Is it really going to damage a bike to wash it with a hose? I was chatting to the guys at my LBS the other day about how they get my bike so clean when I take it in for a service. They said they use compressed air to clean it.

They warned I shouldn't use any high pressure water because it can get into the sealed bearings and cause damage. I also noted on the user manual for Campag cranks (right at the end) that you should "Never spray your bicycle with water under pressure".

How much of an issue is this? Rinsing the bike with the hose is such a convenient way to wash off loose grit and then the soap after washing. How do you clean your bikes?

Yes, pressurized water can damage your bicycle, specifically by washing the grease out of bearing areas. Note, this is pressurized water.

Using a garden hose without a sprayer is unlikely to do damage. Using a garden hose with a shower type sprayer is unlikely to cause damage. Low pressure, so that it doesn't break the seals, is the point. (I avoid the risk, anyway, because I can't afford to be wrong, and how much pressure is OK depends on the strength of the seals on your particular bike.)

A car wash, or any other pressure washer, is pretty much guaranteed to do damage.

Washing by hand, with a bucket, a car wash brush, a toothbrush or gear brush, and some non-detergent based soap is the safest way, and with a little practice and preparation, can be done in half an hour.

Some detergent based soaps react to aluminum, and can cause serious damage to an aluminum frame or parts over time. Make sure you use an aluminum safe soap.

You can make things easier by using a repair stand to hold the bike, and removing some parts, if you have the tools and knowledge, but that's a bonus.

Other than that, it's just elbow grease.

Cleaning a bike with high pressure water is relatively tame and only mildly morally wrong if you really do not know what you are doing.

A lot more fun can be had with a diesel powered steam cleaner where the water-cleaning-solution-mix comes out at a toasty 150 degrees centigrade and the 'wand' has to be held with both hands due to the 'recoil'.

Pass the 'wand' over the three main tubes of a bicycle and you can sometimes pull off the stickers in one smooth motion. Stick a 1980's Peugeot racing bike in the way of the 'wand' and you can get down to bare steel. (Temperature dial has to be adjusted for Peugeot and Halfords own-brand bikes).

Put the bike upside down and well supported so it does not get instantly blown over by the onslaught of water and point the 'wand' at the wheels, in next to no time they spin at a very fast rate and every speck of grease and grime gets to be washed away. A quick point at the hubs and they are in as-new appearance. The same goes for the chain, even the most encrusted chain gets to be denuded of all lubricants in seconds. Handlebar tape - same again, back to as new except for cuts and holes.

Most of the bikes I washed so environmentally-unfriendily were customer repairs or part-exchanges to be sold on as second hand bikes. A thorough inspection was given afterwards and areas needing oil/GT85 were treated accordingly. The oily-rag was used for the Allen-key bolts and other steel nuts where the chrome surface was likely to be damaged. A quick polish and the appearance was so much better than achievable by other means.

I did test-ride many of the bikes 'abused' by industrial cleaning methods and we also had customer feedback. On one or two occasions I did inadvertently get water into the bottom bracket or freewheel, this was not the problem though, it was dirt forced in that was the problem. I learned through trial and error not to assault such areas and to give the Peugeot models an easier time due to that water-soluble-paint problem they had. Not once did we ever get a customer complaint, people were always very pleased with getting their bikes back looking as good as new.

Would I put my own bike under the 'wand' of the steam cleaner? Most definitely, even my retro-Campagnolo road bike (that has no sealed bearings). The 150 degree water would heat the frame/components so that on a summer's day it would be dry in a matter of minutes with not a speck of dirt left behind. The air + water + steel combination needed for rust to bloom was therefore kept to the absolute minimum of time. My bikes did not rust prematurely or have mystery rattles from the freehub or bottom bracket area. As a consequence of having cleaned the bike so quickly and thoroughly I was able to spend more time re-lubing my bike than I might have had otherwise.

Had I only have had a bucket of soapy water and hose to clean my bike with I doubt I would have done such a good job, however, that is all I have now to clean my bike with. I use clothes washing powder for the soapy water and give the bearing areas a very wide berth. Same with the hose, I don't point it at the hubs or bottom bracket. I find that riding the bike is a good way to dry it off, plus sticking it under that unshielded nuclear fusion reactor that passes overhead 93 million miles away on most days.

The fact of the matter is that anything you use to wash your bike with can push dirt into the bearings. But using water under pressure is not necessarily worse than using the sort of baby's toothbrush that archaeologists use to clean up a Sumerian tablet. The reason being that a jet of water will take the path of least resistance. That isn't necessarily straight into the bearings for there is a rubber seal in the way.

From a manufacturer's perspective with parts that come back under warranty, you obviously do not want to encourage 'idiots with steam cleaners' or to recommend any type of pressure washing. However, from my practical experience with hundreds of bicycles I know that pressure washing is best done all the way with 150 degrees hot water and that in some cases you can inadvertently wash the grease out of bearings. The risk is definitely worth taking, even on your own bike.

P.S. I do take my bike to the local car wash these days and let the guys there clean up my bike. I don't know what chemical they use in their bucket of soapy water but it seems to work wonders on my alloy wheels. Last time I had to force them to take my money, the time before they wanted all of £2. If you have a garage nearby and have a sense of adventure/humour I recommend giving the car-wash guys a go.


Is it possible to put a chain on without removing the rear wheel? I have a bike with a single chainring up front and an internal hub and a coaster brake in the rear. (For those unfamiliar with this setup, it's essentially like having a single-speed bike in that the chain is exactly as long as need be, and tension on the chain is adjusted by moving the rear wheel in the rear dropouts before tightening it.)

My preferred procedure for cleaning the drivetrain is to completely remove the chain. The obvious way to do this would be to loosen the rear wheel in the rear fork and take the chain off. (Remember, no rear deraileur and no chain tensioner.) However, rear wheel placement with an internal hub can be tricky.

If I were to install a chain with a master link,  would I be able to remove the chain without loosening the rear wheel, or would the tension on the chain make this operation difficult?

It depends on the style of master link and how much chain tension is in your setup.  An SRAM power link needs about 1-2mm of chain slack to unhook the link.  If you can find this amount of slack, it should work with most types of master link.  If your chain doesn't have 2mm of play, but isn't too tight, a master link that snaps off the side (like the first one pictured in the terminology index) should work.

The tighter your chain, the harder this is going to be to snap back together.  Depends if you would prefer fiddling with a master link on a tight chain versus the re-aligning the rear hub.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't just take the wheel off? The only case I've heard of people doing this is when they want to slam their rear wheel as far forward as possible. So far that the only way they can get the rear wheel off is to break the chain.

oh....re-read your question...didn't see that you're taking the chain completely off the frame. As long as you get some slack by loosening the rear wheel it should be no problem to pop the chain off/on with the wheel still on there. However, it'll probably be easier (more slack) if you take the wheel off.


Looking for Techniques for Riding Uphill on a Single Speed I commute on a Single Speed (SS) bike about 13mi round trip. Going home is not a problem as the gradients are low and I can climb them. However, going in to work the gradients are much steeper and I have a hard time climbing them. I usually need to stop and walk a bit. I am looking for any pointers on climbing hills on an SS. Thanks

Edit: I am not really looking for ways to avoid hurting myself, I am young and fit so that isn't my biggest concern. I am more concerned with making my pedaling technique more efficient, especially for hill climbs. Another point I should mention is that I am using clipless pedals to increase my power output.

Verdict: I added this because I can only choose one best answer. I think that @GuyZee best addressed my question about technique, but @Steven offered a great deal of help with regards to getting a better mechanical advantage. Thanks to both of you for providing great answers.

I ride both SS/FG and approach climbing hills much of the same way I would if I were on a geared bike with one very big exception...MOMENTUM. When on a heavily geared SS/FG I gain as much speed as possible going into the hill and push hard to maintain it throughout the climb.

Basic climbing tips:

Slide back on saddle and drive heels through the bottom of the pedal stroke
If you need to stand, do so while minimizing body sway and unnecessary counterproductive upper body motion
Get into a rhythm - climb at your own pace
Stay upright to keep lungs operating at full capacity
Pull handlebars into your thighs as you drive pedals forward

Hope this helps!

use single speed for high end and just rely upon your grip on handle and pedals.Doing so u can increase the inertia of your mtb so that it moves way along with u. Secondly,if u use fenders in rain,please remove them if not required.That's all i can say.


Safety check for a used bike I'm a poor student and I bought a used bike. I don't have experience with bikes and I want to make sure that the bike is safe for me because actually I found the bike in a garbage container and the owner offered to sell it for 15 euros. Now I really need to be sure that it's safe!

I saw some videos on youtube to understand what gears are and so on and I found that the gears are working and the chain is switching correctly between the chainrings and the cogs. I also checked the breaks handles and I saw that the bike stops correctly when I press them. The rear breaks need a little adjustment to better stop the back tire.

The only thing I did so far is cleaning the bike. Actually I'm so happy about it that I go outside every few minutes just to look at it. I never had a bike when I was a kid but I know how to ride them :). But anyway back to subject!

Here are what I'm planning to do:

0- One of the breaks handles are not so tight, so it is safe to leave it?

1- Remove the rust from the chainrings, cogs, screwdrivers and other parts. (actually i have no idea how to do that and no idea how to do that in a cheap way, so I posted a question Restoring the original color of metal and chainrings)

2- Change entirely all the cables in the bike because I found them rusty.

3- The tires are completely damaged and I need to fully buy new ones. This is the most expensive thing ever to me since I realized I need to spend 25 euros on that.

So that is basically what I thought of for safety check but I wonder if there are other stuff I need to check or buy/change.

Here are some pics for my bike:

More pictures here: Painting a bike with minimum cost

By far the most reliable way is a visit to the Local Bike shop, find a smaller one with lots of kids bikes and entry level bikes (They know about tight bidgets). It should take less than 5 minutes for them to give you a quick assessment of what needs to be done to make it safe, and most will happily do the assessment for free (especially given they will get a sales of at least 2 tires and tubes)

Tires and tubes - replace.

Wheels - remove from bike and check bearings, adjust if required. If noisy not really a safety issue, but if too loose it is. Check rims for wear from brake pads and big dents. Check spokes for tightness. Check where spokes go into rim for cracks. Ensure the QR levers are tight (They should leave a dent in your palm when you press down to do them up). Check wheels to ensure they are true (Wobble from side to side or up and down) - only a safety problem if the brakes cannot be adjusted tight enough.

