Old Guy Show full post »
oleritter
dangle wrote:


I know, I just can't get past this point on a 15lb road bike with skinny tires. It would be so hard to keep it upright moving that slow. Even 80rpm with that low gear is still ~4.5mph and that's pretty floppy on a road bike.


This is exactly what I've been thinking.  It's getting so close to walking speed, why not get off and walk?


I Build Wheels @millcitycycle

https://www.facebook.com/millcitycycle/
Quote 0 0
Skldmark
With 30t chainring and 40t cog in back you set off on a 12 mile climb. You've already shot your wad in the big ring, so it's gonna be a steady 60rpm(being generous) to the top of the climb. It's now 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon. What time will it be when Old Guy reaches the top?
Quote 1 0
NoCoGreg
oleritter wrote:

This is exactly what I've been thinking.  It's getting so close to walking speed, why not get off and walk?


Also, as one goes to lower and lower gears it become more difficult to change position between sitting and standing.  When climbing long steep gravel/dirt roads there are times where it is critical to maintain sufficient speed and momentum otherwise even relatively small bumps and rocks will stop the bike...  At which point walking is the only option. 

On paved roads this isn't a problem, so long as one can maintain a steady position it's possible to continue climbing.  After all, it's much easier to learn to do a track stand when the bike is pointed uphill than downhill.  [biggrin]


Quote 0 0
frontrangegravel
Hello everyone here. This is your warning. This discussion is getting off topic and starting to go sideways. If anyone starts getting nasty, they'll be gone. Time to update and pin the guidelines I guess. I'm not going to have patience with this. The forum has been good so far with a lot of great discussion and information. This thread has some good info as well. I don't want it turning sour. 

Thanks,
Ben
Quote 0 0
Skldmark
Skldmark wrote:
With 30t chainring and 40t cog in back you set off on a 12 mile climb. You've already shot your wad in the big ring, so it's gonna be a steady 60rpm(being generous) to the top of the climb. It's now 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon. What time will it be when Old Guy reaches the top?

------------
ANSWER: 7:22pm (3.57mph/average speed) 3 hours 22 min. ride time
--- (no Einsteinian equations were utilized nor necessary in determining these results)
Quote 0 0
Old Guy
Skldmark wrote:
------------ ANSWER: 7:22pm (3.57mph/average speed) 3 hours 22 min. ride time --- (no Einsteinian equations were utilized nor necessary in determining these results)


LOL......4:00 PM?.... "IF".....I am lucky.
Hey.....just as long as I make it, that is all that matters.
Having said that, I think that you guys are taking it to the extreme.
As I was saying before, just because I have the gears, does not mean, that I am going to be using them all.
Yes.....I could see at times, slipping into the 40 at times......but......there are some Flats to rest up in....while climbing our Local Ski Hills.
I am just looking to have a selection of gears to grab, if needed, as opposed to Blowing Up, from not having them at all.
All our riding is done on Paved Roads, so Balance is never going to be an issue.
There is one Famous climb on the Pro Tour in Spain, where the Riders are climbing up the steeps , slower than the people are able to walk up it.
The Motorcycles can not get up it,  and neither can the cars, due to it being that Steep.
So your concerns, about ever going too Slow....up a Steep Hill,  on a Road Bike, seems unwarranted.
On that note, there are many races on the Tour, where a lot of the riders actually will get Off their bikes, and Walk up the Steeper sections.
If Pro's are doing that.....then....I am sure, that any Recreational Rider, could be expected to do the same and more often if needed.
Riding is what it is all about.
Speed.....to complete any climb or any ride, should never ever enter, into the equation.
If someone does it in an Hour or they do it in 5 Hours.......why would it matter, and who really cares?
As long as people are out there on their Bikes ...and Riding.....that is all, that should ever matter.
I thought that the Moderator ...warned "everyone" to be Nice?
I'm not 20 or 30 or even 40 years old any more...if it takes me 5 Hours to do a climb....so be it.
Slow and steady wins the Race.

 


Quote 0 0
Skldmark
Having more gear-range than you or your derailleurs can manage is counterproductive. Having gears you can't find or engage precisely when you require them is not only not useful but can cause trouble. Like the chain skipping at the wrong time or falling off and causing grief. So balance the trade-off of gear-range vs. quick, clean, precise gearing and shifting. I assure you all of this gear "stuff" has been thought of before.
Quote 0 0
NoCoGreg
Skldmark wrote:
Having more gear-range than you or your derailleurs can manage is counterproductive. Having gears you can't find or engage precisely when you require them is not only not useful but can cause trouble. Like the chain skipping at the wrong time or falling off and causing grief. So balance the trade-off of gear-range vs. quick, clean, precise gearing and shifting. I assure you all of this gear "stuff" has been thought of before.

