAS able to remove the pedals but the flat cone wrenches simply don't give sufficient leverage, so I clipped off a bit of the plastic to allow a proper open-end wrench to get in. On the rear axle, the lock-nut and the bearing cone were SO tight I had to lock the cone wrench in my bench vise to break it loose. I expect this bike hasn't been dis-assembled since it was assembled. At least I won't have to re-spoke these wheels--did that on the Concord--new allow Weinmann rims.

Yeah, the linear pull (Shimano trade name is "V-Brake" for some reason) have slightly better stopping power than cantilever brakes. They are also a heck of a lot easier for many people to adjust correctly, which has always been my primary reason for encouraging people to switch to them.

And, of the hundreds or even thousands of wheels I've worked on, far too many have had such thin wrench flats that even high-quality cone wrenches are too thick. Lower-grade hubs seem to be machine-adjusted, and the machines often lock the lock nuts far tighter than is necessary, as you discovered.

There are reasons I don't work in bike shops anymore. Bike manufacturers have supplied a few of those reasons.

Well, these are LOW quality cone wrenches so their are plenty thin!

This is the kit I bought--they raised the price $35 since I bought it 3 1/2 weeks ago!


https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B01N07NZ2R? ... ct_details
.
I'm adding 2 pieces: a 9mm hex/Allen socket and a 1/2"-3/8" socket adapter--to remove cassette hub free wheels.

And the re-assembled bottom bracket:

YankeeTarheel wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:51 pm And the re-assembled bottom bracket:
BB-CT92.jpg

Yeah, I remember the CT92 cartridges.

I haven't seen a new one in ten years or more, so it's good that you were able to clean and repack it.

For future reference, and for those who don't feel ready to do that level of work, Shimano (the company that made that one) has gotten to the point that they won't sell to online outfits like JensonUSA, so your local bike shop is the best source for a replacement.

A LOT of online parts dealers are selling stuff for racers and those who have tons of money to spend on pretending to be racers that use a variety of new "standards" (the problem with "standards" is the second "s"), and even for a former bike shop guy, those get confusing. Unless you are a pro racer, the differences in spindle stiffness are all but undetectable. Square-taper spindles (like the one YankeeTarheel is showing) are getting harder to find online.

Yeah, they all look like giant Torx wrenches, which are probably stronger than square-taper, although I've never had a problem with one, only with the old cotter-type cranks--especially on the unicycle I got at 15. Finally had the damn things welded on and STILL the welds broke!

New versions of this bike sell for about $400 so racer quality isn't worth it.