Brakes - Adjust so they are tight. Check pads for wear. Lube cables and replace if budget allows. Frayed rear brake is not a safety issue unless the tension side is frayed.

Seat - check seat post is tight and seat bolted on to seat post.

Steering / Handlebars - are all attachements tight (stem, handbars, brake levers and shifters). Do the handles bars turn freely and without play in the head.

Bottom bracket/Pedels - do they spin freely and smoothly without play. Listen for creeks and grinding noises. Look for cracks and damage to the cranks.

Frame - look for visible cracks - its steel so sudden failure is not likely. Go for a ride and jump up and down a few times, listen... Pick the bike up and drop it onto its wheels from about 300mm. Listen to the bike for rattles, squeaks etc. Some are normal, but it can give away a lot.

Rear derailuer and shifters - not really a safety issue unless the chain jumps off and jams. , but do read up how to tune it. Make sure the chain stays on the cogs.

It's a very inexpensive department store bike. I wouldn't put too much money into it except for a good lock. Even new tires would cost half as much as it's worth.

The nice thing about it is that most bike thieves will also recognize it for what it is and won't steal it, if you have a halfway decent U lock on it.


Is it possible to do 50 km distance without any previous training? I'm considering to do a 50-55 km distance on a mixed surface. Mostly asphalt and gravel, maybe even a little bit of sand. Haven't done any training or exercise, basically been sitting at home all day, everyday for years. Don't know why but suddenly had an urge to go on a journey.

My bicycle is quite old, 12 or so years, not in a great condition either but nothing is falling off so far. That wouldn't be my concern though, my concern is will my legs be able to cycle for 50 km in one go without any previous leg training. Is it advisable for me to do this? Will my legs be stiff after the first 10 km? What do you guys think?

Edit  I'm 24. Last year I tried a 30 km distance, my legs were gone after 20 and I had to step off my bicycle and walk a bit, as it seemed easier than cycling. That was my only real exercise I've done in a couple of years.

I really have all day and can take as many rests as I want. I'd say I have a solid 8 hours. Is it doable if I go on a gear that doesn't require a lot of push?

A fit person can do 50km without too much difficulty, though they'll probably be sore from the effort if they don't cycle much, just because cycling uses different muscles to, say, running.  It wouldn't be easy, but it wouldn't be too hard.

It sounds like you're not very fit. If you were determined, you could probably make it around 50km but I doubt it would be enjoyable at all.  I suggest that you start with shorter distances. Try riding 10km and see how that feels. Once you can ride 20-25km fairly comfortably, doing 50km will be a nice challenge: not easy but an achievable goal that you can look back on with pride.  Note that gravel and especially sand are more work to ride on than the equivalent distance on the road.

Since your bike's not been used for a while, you should get a bike shop to check it over. Depending on how much it was used and how it's been stored, it might need things like a new chain, new cables and new brake blocks. Possibly new tyres if they're in bad shape.

If you're going far from home, make sure you know how to repair a puncture (bring a spare inner tube so you don't have to use patches unless you puncture twice) and that you have a way of getting back if everything goes wrong.  Rather than cycling to somewhere 25km away and then coming back, consider arranging your ride as more of a circle so there's a shorter route home if things don't go well.

Make sure you bring water and snacks with you, since your first 50km will probably take at least three hours.

Yes, I'm 60 and just did 50km quite easily in 2 hours on an old CX bike. I'm not an athlete, just a fat 60 year old guy.


What was the rationale for reverse brake levers? The Porteur style of bicycle popular by newspaper delivery men in France in the 1940s-1960s had reverse brake levers, seen here in this diagram from an article from Bicycle Quarterly (the photo jpeg is titled rebourherseville1960.jpg):

A bunch of manufacturers including Dia-compe used to sell brake levers that were reversed and there are also some contemporary reproductions:

Was this just purely for style reasons? I can't think of many advantages of a reverse brake lever (except style) and can think of major disadvantages (it will hook or catch on things as you move forward). What were the rationale for having brake levers like this originally?

Period sources preferred.

If you look at drawings of old bikes, both types of brake configurations are depicted. This supports the idea that it was merely a design choice with no significant pros and cons over other configurations other than aesthetics. I suggest that it just so happens that builders in the place and time period you cited used this design because it was fashionable.

There is very limited risk here for "catching" unless the rider is literally going through shrubs (and in that situation, catching would be the least concern). Also, bizarre freak-accidents aside, no one is going to be "speared" by a reverse brake handle. Think about what would actually have to occur for that to happen.

These lever style are mainly used in triathlon bicycles because of their smaller profile and positioning on aero-bars. You can read more about the evolutions of these levers here: http://university.tri-sports.com/2010/08/11/stop-triathlon-bike-brake-levers/


Why does my bike make a noise when I pedal hard? When I pedal forcing a little with my right leg, the bike makes a noise that I don't know how to describe. I'll try to do it. It's like:

a short "ting"
a tiny bell
if a small rock hits the down tube

I don't know what is causing this noise, but I think that it could be any of this things:

pedal
crank arm/pedal connection
crankset

I think the material of all these things is alluminium.

I don't feel anything (like a bad shifted chain) when I hear the noise.

It happens when there is movement and when there is NO movement (I use the brake, so the bike doesn'e move, stand using all weight on right pedal, and it makes the noise)

The pedals could be in any position, It is not in a particular position. Just pressing the right pedal.

Has someone else has this "problem"? Any ideas of where this comes from?

Update:
Yesterday I took out the chain and stood on the right pedal, and made the noise. Then is not the chain, nor the transmission system.

I put oil in the pedal axis, but had no luck. Also tried to loose the pedal, but the juncture point is too tight, and I couldn't.

Today I will try to use oil in the bottom bracket.

Update: here is a link to info on the bike http://www.diamondback.com/2012-sorrento maybe it helps to know the model of all the components.

Could be any number of things.  The first thing to check (because ignoring it can rapidly cause expensive damage) is that the crank arms are tight.  Even if they don't seem loose it doesn't hurt to put a wrench on the fixing bolts and torque them a bit.  (If one moves more than a small amount, get a torque wrench and do them up right.)  Likewise with the pedals.

You can also get noise from a cartridge BB if the cups are not totally tight. No big emergency here, but you need to tighten them to see if that's the problem.

Spokes can make a "ting" sound, especially if the wheel is relatively new.  Unless there are loose spokes, though, there's not much you can do about this and it will usually go away on its own after the wheel breaks in.

It's unlikely to be that the BB needs lube, unless it's been sorely neglected for years (or submerged in Sandy's tidal waters).

If the bike is relatively new (a few months old), you should take it back to the shop where you bought it and ask for a "tuneup" where they would tighten the crank arms, adjust the brakes and shifters, and true up the wheels.  On a new bike they should do this for free or for a nominal sum.

If the bike's older a tuneup won't hurt, but expect to pay more.

My opinion is to make sure your bearings are still okay and that you are not missing any.
If not put grease in the area of the bearing. Put the cranks back on and tighten it as much as you can.


At what speed does Aerodynamics of a bike come into play? Is a more aero bike more efficient than less aero bike at 10mph? At what speed does Aerodynamics affect your speed significantly.

update: "The question is dealing with the minimum speed that a cyclist will notice the effects of a modern aero frame vs a non-aero frame. via @user"

As long as you are moving through the air, aerodynamic drag will account for some portion of total drag. Here is a plot that shows the relative contribution of aerodynamic drag vs. rolling drag on total drag for a rider at constant speed on a flat surface with the given CdA (drag area) and Crr (coefficient of rolling resistance). There is no magic threshold speed at which aerodynamic drag suddenly appears. Whether the amount of drag is important or significant to you will depend on your power and riding goal, but for this example roughly 25% of total power will be consumed by aerodynamic drag at about 10 km/h (or about 6 mph).

In my experience it is begin at about 30 kmh and at like 50 kmh you really feel how the wind is hitting you in the face I guess faster you goes stronger the effect is. But it is important at any speed really, if its windy and you have loose clothes they act like a sail.

aero bike for like 10mph ? you can walk faster I guess it will have less air resistance that regular bike but just in theory maybe you couldn`t even measure it.


Lube substitutes for Phil Wood lubricant I need lube for my new Schwinn Meridian Adult Tricycle that I received as a belated Christmas present. The chain/axle mechanism is making a noise. It may not have ever been lubed! Can I substitute olive oil, castor oil, or peach kernel oil until I can order Phil Wood lubricant or some other appropriate lube?

The listed oils are what I have on hand. I live in a small town where these kinds of things are often not available locally.

Vegetable oils such as "olive oil, castor oil, or peach kernel oil" are entirely inappropriate for lubricating anything except your salad and steak (or in the case of castor oil, your digestive system).

The problem is that vegetable oils quickly oxidize and get gummy. Think about the residue that accumulates on the bottom and around the cap of a salad oil dispenser. That gummy stuff accumulates dirt and grime and accelerates wear.

The best thing to do is to go to your local auto parts store or hardware store and ask for a good teflon based dry (chain) lube (for the chain), motor oil, or regular auto grease (for the axle). Some people also swear by chainsaw bar oil for bike chains (I find it's kinda sticky and prefer dry lubes, but you might be a rainy area). Here are some lubes that a regular auto/hardware store would have that would suffice:

p.s. There's nothing super special about Phil's -- it's just a good general purpose oil. I actually don't like it, as it is a grit magnet but it has its followers.

FINALLY: Note that your trike is pretty much (sad to say) a Walmart BSO. In many cases, these are very poorly constructed and assembled - so your axle/chain noise may also come from it being poorly constructed and assembled rather than a simple lack of lubrication. If lubing it doesn't work, you may want to try to take it in to a real bike shop for an overhaul -- and because of its construction, it may in fact (even with professional assistance) be impossible to tune to the point where it operates without noise/friction.

Insofar as this is a question about what makes a good substitute for Phil Wood Tenacious Oil when you want such an oil (thick, gooey, extremely high viscosity, very high washout resistance, good in many kinds of freehubs/freewheels, prone to being a total mess on chains if not applied very judiciously) but don't have Phil on hand, there are a couple options I know of.