Ahhhh but you're speaking from experience.  It's like the previous posts pointing out the challenges of maintaining control of the bicycle at very slow speeds.
Quote 0 0
Zurichman
Yeah sorry that I went so strong on this thread and moe53 is right in that this doesn't belong on this thread. I just miss having a chance to buy Lemond bikes the rest of my life unless I buy used off Ebay/Craiglist etc.

Zman
If it was easy it wouldn't be a memory. You just hope you don't have all your memories in the same ride. been there dun that Zman
Quote 1 0
frontrangegravel
@Zurichman, no worries. Opinions are good, but trying to keep on topic. It's a fine line with forums. I don't want this to descend into a cesspool of ripping people and trolling. Disagreement is good though. But, yeah, I need to try to keep things on the up and up for everyone.
Quote 0 0
NoCoGreg
Zurichman wrote:
... I just miss having a chance to buy Lemond bikes the rest of my life unless I buy used off Ebay/Craiglist etc.
Zman


But on the positive side I've seen several very inexpensively priced Lemonds on CL.  Almost picked up an immaculate '02 Maillot Jaune for $300 but alas the tire clearance wasn't what I wanted so I let her go to someone else.  Definitely beautiful bikes!

Have you seen his new bicycles?  Here's a Businesswire.com article from 2016...
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160829006000/en/Tour-de-France-Champion-Greg-LeMond-Signs

In addition to the carbon race bikes he also had some tig welded Reynolds 853 frames coming out.

Greg

Quote 0 0
dangle
drwelby wrote:
Sorry, that's wrong. BB90, BB86, and BSA external cups all have the bearings in the same place. Trek is a big OEM but they're not getting Shimano and Sram to make them slightly wider cranks. Check the Problem Solvers bottom bracket compatibility chart PDF. There are teeny bearings that let you run 30mm spindles in BB86 shells but they have terrible durability problems. The bearings are just too small for the loads.


To the first point about bearings in the same place, that's not true. It took me forever to respond because I didn't have anything not attached to a bike to take a picture of. A 30mm axle won't fit in a BB90 for TWO different reasons (so we were both right and wrong at the same time). BB90 bearings sit a few mm wider than the specs for BB386. There's a lot of wiggle room with BSA cups because some applications have spacers between them and the frame, sometimes spacers on the crank spindle, and possibly even a mix of the two.

The bearings that would be needed to fit a 30mm spindle into the BB90 shell would be so small that the resistance and durability would be ridiculous, but a 386 axle wouldn't allow the crank arm to thread fully as the spindle isn't as long as BB90 requires. A Shimano (and GXP) axle are longer than a BB386 axle. They measure closer to 90-92mm of visible spindle with both arms attached. There's a bit of wiggle room because of the plastic pre-load adjuster on the Shimano crank to take up any play. Shimano and SRAM aren't making wider cranks for Trek, their (24mm spindle) cranks are already long enough. The FSA MegaEXO cranks were roughly the same specs as the Shimano cranks, but they are really pushing on 30mm crank spindles now. That's starting to get even more confusing though since they now make a "BB392EVO" in addition to their BB386EVO cranks. SRAM makes BB386 axles too, but Shimano refuses to do anything with 30mm. Which also means they don't make any adapter to fit a Shimano crank in anything designed for a 30mm crank spindle/axle. FSA picks up the slack there.

Anyhow, if you buy a bike with a true BB386EVO bottom bracket that comes from the factory with a Shimano crank, there's a reducer/spacer thing and usually another or spacer or two snuck in there as well. I believe the most common one is the FSA one below.
[megaexo_carbon_crank_%c3_24mm_spindle_to_bb386_frame]
It reduces the ID from 30mm to 24mm. It's also ~2mm thick and acts as a spacer between the bearing's dust shield and the cranks. Your 'bearing stance' goes from ~86mm to ~90mm if you include the reducer. My BH Ultralight came with another spacer between the bearing and reducer which bumped it out slightly more to make the Shimano crank a perfect fit.
2017-06-10 19.02.45.jpg 

I haven't used the smaller bearings to run a 30mm crank in a BB86 frame, so no comments there.
Quote 0 0