-Finish Line Wet (formerly Cross Country) is just about the only similar product within the bike industry. It's the same approximate genre but not quite as stringy-gooey.

-Chainsaw bar oil is a similar oil that can be found many places. Phil Wood claims their oil has a lot of additives that distinguish it from generic bar oil, and this is a topic of perennial internet debate.


Identify this shaft driven bike for me I can't identify the manufacturer nor the year it was produced.

It has a serial number on the frame, just above the front fork, something like 93042829 or so what (peculiarity: the numbers are engraved head down).

So, can anybody help me, please?

Looking at the integrated shaft and the style of bike it could be from Arcade. I can't see the bike in their current catalogue, but that's hardly surprising. Maybe if you contacted them directly they could help you out.

This is the key part of the only shaft drive bike in their 2016 range:

I think this Chainless drive aka "Sussex Drive" I came across a brand or model called Dynamic which had the same odd bend in the top tube.

Review: Dynamic “Crosstown 7” Shaft-Drive Bicycle


Should spoke tension be measured before or after adding a tube and tire? I built my first set of wheels and measured the spoke tension when I finished. They were all uniformly tense at about 100kg of force.

Once I put the tire on, that measurement went down a little, to about 90 kg -- makes sense, I guess: the tube and tire must compress the wheel.

But the drop made me wonder if the measurement to pay attention to is before or after the tire is added.

Jobst Brandt's definitive text "The Bicycle Wheel" has this to say on spoke tensioning:

With tensioned wires as spokes, the wheel can support loads only to the point where its spokes become loose. At this point the wheel will collapse. Therefore, for greatest strength, spokes must be as tight as the rim permits.  Structurally the
rim supports spoke tension as an arch that is compressed by the inward force of the spokes. The load limit for most rims is far less than what the spokes could deliver if they were tightened to their breaking point. So in a conventional wheel, it is the rim that limits wheel strength, not the spokes. A rim can be subjected to spoke tension near its elastic limit because, during use, almost no net tension increase occurs.
In practice, however, spokes should be slightly looser than the maximum the rim can sustain, because at maximum tension, failure of a single spoke can severely deform the rim.

Given that strategy you should not tension the wheel based on any additional compression from the tire and tube, since getting a flat could result in rim deformation or damage.

"The Bicycle Wheel" provides the equation for the decrease in spoke tension under tire constriction, if you're curious.  His measurements on a 36-spoke wheel with spokes at roughly 100kgf and a 25mm tire with 45-degree cord at 115psi give a reduction of total wheel compression from about 5700N to about 5300N.

In practice you should verify that your spokes decreased in tension evenly; if they didn't you should ensure that you properly stress relieve the spokes and retension them.


How to choose a bicycle seat I'll need a new saddle for my bike soon. I use it mainly for short commutes (30 minutes). About once a year I go touring for a few days, up 8 hours in the saddle.

My current saddle just came with the bike. I see there are a lot of different saddle types available now, from the ultra thin, to the wide & comfy to the downright fruity.I associate the thin saddles with racers, but thats the limit of my knowledge.

When choosing a new saddle, should I choose based on my body frame or my cycling type (i.e. get one for short commutes, one for touring)?

Choosing a saddle that fits you is very important. The wrong saddle can lead to numbness and pain in the crotch area, and in the long run serious health issues. The right saddle for you should fit comfortably regardless of what type of riding you do and will depend mainly on the width of your pelvic. Ideally you should get a professional fit. If one is not available to you, you should try a few saddles of different sizes to determine what fits you before you purchase.

In case you like inovations, what about something redefined like this ?
https://www.moonsaddle.com/


How do I separate hydraulic disc brake pads after pulling the brake while the wheel is off? I take the front wheel off my mountain bike to get it in my car. When I get it out and try to put the front wheel back on, the space between the brake pads isn't wide enough for the rotor. Whoops! I must have pulled the lever on my hydraulic brakes.

How can I separate the the pads without damaging them?

As mentioned try a blunt bladed instrument (A large flat blade screwdriver will do) to pry the pads back in. Just put the screwdriver between the pads and lever the pads apart evenly!
Just be carful though as sometimes the pistons that push the pads out can come out too far resulting in the pistons being slighly out of line, however if the pads have plenty of material left on them you should be fine to just lever them back in with the screwdriver, ther will be some resistance as you will also be pushing against the pistons and fluid pressure.

Not as practical as some of the other solutions, but if you know a car guy, they've probably got brake pad spreaders laying around.  You should be able to get an edge or corner far enough in to use them.


How to improve my performance on a commute? I commute to work on a Trek 7100e hybrid bike. It's about 15 miles (24km) each way, along flattish suburban roads and a (fairly smooth) canal towpath. It takes me about an hour. Due to the distance (and extra time compared to driving), I only do this about once a week. I'm a medium-height, slightly built guy, reasonable fitness level. What is the best way to improve my speed and reduce my time, without spending much money?

Pedals - I don't really want to go clipless due to the expense, but I'd consider it if it's the best way. Are toe clips and straps likely to make much difference?
Reducing 'luggage weight'. My standard pack for work is a change of clothes and some basic bike maintenance stuff (tube, pump, tools, and a cable lock). It's currently in a double pannier that's probably overkill. Should I consider going to a rack trunk, a handlebar bag (no rack required), or something else? I don't like cycling that far with a backpack.
Tyres - change to slicks? Or narrower tyres? Would that mean I'd need to change the wheels too?
I'd assumed (and read somewhere here) that changing to drop handlebars would be more trouble than it's worth.
Something I haven't thought of?

EDIT - just a quick update. A work colleague had some spare LOOK clipless pedals and shoes, so I gave them a try. And I'm a convert! I see a definite improvement in performance, especially in acceleration - I can get up to speed a lot quicker than I could before. Thanks to everyone who answered. I'll probably try skinnier tyres too, but not until I actually need to change them.

EDIT three years on. I upgraded to a road bike (Pinnacle Dolomite 4, 2016) and that's been the biggest improvement in speed. I still have a rack on the back (just a rack top bag now, no panniers), clipless pedals, and 25mm tyres inflated to 100psi. I usually try to leave some clothes in work to reduce weight. Record time is now 51 minutes!

I posted a comment

  Slick tires would make a difference, if you're not using them. Maintaining 24 kph on a hybrid that you ride one day a week is pretty good. The next two increments after slick tires would be clipless pedals, riding more frequently, and then a road bike.

... but decided a full answer was needed.

Given that the trip is 24 km, doing it in 60 minutes is 24 kph. Not bad for a lightly built guy riding a hybrid that is reported to be heavy, one day per week. By my figures, you're putting about 150 watts into the pedals to do that. This assumes you're using wide, non-slick tires.

Switching to thinner, slick road tires would gain you 2 kph for the same effort, possibly 3 kph. That gets you there 5 minutes quicker.

But to put 150 watts into the pedals, you have to produce more, because without your feet being clipped in, they will slide a little, and you have to use energy to keep them in place. Lets guess that's 10% of your effort - 15 watts. So you're really producing 165 watts. That translates to about 1 kph faster if you were clipped in. But as the late night TV ads say, but wait there's more. With your feet clipped in, you can produce more power because you can pull the pedals up as well as push down. How much more? The experts argue. Some claim 15%, others 40%. If it's 15%, that's another 24 watts (15% of 165). So after your aerobic system has adapted to delivering that much extra oxygen, you'll be up to about 29 kph. But I think you'd need to be riding three times a week to develop that sustained pace.

Extra training can take you faster, if you are riding regularly. How much is up to your innate abilities and dedication.

And how to go even faster? A road bike. For the same power that drives you at 29 kph on the hybrid, you'll go at 31 kph on a road bike, getting you there in 47 minutes.

So, you said you didn't want to spend much money. I'm arguing that clipless pedals will give you good return. They also support you as you work to increase your strength and fitness.

You're not going to save much time getting fit or buying a new bike. 15 miles will take 45 minutes (20 mph) to an hour (15 mph). If you are a Cat 1 Pro rider, you might be able to make it in 35 minutes, drenched in sweat.


What to get? How do I know whether what I'm looking at is a BSO? (Bicycle Shaped Object); what should I do about the multiple chainrings? I'm about to get a ridiculously cheap bike (~$200) sometime soon and have limited my options to two bikes.
One is the BTwin Riverside 120, which people here in India who have put up reviews don't seem very happy about..
https://www.decathlon.in/p/8389398/bikes/hybrid-cycle-riverside-120-grey-yellow
Another one is Mach City Munich 21 speed.
https://machcity.com/munich-21-speed/
The reviews I've read about it are great everywhere I've read them on the internet, and the bike store guy also said that it's a great bike (he's trusted). However, since both are different brands, he couldn't draw out a comparison of which one would be better..
Anyone who can help? It'd be primarily ridden on bad Indian roads (image attached for reference, that's not how all parts of the road are, but significant enough to be considered).
Both have 700×35c stock tyres and can accommodate 38c tyres as well.
If I choose to buy a Mach City Munich 21 speed, I'd also like to know if I should simply remove two chainrings of three (if they're detachable, which I am yet to find out) to help "ease" my riding? It'd be mostly ridden on flat terrain with maybe a 50m 5-6% climb, so I'm not sure, but I don't really think I have any practical use of three chainrings.. By ease, I mean I want to eliminate the risk of putting the chains through a lot of stress and risking the chain falling off every now and then while also causing more wear and tear to the parts than is supposed to happen. I happen to be a student who doesn't really want to go to a bike repair shop all the time, so I'd try maintaining it myself, I've obtained resources for the same in a previous question of mine, thanks to the community here.. If the suggestions still remain to keep the triple chainrings, how to I "properly" shift gears? Is there any guide for the same?
Since I'm buying a rather "expensive" bike for the first time, what else should I be getting with the bike? I've currently understood that I should be getting a helmet, a good quality lock, mud-guards that cover the whole wheel (we actually have a monsoon season), a bottle stand, and a bell. I won't be buying lights because I am not thinking about riding in the dark. I want the bike to last as long as it can, so should I also get a chainstay protector? Anything else that I should be getting?
How do I know something is a BSO (Bicycle Shaped Object)? I also want to know whether any of them are a BSO? I don't even clearly understand what BSO means, given the fact that I don't have a "proper" bicycling experience (I've only ever ridden a ~$60-70 ss bike as of yet).. Are BSOs bad to have?
I've read various questions related to BSOs here but none seemed to answer my query.. I may have missed out on a relevant one though, but I tried not to.

That Munich "21-speed" is really a 7-speed. It doesn't have a triple chainring or front derailleur (and doesn't seem to have a planetary-gear rear hub). Not sure why they call it that.
Both bikes seem pretty comparable. Decathlon is well-known in Europe as selling cheap but decent products. I've never heard of Mach City. If a brand's reputation is worth anything, that's something to consider.
One of the hallmarks of terrible BSOs that I've seen in the USA is thin stamped dropouts with tubes that are pinched onto them (see below). Neither the Mach City nor the Decathlon bike seem have this kind of construction. Another hallmark is the one-piece crank.

Both have 700×35c stock tyres and can accommodate 38c tyres as well.

Good! Although if your area has a real winter, it might be a bit limiting to fit studded tires in. Is this 35c / 38c tire clearance with or without mudguards?

If I choose to buy a Mach City Munich 21 speed, I'd also like to know if I should simply remove two chainrings of three (if they're detachable, which I am yet to find out) to help "ease" my riding?

No, no, a thousand times no, unless you're planning to retain the front derailleur and the shifter.
I have removed the small ring on a 26T/36T/48T crankset because it's just so ridiculously small for my uses. But it wouldn't be a crime to retain it.
If you have only one chainring, the chain is prone to drop off the chainring, requiring you to get your hands dirty in chain oil whenever that happens. It's a major annoyance.
There are three conditions that allow chain drop to be a non-issue:

If you have a front derailleur and the front shifter, the chain is unlikely to drop, and when it drops, you can operate the front derailleur to re-raise the chain on the chainring.

If you have a chainguide, the chain is very unlikely to drop. This may depend on the design of the chainguide: some are better than others and there is no standard for chainguides.

If you have a narrow/wide chainring (needs to have an even tooth count for it to be possible) AND a clutch-type rear derailleur (e.g. Shimano Shadow Plus) AND you have enabled the clutch by turning the switch on the rear derailleur, the chain is very unlikely to drop. Note that the clutch needs to be disabled to easily remove the wheel and re-enabled after installing the wheel. A clutch-type rear derailleur and a narrow/wide chainring will not help at all if the clutch is disabled, as I have found.

I've currently understood that I should be getting a helmet

It's debatable. Bicycle helmets are very weak, much weaker than motorcycle helmets. Due to the ventilation needs, they may not be strong enough to prevent brain injury. However, if you choose to select a helmet, run through this checklist:

The helmet should be an in-mold type, i.e. it should have a polycarbonate structural part that is molded in to the expanded polystyrene. Cheap helmets don't have the polycarbonate structural part molded in.

The helmet should have MIPS protection to prevent rotational brain injury. If it doesn't, you may be putting yourself in more danger when wearing a helmet than when not: a helmet increases the likelihood the head rotates violently when crashing, thus making it possible to get rotational injury.

The helmet should be Snell certified as only Snell certified helmets are dropped from 2.2 meter height. United States CPSC certified helmets are only dropped from 2.0 meter height and European EN-1078 certified helmets for (oh the horror!) 1.5 meter height. Note here that the actual height of your head does not matter, because the constant angular momentum puts more linear momentum in your head than in your toes. Thus, because of this constant angular momentum, your head is effectively dropped from 1.5 times of its actual height, when falling. So if your head is at 1.8 meter height, ideally the helmet would be tested by dropping from 2.7 meter height.

a good quality lock

Select the smallest quality U-lock you can find. Smaller locks are harder to get a hydraulic jack in, and harder to find space to run an angle grinder without damaging the bicycle itself. Smaller locks are lighterweight, too. For me, my choice is the Kryptonite Evolution Mini 5 lock.

mud-guards that cover the whole wheel (we actually have a monsoon season)

I recommend Hebie Wingee. They combine mudguards and 8+8kg capacity pannier rack to the same lightweight part, and are very sturdy. It's much lighterweight to mount the panniers directly to the rear mudguard. Note that when driving in the rain, the water spray from your front tire will still make your toes wet even if having a mudguard.

a bottle stand

Not necessary. I used to ride 50 km rides, and never once needed water. If the theoretically unlikely occurrence of needing water happens, you are usually less than 10 km away from a grocery store. So replace the bottle stand with a credit card, unless you are riding in very remote locations.

a bell

Yes! Don't forget lights and reflectors. German law requires (I follow the German law even though I'm not in Germany):

at least two red rear reflectors
at least one white front reflector -- I use two
tubular spoke reflectors in every spoke OR at least two yellow side reflectors per wheel OR a reflective strip around the tire -- I prefer the tubular spoke reflectors in every spoke
yellow pedal reflectors facing front and rear on both pedals
a non-blinking red light to the rear
a non-blinking white light to the front with a beam pattern that produces useful visibility and vision without blinding oncoming traffic

I won't be buying lights because I am not thinking about riding in the dark.

Note most jurisdictions make reflectors mandatory even if not riding in the dark, and there are jurisdictions that make lights mandatory even if not riding in the dark. Also, you may find yourself needing those nevertheless.

I want the bike to last as long as it can, so should I also get a chainstay protector?

Unnecessary. It is not a reasonable failure mode preventible with a chainstay protector for a chainstay to fail.

Anything else that I should be getting?

You need the most important things to bring on a ride. Plus a floor pump you keep at home, because it's a pain to inflate tires with a mini pump.
If you need to park the bicycle standing often, consider a kickstand.
If you transport stuff with the bike, consider quality panniers (Ortlieb is one good manufacturer).
A cyclocomputer would be useful but not a necessity.
Bicycling shoes, preferably of the types that attach to the pedals AND that you can walk in out of the bike. So this pretty much limits you to SPD shoes. They require SPD pedals; I prefer Shimano PD-T8000 as the PD-T8000 has reflectors and at the same time allows you to ride the bike in regular shoes.
Bicycling clothes for all kinds of weather you're planning to ride in and gloves are heavily recommended. The clothes should be synthetic, because cotton holds a lot of water (i.e. sweat), making you cold when sweaty.
The saddle should fit to your anatomy. For most, it means around 14 .. 15 cm wide saddle that is fairly hard. A soft saddle or a too wide saddle means you're sitting on the muscles that propel you forward, which is not a good situation in the long run. Any saddle hurts a lot if not being accustomed to bicycling. Ride 300-500 km and the saddle pain goes away.
If you maintain the bike yourself, tools plus an inventory of the most common spare parts.

How do I know something is a BSO (Bicycle Shaped Object)?

Look at the hubs. They should be Shimano. Other hubs are likely to fail early, and hub is the second most difficult component to change in the bike.
Look at the rims. They should be aluminum, and have eyelets around the spoke holes. Ideally, they would have double eyelets. However, I wouldn't call something a BSO just because the rims lack eyelets around the spoke holes, if it's otherwise a good bicycle.
Ideally the front and rear wheel would both have 36 stainless steel spokes, triple-butted (2.34mm at head, 1.8mm middle, 2.0mm at threaded end) and the nipples would have a spherical seat (e.g. DT Swiss Pro Head), but if I labeled this as a recommendation of a bicycle as opposed to a BSO, I would be heavily downvoted. (I still may be, as I dared to question the usefulness of less than 36 spokes per wheel.)
Look at the frame specs. If it says "hi-ten steel" it's a BSO. Quality frames are butted chromium-molybdenum steel or hydroformed aluminum. The frame is the most difficult component to change in the bike.
Look at the fork. If it's a cheap suspension fork, it's a BSO as opposed to a bicycle. Suspension forks have their place in more expensive mountain bikes, but unless you're planning to spend a lot of money on the fork (and thus the bicycle), a rigid chromium molybdenum steel fork is a much better choice.
Look at the seatpost. If it has a cheap clamp with finite adjustment positions, or a clamp separate from the seatpost, it's a BSO. (However, if this is the only problem making the object a BSO as opposed to a bicycle, it's easy to remedy -- replace the cheap seatpost and clamp with a good quality two-bolt infinitely adjustable seatpost.)


Aluminium front and carbon rear wheel on hardtail? I recently got a used hardtail MTB. (Specialized Epic Elite)
It's got Roval SL Control 29 - which is pricey. The front has 24 spokes and back has 28 spokes.
Now I want to install a dynamo on it and found out there are not many dynamos for 24 spoke wheels.
And I'm not sure If it's a good idea to use 24 spoke wheel on a long distance (I asked a separate question for this
I stumbled upon a aluminium wheel with SONdynamo built into it
Does using the Hunt wheel (aluminum) on front and carbon wheel on rear makes sense?  Buying another Roval carbon 28 spoke wheel and building dynamo on it myself would cost me probably 2.5x the price.
Should I stick with carbon on front as well at least even if it's not the same model?

You’ll be perfectly fine. A carbon rear wheel on a hardtail is actually a pretty good idea because of how much you’re smacking the back wheel around, thanks to the lack of suspension.

Now I want to install a dynamo on it. and found out there are not many dynamos for 24 spoke wheels.

There's a good reason for that. Quality wheels have standardized on 36 spokes for 622mm bead seat diameter for reasons of durability. Also some people use 559mm bead seat diameter wheels so 32 hole hubs are sometimes offered for use with these smaller rims. The 32 spokes on 559mm wheels have the same spoke density as 36 spokes for 622mm wheels.

So using the hunt wheel (aluminum) on front and carbon wheel on rear makes sense?

The reason this does not make sense is not the front wheel. It's the rear wheel.

Should I stick with carbon on front as well at least even if it's not the same model?

In my opinion, wheels that:

Have carbon rims
Have less than 36 spokes even though they are of 622mm bead seat diameter, or less than 32 spokes even though they are of 559mm bead seat diameter

...do not make sense.


How can I mount my phone and my battery pack to my bike? On long bike rides, my phone dies often. Is there any way I can mount my phone, a galaxy s5, and my battery pack, pictured, to my bike? I'd say that mounting to the handlebars would be ideal, but I'm open to suggestions.

Battery pack is a "Fremo P130"

How about a top tube bag?

I've had a couple of handlebar mounts and they haven't lasted long in crowded bike sheds. Even mounted quite centrally they're vulnerable to knocks and aren't very strong.

A top tube bag with a clear lid works better for me. Do be sure to get one big enough though.  It will take the battery pack as well and should do a decent job of keeping everything dry (even if you have a waterproof phone you probably want to keep water out of the charging socket).

Stick your phone in your back pocket. Why would you want to ride round with it mounted on your bars? Better concentrating on bike riding than phone using.


How easy are Parabolic v. Standard Rollers to use? I cycle a track bike and want to do some training over the winter. After a bit of research I've decided to go with rollers.

I haven't used them before but I'm sure with a bit of perseverance I'll get the hang of it.

My budget is €400 max inc. delivery and I think that resistence will be necessary considering the lack of gears.

So far I've boiled it down to:

CycleOps Aluminium Rollers with Resistance Unit
Elite V-Arion Parabolic Inertial Rollers with Integrated Resistance Unit.

I like how simple the CycleOps look and the option of using outdoors but am mildly worried that the non-parabolic rollers will be a lot more difficult and that I wouldn't be able to watch tv etc. eventually.

Would you say that parabolic rollers only lessen the learning curve and are much the same as standard rollers after, or are they always easier?

I've never ridden parabolic rollers myself but I do have a pair of cylindrical pvc rollers. It takes a bit of practice, but after a short amount of time I was able to watch tv quite easily from my cylindrical rollers. A bit after that, I was able to sit up, lean back down, take a drink, and ride with one hand or one foot while watching tv. Not all at the same time, obviously.

It is my understanding that parabolic rollers are easier to learn to ride simply because you can't ride off the edges. However, riding off the sides isn't a big deal. The bike comes to an immediate stop. The friction of your tires isn't enough to overcome your body's lack of inertia. You smell burnt rubber and may leave burn marks on your carpet, but that's about it. If you put a towel under the rollers, you won't have to worry about the carpet.

One other thing to consider is the diameter of the riding surface of the rollers. I believe that on average parabolic rollers are smaller than cylindrical rollers. Smaller rollers heat up more quickly and as a result are harder on tires.

I've really only addressed the issues between parabolic and cylindrical rollers here because that seems to be the brunt of your question. For a more comprehensive disucssion of rollers, see this question and the questions that are linked to in the accepted answer on that question.

Parabolic rollers are really easy once you get the hang of it but normal rollers are like riding on ice


Childrens' bike if I want to put my feet down? I am a very short adult (61 inches; 155cm), who has not been able to get the hang of sliding off the seat and back on at stops (especially on hills). I really just want to be able to stop and touch the ground with the balls of both feet, but I do understand that on a regular bike, you can't do this and have the seat at the right height for pedaling.

Could I solve this situation by buying a children's bike, and then adjusting the seat up really high? It seems like with smaller wheels (maybe 24"), the part the pedals mount to at the center should be closer to the ground, so there will be less of a difference between "leg distance touching ground" and "leg distance at bottom of pedaling". Could this solution work?

Also, are there other solutions in the a-broke-student-could-buy-this-on-Craigslist price range that I should consider? (Something with gear shifting, my commute involves a big hill.)

The seat-to-bottom bracket height is important for comfortable riding and efficient power transfer.

The seat-above-road height is what you're trying to minimise in your question.  This means a lower bottom bracket, which means an increased risk of pedals hitting the ground.

The size of the wheels is utterly irrelevant to the bb-road distance.

Instead of sliding forward and standing over the bike's top tube, consider attempting to lean the bike and put a foot to the road and the other ready to take-off.

Leftmost police cyclist here is leaning to her right, the other is leaning left.  Both are seated on their saddles with one leg ready for the first power stroke.  I'd suspect female police rider is left-handed.

From left to right: Purple bag is leaning left, but has a foot on the curb/kerb.  Jeans Man is leaning left.  Can't see Red Jacket too well.  Red Bag Folder is track-standing (staying on bike without rolling)  NoHelmet appears to be drifting slowly forward while being off the saddle (prepared for a big power push when the light changes.  Other Folder seems to be right foot down.

My point is, none of these riders are standing over their top tubes with both feet on the ground.    Its really hard to find a picture of anyone even doing it that way.

Generally speaking that is only done when fully relaxed with no need to get up and ride again immediately so you'd rarely see it in traffic.

Another option if something is available.

Amusing video about how to stand with your bike:

Juliane Neuss in northern Germany (D-38678 Clausthal-Zellerfeld), works also in English, is a bicylce engineer and kinesiogist who creates bikes for special needs purposes including open frames and setting feet down.
See  junik-hpv.de/html/spezialfahrraeder.htm  .
The Kontact page gives email, phone and postal mail addresses.


Can I replace the 32 mm tires on a Trek 7.3 with 35 mm tires? When I bought a Trek FX 7.3 instead of the 7.2, the bike dealer told me that the tires were the same. They looked narrower, but I thought it was just that I was used to my other bike. I found out later that the FX 7.3 indeed has narrower 32 mm tires.  Can I put 35 mm tires on my FX 7.3?

32mm to 35mm is a small change. It's not going to make a huge difference in ride quality and because it's a small change, any bike that comes with 32mm tires is very likely to handle 35mm tires with no difficulties.

The 7.2FX and 7.3FX are the same frame, but a different fork. It's hard to be sure from the online description, but probably also the same brakes. The wheels are different, but it's a small enough tire size change that it's not a problem. All the geometric specs are identical for all sizes between the two models.

If the 7.2 works with a 35mm tire, the 7.3 will almost definitely work with the same 35mm tire on the rear, and very likely work with the same 35mm tire on the front.

A 35mm wide tire should be 1.5mm wider on each side than a 32mm tire, and will have a similar increased outer radius. 1.5mm is the thickness of a US penny (or a smidge more than the thickness of a dime), so you can use a couple dimes to measure.

Is there at least 2mm of room on each side (and top) of the tire where it passes through the top of the fork? Same amount of room or more where it passes through the brakes? That's the most likely problem areas here.

Double-check the back if you're still worried: is there 2mm clearance around all sides of the tire where it goes through the brake, where it goes between the seatstays, where it goes through the chain stays and where it gets closest to the seat tube?

If all those check out, then you're in the clear.  If it's a close call, you'll just have to try it, or go into the shop and ask them to help you see if it'll work.

Honestly, I wouldn't risk it. It's always best to go with a replacement that you know will work and especially with tires! So really it's up to you but a close call for sure with the size dimensions you've explained here.


Which type of handle bars are best for off-road & road use? There are quite a lot of types of bars. Some best bit for aerodynamics, some best fit for control, some offer significant amount of positions.

I am looking to change my handlebars to the best fit type for both off-road rides which should offer a lot of control of bike and for road use, provide variety of positions, to gain aerodynamic form.

I was using a curved handle bars (also referred too as raised bars) before, it provide a lot of control over turn, but except that it was fine.

And does the width of the bar affect riding?

The best handlebars for on/off-road MTB use are made of unobtainium:

They offer four hand positions including an acceptable aero tuck. The double bar also acts as a hand-shield. The loop at the front is useful for carrying shopping small distances. The total width is narrow enough to squeeze through gaps in traffic, hands protected so long as not using the bar-end position. You get 2x 'dashboard' for mounting lights etc.

The Scott AT4 was made by the earlier incarnation of 'Scott' and they have no  interest in making them now. The alloy is some last-forever furniture alloy so keep your eyes peeled on ebay for some.

The two types of riding are quite different in terms of technique, and the bars developed for both over many years are quite different.
Standard road bars, the so-called "drop" bars, have evolved over a century and offer a variety of hand positions for efficient operation under all conditions encountered on the road.
Folks who "don't like to ride bent over" are doing it wrong.

Mountain-bike or off-road bars vary largely by width; riders who spend a lot of time on tight, woodsy singletrack may prefer a narrower bar, those who ride wide-open trails with a lot of sand and such may like a wider bar.  Other than that.. It's a matter of fit and comfort.   A slight "rise" may be more comfortable, and a slight "pull-back" may ease strain on wrists.


bike grease got on my wall. best way to get it off? white paint on drywall.
black bike grease.

whoops.

what are you tips and tricks for getting it off the wall/paint

Probably best to start with something mild and work to more harsh until you find something that works. It's probably also best to test in a non-conspicuous area on the same wall just in case something unexpected happens. You can start with just soap and water, and see how that does.Then try dish soap. If that doesn't work, you could try the magic eraser things. They do sell generic ones which people claim to work (never tried them) which could save money if you need to do this a lot. I think these actually remove a thin layer of paint, so you should probably be careful with these.

I am using Acetone. It dissolves all kinds of paints, varnishes and stuff.
For rusty parts and oxidized terminals WD-40 is the answer.

Good luck !


Bag for holding valuables on bike while parked? I ride regularly in the city with my a few valuables with me. My purse, phone, keys, company ID card etc. I hate having a bag on me while ride so I am looking for a solution to have these few items in a bike bag, but also have them safe if I stop somewhere to run into  a shop or a cafe for 15 minutes.

My original idea was to look for a small saddle or top tube bag that is lockable and also safely locked to the frame, and I can simply leave it there. As it turns out there is no such thing! Or I just did not find it?

My second idea was to search for a similar bag, but which is easily detachable and I can take it with myself as a waist bag for example. Same story, I couldn't find anything like this on the market.

Do you know any bag that could work for me? Or do you have an alternate suggestion for my conundrum?

Thank you very much if you take the time to answer! Ride safe!
János

Leaving valuables on the bike sounds like a very bad idea. Bike luggage just isn't going to be robust enough to resist theft if left unattended, and the whole bike itself may be vulnerable to theft.

What you want is a bag or caddy with a quick release so you can easily detach it and take it with you when you leave the bike. Many saddle bags have a quick release and come in a range of capacities.

I am actually designing such a device at a Hacker space at University.  If you would like to give input or collaborate please let me know.

It is basically a secure aluminum polycarbonate lockable box ...


Why is it easier to balance a non-moving bike standing up than sitting down? When I arrive at a traffic light that is red I usually just stop the bike, stand up and balance it for a minute or two before going on, without ever putting a foot on the ground. Learning to balance a bike like that was easy, I estimate it took less than hour before I could stand indefinitely (well, the static load is quite high so I probably won't stand more than 5-10 minutes due to exhaustion). With some effort and luck I can also release one hand.

BUT, now I have tried to learn to balance the bike sitting down on the saddle and that is basically impossible. Why is that so much harder? Any hints on how to do it?

Just speculation, but I suspect that when we balance standing up, we move our hips laterally to make fine adjustments to the relative position of our center of mass over the wheels. When doing so, we push laterally from our feet on the pedals, which are low enough and far enough below the center of mass to make adjustments relatively easy to accomplish.

With your backside planted on the seat, the main mechanism to laterally adjust your center of mass is to move your shoulders and chest relative to your hips. Now you have a smaller mass on a relatively short lever anchored relatively high up. So a movement of the shoulders mostly results in a countermovement of the hips in the opposite direction. That makes it not only fairly difficult to get much movement of the center of mass relative to the wheel-ground contact, but also difficult to do so in a controlled manner.

If you want to balance sitting down, just spin your cranks backwards, works for me.


How much to eat and drink during a 50km ride? I want to try a 50 km ride for the first time, to be completed continuously one morning.

The most I've even done before is an 18 km (70 minute) each way commute (out in the morning and back in the evening).

When I commute I eat (breakfast, and late afternoon snack) before I ride, but I eat and drink nothing during the ride.

I guess that the difference between that and a 50 km ride is that, on the multi-hour ride, I ought to eat or drink something on/during the ride to replenish? How much should I eat and drink then, and when? Should I expect to take rest stops, and/or to go more slowly on average?

I'm wary because I think I've read that glycogen depletes at around the 2-hour mark, whereas my longest continuous ride to date has has been only 80 minutes.

50km isn't that enormous of a distance - and especially for someone who does 18km twice a day.  It sounds like your current pace would have you completing that in about three hours.  I'd bring a snack or two if you're worried about being peckish, but unless you're going all-out for a personal record or you skip breakfast you should have no issues.  Just keep turning the pedals, make sure you drink some water, and feel free to take a 5-minute stretch and snack break if you're feeling tired.

ive done 90 miles in one day as my biggest  rides and i could say eating like a stake 30 minutes before you ride helps with like a Gatorade.


Hydraulic disc brakes stuck on new bike I pulled the lever on a brand new hydraulic disc brake and the brake won't release.  What's up ?  The wheel was never removed and a brand new bike.

Are you able to remove the wheel? Once the wheel is removed amd the pads are no longer obstructed by the brake rotor, you need to insert a flat-bladed screwdriver between the pads and twist it to push the pads apart. If this works, then you should be able to put the wheel back in, fitting the rotor into the brake caliper. With everything back in place, try pulling the brake lever again to see if it works properly now.

If this doesn't work, then you probably have a more complicated issue that we would need more information to diagnose.


Shimano 11 speed road shifters with 10 speed hub? is it possible to use Shimano 11 speed road shifter with 10 speed hub/cassette?

if yes, how?

I have a set of Shimano Hydraulic 11 speed shifters but I don't want to upgrade hub to 11 speed. Is it possible to use the shifters in some way?
Checking online on compatibility I realized that pull in shifting is quite different between 10 and 11 simano road.

Thanks in advance!

It is possible to use MTB 11 speed cassette on a 8-9-10 speed freehub body.
Although not officially compatible, the recently introduced 105 derailleur RD-R7000-GS can physically shift up to 42t cog, but Shimano introduced also a 11-34 11-speed cassette which fits 10-speed freehub body, so there's plenty to choose from in 2019.

I think it wouldn't work in a satisfying way. Not sure if the spaces of a 10 speed and an 11 speed cassette are equal, but even if, at least you lose your "lower boundary" which is never a good idea cause it might happen that you accidentally shift too low


Why are brake lights not common? I spent a fair bit of time riding in the lane, in traffic. In this situation, it seems that a brake light would be very useful: It's not always obvious when the vehicle ahead of you is slowing down, and I don't want to be rear-ended by someone who doesn't notice me slowing.

This intuition does not match reality. I was not able to find any bicycle brake lights that seem really ready for prime time. This is what I was able to find:

Q-Lite Multi — Apparently available from just one vendor (TerraTrike). Not mentioned on manufacturer (Q-Lite) website.
Maxxon — Available on Amazon, but poor reviews suggest it does not detect deceleration well.
Revolights — Complicated spoke mounting system; unclear drivers will interpret it properly.
Velodroom — Not yet available (pre-order only).
LucidBrake — Perhaps the most promising of the bunch. Apparently available only direct from a not-so-great website.

The first uses a brake handle-mounted switch. The others use accelerometers to detect slowing.

None of the major bike light manufacturers seem to offer a brake light.

My question is, what's the disconnect? Am I misjudging the value of brake lights? Is there some challenge that makes them hard to offer for bicycles?

Summary: it's hard to make a light that reliably turns on only when the brakes are used.  Most cyclists who want brake lights buy rear flashing lights because they're cheap and ubiquitous.

Ignoring cost, to work well a brake light on the back of a bike would need to be paired with a constantly on, non-flashing light, purely so that people who saw it would recognise it as a brake light. Otherwise it's just another blinking light on a bike. Then it needs to be daylight visible, or no-one will see it.

From my experience with rear lights, 200 lumens is about the level you'd want from a brake light. My always-on dynamo rear light is about half that and while it's visible it doesn't really stand out. In other words, it makes the bike more visible without being too bright. But for a "hey, I'm stopping" light, you want more than that. So the combination of a 200-500mW always-on light with a 1W or 2W "BRAKES!!!" light would probably work pretty well.

Unfortunately most super-bright LED rear lights are designed to overdrive the LEDs in short flashs, but for a brake light you want a solid 2-5 seconds of on time. Which means bigger, more expensive LEDs. And also a bigger, heavier battery to drive them.

The sensors are also challenging. SeeSense have done a lot of work on accellerometers in bike lights and from using their light, braking detection is ok but not brilliant. If I  hit the brakes to reduce the impact of hitting a pothole, for example, the light seems to got into "holy shit" mode instead of braking mode 90% of the time. Which might be ok for a brake light, 5 seconds of braking mode in that situation is fine. But it means that I'll get 5 seconds of braking mode when I bunnyhop a curb or bounce a speed bump too. Which isn't really "braking" as I think of it - I'm definitely not slowing down at that stage. So you probably want sensors on the brake levers as well (the accellerometer is built into the CPU that runs the lights). Which means wires and fiddly mechanical bits. I dunno, that seems hard to me, you have to cover road bikes with integrated electronic shifting right down to basic V brake levers. Sounds expensive.

To get an idea of costs, look at some of the KickStarter bike lights. It seems to cost about $100 to get a light to market. Which means hardware costs of about $25. If we double that because we're using, say, two 18650 LiIon batteries (18Wh) instead of one, CR123/16340 battery (half-16550, 4.5Wh) and a 0.5W RED LED as the primary light plus a pair of 1W LEDs as the brake light... ok, maybe triple it. So you're looking at a light that will cost about $200-$300, assuming the sensors are cheap and reliable. Cheap means pure accellerometers, like the last light in your list.

Which makes them "something is happening" lights... just like any other blinking light on the back of a bike.

What do you mean "It's not always obvious when the vehicle ahead of you is slowing down". Cars have brake lights.

For bike to bike communication you say slowing or stopping and hold your left hand in a down position.

For bike to car the car is typically going faster. Here is my flashing light - I am a bike - please don't run over me.

Car to car they have lights because they have windows, stereo, AC, and kids in the back seat.  They need lights to communicate.


Stuck pedal, I've tried everything I'm looking for suggestions, when basically everything has failed to remove a pedal. It's a pretty new bike (Trek 520). The drive side pedal came off fine, the non-drive side did not. I am aware that it has left-hand threads.
I initially used a 15mm pedal wrench, and tried with an allen key on the other side as well. Now, the flats on the bolt are completely stripped.

I used a metal file, to file new flats onto it. Then, I placed it on its side, and put a little WD40 into the bolt, so it could soak for about 30 minutes.

Then, I used a butane torch on the spindle, where it screws in.

After all this, I put an adjustable clamping wrench to it. The bike is upside down.

It stripped the teeth on the clamping wrench, without budging.

This is absurd. The only thing I haven't tried is a bolt extractor. After all of this, I don't have much faith in it.
It seems like I'm going to have to replace the entire crank. The one that comes with it is:
Shimano Alivio T4060, 48/36/26, 2-piece w/chain guard, 175mm length
However, due to high demand, and limited resources from the pandemic, this has been sold out everywhere for some time. :/
Edit: Update. First of all, thank you, the responses here have been awesome, this is a terrific community.
I didn't have access to a vice, so I ended up taking the bike to my LBS. We removed the crank arm, stripped the pedal down to the spindle, and put it into a vice there. Flash forward to three of us working it, two pushing off the wall, and using a foot to torque the arm, while another alternates a blowtorch, and spraying it down with penetrating oil to the point of slightly deforming the arm. Whatever black magic is holding this thing, it will not let go.
The Alivio crankset isn't set to be back in warehouses until June, so we ordered a 175mm, left Sora arm for $30.

I think your pedal is a lost cause.  Even if you did get it off in the current condition, reinstalling and later removal will make later-you hate current-you.
I would disassemble the pedal from the outside - remove the axle cap, locknut, cone, and bearings, then slide the pedal cage outboard.  You may have a second set of bearings inboard, or a bushing.  The bearings are probably separate, but might be caged.  These are all "spare parts" now.
Now you should have a bare metal shaft poking out the side of your bike crankarm.  It will be hardened metal, and probably chromed and oily.   I would use a grinder or a file to create two flat(ish) spots on either side of the widest part of your axle.  Don't need to be perfect, need to provide a place for grip.
Then I would use either a pair of stilsons (aka a pipe wrench or monkey wrench) or I'd put the bike horizontally with that axle pointing down into a secured bench vise.  At that point you should be able to use excessive leverage to back out the axle.
Think three times about which way you need to turn the axle.  It should be left-hand thread but that flips if you're working from the back-side.  Its easy to be tightening when you want to be loosening.

Once its out, examine both the internal and external threads.  Identify why it was so wedged, and whether there is damage inside the crank.  If you have a 9/16" 20tpi left hand tap then chasing the thread gently would be a good idea.  If the thread is munched, then consider options.
Finally, go shopping for new pedals.  Whether you want to stay with flats or go to clipless/cleats etc.
When you do install replacement pedals, use something as an assembly lubricant.  Grease at a minimum and is better than nothing.

Put a big hammer under the crank and hit the crank with an other hammer. The crank will have some damage but the pedal will go out.


How do I reassemble the rear gearing after fitting new tyres? I have a Raleigh maybe 8 years old with shimano 15 gears. How do I reassemble the rear gearing after fitting new tyres? Everything seems to be in correct position but a small bolt with captive nut seems to fit in a triangular hole above the axle, on frame but this then throws the gear all out of position. Any ideas?

Sounds like you're placing the tire back into the wrong gear to begin with. Always remember what gear you left off on as it can ruin your entire setup in a matter of seconds.


What make and model is this bicycle? can you tell me what make and model this bicycle is?  And maybe tell me what year and how much it may be worth?

I had one just like it many years ago. Not a good collectible, and not worth much. It's an old Murray.


Handlebar-mounted "turn indicator" that can pair with a smartphone for turn-by-turn GPS navigation So far I've been using my Android smartphone and a combination of Strava and Google Maps for navigating/recording my routes. This works reasonably well, but as I've been going on longer and longer rides I'm getting fed up with having to take my phone out of my pocket to check whether I've missed my turning.

I've tried mounting my phone on my handlebars, but this isn't a great solution for several reasons:

It's bulky and vulnerable to getting smashed in a crash
The battery quickly runs flat if I leave the display on for navigation
It's hard to read the display in bright sunlight

I've looked at various cycling GPS units which seem to mainly fall into two categories:

Small, relatively cheap units that record performance stats (distance, speed etc.) but don't offer any navigation functionality. I'm not really interested in these features since I can already record most of the information I want using my phone.
Bigger, more expensive units with colour screens that offer route planning and turn-by-turn navigation. My phone already has a nice big color touchscreen as well as a GPS receiver so I find it hard to justify spending ~£200+ on one of these.

All I want is a small, dedicated "turn indicator" that I can mount on my handlebars and pair with my phone (perhaps over Bluetooth).

So far the closest thing I've found is the Schwinn CycleNav. However there are lots of angry reviews on Amazon claiming that the app is no longer supported on current versions of Android/iOS. If so then this rules it out completely for me.

By far the nicest-looking "turn indicator" solution I've seen so far is on the Hammerhead. It's reasonably priced for a cycling GPS unit, although I still feel like buying another GPS receiver would be overkill. I also have some reservations about their Android app, which has some quite poor reviews.

There also seem to be a few relevant products at the crowdfunding stage. In particular Beeline comes close to the idea of a dedicated turn indicator. However it doesn't actually do proper turn-by-turn navigation - all it gives you is the bearing and distance to your destination, which is no good for me.

I'm sure I can't be the only one looking for a solution along these lines. Does anyone have experience with the options I mentioned above, or any other recommendations?

I've had a phone in a bumper case come off the handlebars several times without damage. But my handlebar mount kept getting broken in the bike shed at work so I  switched to a top tube bag (which also holds a tube and basic tools). The low light readability is still an issue, but you're over the top of it a bit more which helps. Where I put tools you could put an extra battery. The bag is firmly attached to the bike so won't come off, and the location means it's highly unlikely to hit anything. They're cheap so it's worth a try. This way there are no worries about device/phone/app compatibility.

I found these,  but it seems  they did not raise enough money.


Wheel advice/information I just bought a Top Fuel 9, 2016, 27.5. It came with Bontrager Mustang Pro wheels.  Where would I find the specs for these wheels?  I am thinking of upgrading the wheel set.  Any suggestions for upgraded wheels?

The only thing you need to know besides diameter (27.5 duh), freehub body type (standard shimano style or SRAM XD) and rotor mount (6 bolt or center-loc) is rather or not the hubs are "Boost" spec (110 front & 148 rear) or standard thru-axle (100 front & 142 rear).
Of course don't do something silly like buy super wide (30mm internal width or wider) rims and your all set to shred that gnar...


Chain line adjustment when replacing triple crankset with single I have an old Univega MTB with a triple 28-38-48 crankset and 6-speed freewheel. The bottom bracket is square taper with cup and bearings. I want to remove the front derailleur and convert to 48T crank, keep the freewheel and rear derailler. The final setup will be 1x6. What adjustments do I have to make to the chain line (priority item) and the bottom bracket, if any. The fixed crankset will be 48T so I expect that chain line adjustment should be minimal, if any, on a bike with a rear derailleur.

Assuming the chainline is spot on as it is now, you could remove the inner and middle chainrings, and place your 48t outer ring in the middle ring position. This will most likely require new chainring bolts intended for single ring use (they are shorter).
This will only work if the middle and outer ring share the same bolt circle diameter - BCD (most triple cranks work like that, but I've come across a few where the inner and middle rings both had a smaller BCD than the outer ring.)

If above solution doesnt provide the chainline you want, you could replace the bottom bracket. Shimano makes a cheap and (in my experience) reliable bottom bracket for square taper interface: The BB-UN26. It comes in various spindle lengths and for both 68mm and 73mm shells.

You'll probably have to buy a narrow wide chainring.. So that your chain does not fall off. And a longer shaft bb would also be a good idea.


Shifting direction is different for front and rear shifters I have been riding singlespeed and 1x setups for decades. The last time I had a front derailleur was over 30 years ago, and the shifter was on the downtube then, and I don’t have any memory of how it all worked. So I’m experiencing a time warp of sorts when it comes to multi-geared bikes.
Recently I bought a cargo bike (Mongoose Envoy) with a Shimano 3X drivetrain. I love having the extra gears, but I’m totally shocked that using the thumb lever on the right shifter gives a downshift, but using the thumb lever on the left shifter gives an upshift. And vice-versa for the triggers…using the trigger on the right shifter gives an upshift, but using the trigger on the left gives a downshift. It’s completely counter-intuitive to my brain and I can’t imagine the reason it would be this way.
First of all, is my bike assembled right? Is this the normal way all bikes are? If this is the “standard” setup, how did this convention ever arise in cycling? Is there some advantage to the controls being opposite that I’m not able to appreciate? And lastly, can I change the cable routing somehow so that the front derailleur both shift the same “direction”?

The reason why shifting is arranged this way:

Shifting to a larger chainring at the front gives a higher gear ratio, shifting to a larger sprocket at the rear gives a lower gear ratio.

Shifting to larger chainring/sprocket requires positive pulling force from the shifter whereas shifting to smaller chainring/sprocket can be done with derailleur spring tension. It's intuitive that getting the chain to  climb up onto a larger chainring/sprocket will takes more force than letting it fall down.

Its easier to get positive pulling force from the thumb shifter lever then the finger lever, there's more room for a longer lever and a longer lever throw. The thumb can travel on longer distance without the  hand losing grip.

The exception is of course Shimano's Rapid Rise rear derailleur which use derailleur spring tension to shift to larger sprockets. THis obviously didn't work as well as 'normal' derailleurs as the type has disappeared.

The old Shimano SIS levers were just indexed levers. The deraileurs were spring-loaded heding towars smaller chainwheels. Thumb pushing lever is much more effective than index finger pulling lever. Also note that index and middle fingers should be on the brake levers most of the time.
Other design is rolling drum (simillar to motorbikes accelerator/spark timing controllers). Here it is easier to pull the drum rotatin towards you than pushing it rotating away from you. Again the indices in front goes against the ones in rear.
In modern index mechanisms, no matter whether MTB or roadbike integrated, the thumb lever (the longer one on roadbike) demands higher force to overcome the spring and the index-finger (the shorter on roadbike) is the other.
Speculation below:
I think this direction has also one advantage that when both wires fail, the chain gets set in the lowest tension setup. And also to the easiest to access and service.


Gmc Denali - good bike on a 200 budget? Alright, so, please, don't flame me for buying a budget bike. My dad recently passed away, and i've been riding his bike. It was a hybrid mountain/road bike. As it slowly died, and i bent the rear axle (Don't ask me how, i don't ride it hard) i debated buying a new bike. I have a few friends with the Denali, and, while they won't let me try it, it looks to be a good bike. One of them has had it for over a year, prompting me to consider it. Personally, i don't have the money for a big budget bike, and only have around $200 to spend. I also pop on and off curbs, and am wondering if that will be much of a problem. Is it worth buying? Will it stand up to my antics? I only weigh 155 Lbs and am a fan of speed. I'm 5'8" but am looking to buy the one intended for much larger people (6'2"-6'5") as i am used to that on my dad's bike. (Plus, i'm only 16, i might get a little bit taller). Biking is pretty much my life, I do it daily. But my old bike is not a road bike, it was a hybrid and is 40 lbs. Is it worth the upgrade? I'd like to get a higher cruising speed as well as a higher top speed. I'd also like to be able to jump on and off curbs if need be. (I've been hit on my bike riding on the road a few times)

"As it slowly died, and i bent the rear axle (Don't ask me how, i don't ride it hard) i debated buying a new bike"

Hmmm… If the bent axle is the only major problem the bike has (by "it slowly died" I take you to mean that it was developing other less-serious problems too), if I were you I would do an overhaul and continue with the hybrid.

I don't know if you have the knowledge/experience it would take to do such an overhaul, but if you were willing to put up $200 in quality components and elbow grease, you could probably turn your hybrid into something that's significantly better than any new $200 bike.

If you decide to purchase a bicycle, definitely buy used. Don't get the Denali. A used $200 road bike will last longer.

A $200 bike is not good for someone that rides gentle and you want to ride it a little more than gentle.

Look used as you will find better values.

Go for a bike that is maybe a bit big for you but at 5'8" don't jump to a bike for 6'2".

Then there is style of bike.

If you want to go fast and bang (jump curbs) then a road bike with
some solid wheels, axle, frame, ...  That is not is not a $200 bike.
Road wheels that will bang are more like $400 alone.
Consider not going fast and getting like a single speed street or bmx bike.  You are going to need to get up into more the $400+ range but can get a pretty ballistic bike.
Kind of between is a cyclocross that is like a rugged road bike.  But you not going to get a good one for $200.  You do find some nice used for like $600+ especially at the end of the racing season (Feb).


Advantages of higher quality cranksets What are the advantages of upgrading the crankset on a bicycle?

For example, my bike (2009 Kona Dew) comes with a FSA Dyna Drive crankset. I'm assuming this is a pretty basic crankset since it lies at the bottom of their product list.

Would there be a substantial improvement by upgrading to something nicer? My (uneducated) guesses are that a higher end crankset would be lighter (e.g made from carbon) and possibly have less flex under power application.

They will definitely be lighter, and probably shift a little better. More rigid is possible but not especially likely, as the cheap one will be strong enough to take a lot of abuse (they don't particularly care about weight so that's easy to do).

(edit) A cheap crankset very likely has the chainrings rivetted on, and they're not designed to be changed. Sometimes the smallest chainring is bolted on and can be changed. Swapping one of these for a more expensive one that has interchangeable chainrings will probably give better shifting.

Cheap bikes are the ones more likely to be bought by people who either weigh a lot or are careless with their bikes, so are more likely to be overloaded. More expensive bikes get crashed instead. The cranks are designed accordingly.

As discussed in  Suggestions for progressive upgradation of bike you're almost certainly better off saving up for a more expensive bike rather than trying to upgrade the one you have. Buying parts retail is a lot more expensive than getting them as part of a bike (manufacturers buy 1000's at a time and don't pay for retail packaging).

Upgrading crankset gives you several benefits.  It performs better.  It is lighter.  It looks way better.


Gap between lower headset cup and fork. Is this likely to be a problem? Yesterday I had a headset and fork fitted by my LBS. Lacking the specific tools or knowledge, I thought it better to leave this job to a professional; as a consequence of my inexperience, however, I have no idea whether they've actually done a good job.

As far as I can tell, the crown race fits snug against the base of the steerer tube. When the fork is inserted, however, there is a gap of about two millimetres between the base of the steerer and the bottom headset cup, leaving the crown race exposed. My expectation was that the bottom cup would instead sit flush with the fork.

Scouring bike forums for answers suggests this situation isn't all that uncommon, with some offering makeshift solutions, like a strip of inner tube to keep out grime. Still, if someone wouldn't mind taking a look at my headset specifically, it might ease my mind somewhat. I've included a couple of close-ups below.

I've checked the orientation of the bearings, and they're definitely the right way up. The slight chamfer on the inside edge of the lower bearing fits nice and tight against the crown race.

The headset is a Tange Seiki RDC-82. I don't appear to be missing any pieces.

Thank you for your help.

Update: Ok, so I gave the company I originally purchased the headset from (the same place I bought my frameset at the same time — not the LBS that installed it) a call; they instantly knew what I was talking about, and assured me it was normal for this particular model. In hindsight, ringing them should really have been the first thing I did.

Still seems like a poor design in my opinion. Not only does it look somewhat unsightly, but the gap risks exposing the lower bearing to grime and dirt. A simple seal could have solved both these issues. Perhaps when I eventually come to replace the headset, I'll invest in something pricer/better quality.

There is a part missing, commonly the gap is filled with a simple plastic ring which works ok as a seal. Either this wasn’t supplied with the headset, or was lost by someone before it could be installed. If I had a headset without this seal, I wouldn’t be surprised if it wore prematurely as extra dirt got in.
Seen in the bottom left of a photo of the current model is the missing ring which would seal the gap.

it's supposed to be like that... my fork also has a 1mm gap that's suppoosed to be rthere as well.... they done nothing wrong...


How to stop bike renters overextending seatposts? A friend and I have been operating a bike rental shop for about a year, and just recently we've started to notice more and more customers extending the seatpost well beyond the maximum line. So far we haven't had any frame issues, just bent seatposts, but we're trying to get ahead of the problem before it costs us too much.
We've discussed assessing fines for this, as we do stress ahead of time not to overextend the seatpost, but we would like to explore some preventative measures. Are there any devices or solutions out there that would prevent someone from extending a seatpost too far?

I assume they are extending the seat post that far because they need it for an appropriate saddle height.
So the solution is simple: Offer bikes with larger frame sizes or at the very least equip the bikes with long seatposts which can be extended far enough.
Any other solution would force your customers to ride with a too low saddle.
If you still want to make sure that they can’t be extended too far, just in case a giant with long legs comes along, there is a solution I can think of: If you have seatposts where you can see through the tube (common on cheap steel seatposts) you could try to attach a string (or steel cable) somewhere at the bottom bracket, thread it through the seat tube and seatpost and tie it to the saddle rails. Could lead to some noise though if the cable rattles inside the seat tube.

Nothing on a rental bike should be removable or adjustable by the renter. Everything including wheels and seat posts should at the very least need a wrench to remove/adjust, and ideally should need a special tool with a security fastener.
Yes, that means you'll need to adjust the seat post height when you send the bike out. That shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes per bike, and if you can maintain a bike then you can surely manage that. And if you don't have a bike that fits them, you don't (can't) rent them a bike.
This also protects you against theft of parts. With quick releases on wheels and seat posts, thefts of bike parts is common almost everywhere, and if you've not yet lost anything then you've been extremely lucky.
Of course preventing renters from fixing a puncture might be inconvenient for them. But you can't trust your renters to know how to fix a puncture without causing damage; and for cycling around town, having to take the bike back to be fixed is only a minor inconvenience at most. This would be different if you're renting mountain bikes for long treks, of course, but then you're talking a very different target market, and usually a trek like that has a guide/leader who you work with anyway.


Replacement parts for old Giant CRS 4.0 I'm looking at replacing the cassette and chainrings on an old Giant CRS 4.0 bought way back in around 2009 (I think) and trying to find compatible (and still available) parts.
Its parts are listed as

Cassette: Shimano TZ37 14-34 freewheel
Chain: KMC Z51
Crankset: Suntour 28/38/48
Bottom bracket: Cartridge

I am considering buying

Sunrace 7/8 Speed Chainset

Shimano HG41 7 Speed Cassette

Shimano CN-HG40 6/7/8-Speed 116 Link Chain With Connecting Link

So I'm not sure on a few things:

How do I know if the chainset is compatible with my bottom bracket cartridge?
Are all shimano cassettes compatible if the speed matches?
Am I right that replacing a 14-34T cassette with a 11-28T cassette will result in less gear range on the higher and lower ends, with more similar gearing?
Is it a bad idea to buy a chainset instead of individual chainrings? It seems like a cheap component and might be a simpler process?
Any other compatibility problems I've not spotted?

Thanks!

How do I know if the chainset is compatible with my bottom bracket cartridge?

Look at the type of the bottom bracket to crank attachment. Most likely it is square taper. Then look at the bottom bracket spindle length. For example if you have 110mm spindle yet the new crankset requires 130mm spindle, the chainline will be affected by half of the difference, i.e. one centimeter. That's a lot! Also it's possible that the cranks hit the chainstays of the frame so not all cranks fit with all spindle lengths. Also, there is a difference between JIS vs ISO square tapers. So not only does the length have to match, the standard of the square taper should also match. (It might be possible to use a JIS taper with a slightly differing length on ISO cranks or vice versa.)

Are all shimano cassettes compatible if the speed matches?

Based on the information, you do not have a cassette but rather a freewheel. The freewheel will be so tight you'll hurt yourself if trying to remove it, if the bicycle has been ridden as opposed to being only parked. And you can only replace it with a new freewheel rather than a cassette, unless you change the hub (which is the second most difficult part in a bicycle to change -- unless you replace the entire rear wheel).

Am I right that replacing a 14-34T cassette with a 11-28T cassette will result in less gear range on the higher and lower ends, with more similar gearing?

You'll have a new higher gear with 11-28T cassette but the lowest gear you used to have with 14-34T freewheel won't be available. Of course if changing the chainrings, you can compensate and besides 28 tooth chainring and 28 tooth sprocket is so ridiculously low gear it should be enough for most purposes.

Is it a bad idea to buy a chainset instead of individual chainrings? It seems like a cheap component and might be a simpler process?

There's a reason for being cheap.
The cheapest cranksets have rings made of steel. They are heavy and often times the steel used is also quite soft so not necessarily that durable. The slightly more expensive ones have aluminum chainrings but made of a soft alloy. They wear in no time. Only the very best chainrings are made of high-end aluminum alloy such as 7075T6. By purchasing a cheap crankset, you won't get the very best chainrings.
If your bicycle is a 2009 bicycle that has a freewheel and not a cassette it's probably a very cheap bike so not necessarily a good idea to throw a lot of money at it. So you might want to either use a cheap crankset or much better yet, reuse the old crankset. Old chainrings usually work with a new chain if they worked with the old chain too. Only for rear sprockets is the failure mode such that they refuse to work with a new chain. So you don't necessarily need to change the chainrings or the crankset.

Any other compatibility problems I've not spotted?

Yes. The freewheel vs cassette compatibility problem.


Front Friction Shifter Problem I have friction shifters and for some reason the front one gives me a bit of trouble. It tends to return to its most untensioned state. So say I want to shift to a higher gear, it will try to drop me back down to my lower gear. My guess is I might need to lube up the cable and shifter. Any other known solutions?

With friction shifters this is usually caused by one of two problems:

Loose Shifter Screw: Friction shift levers usually have a wing-nut-screew used to adjust the tension and friction of the lever against the mounting housing.  Tighten this screw, but not too tight or else you can't move the shift lever.  You can also take the shifter apart (noting carefully the order of the parts) and clean everything with degreaser.  DO NOT LUBE - you are trying to regain friction, not remove it.

  Edit re. ʍǝɥʇɐɯ  - After you adjust everything you may find that the shifter screw continues to come loose almost immediately - in that case you may want to use a little 'adjustable/removable' Loctite on the screw, assemble, and let it sit for a while before using.  That should help hold everything together.

Cable Friction: Often there will be one or more points of friction on the cable route.  This could be in the housing, or in the routing channels under the bottom bracket.  As you apply pressure to the pedals the frame flexes, pulling the cable one way, but then the friction stops it from sliding back.  Check and clean your housings and routing points, especially at the bottom bracket.

A dab of loc tight will hold the screw in place, problem solved.  Overtime as you repair or replace cables and losen or remove the screw,  be sure to remove old loc tight residue from the screw threads.  The build up will not allow a new bond and it wont work.