How you can reduce wind noise in the ears while cycling? Whan I cycle I usually listen to music with a headset but the wind noise is so annoying that I do not hear music

I would not too turn up the volume of the music because I prefer to easily listen to the noise of cars and everything that around me

I use to listen to music only from the right headset and with a low volume, so the wind noise seems stronger and I am not able to understand the music. I cycle low speed so the wind noise is caused by the power of wind, not by the high speed

I had this exact problem, and I found a variety of products that can solve this and reduce the wind noise significantly. Cat Ears, Wind Blox, and SlipStreamz being the ones I know of (no affiliation).

These products attach to your helmet straps and force the wind around your ear, therefore reducing the wind noise. I've heard you can also put a twist in your helmet strap to have a similar effect.'

Once I started wearing these, I could put my headphones in and understand podcast conversations much better. I even wrote a post about these wind blocker products on my bike commuting blog I love them so much (I am NOT affiliated with any of the companies mentioned, just an enthusiastic bike commuter).

When I was initially looking a few years ago I believe only the Cat Ears were available, so I got what's now called the Cat Ears Classics. They look a little funny, but they definitely work and provide a little warmth from wind chill as well. Here I am wearing them.

Happy biking!

for your own safety. you use cover ear.
cover ears work very well at reducing wind noise , particularly at higher speeds.
awareness of surrounding traffic and racers.


How to minimize wear on pants I commute on bike and I wear jeans (which I work in).  I find that after about 500 miles of bike commuting in a single pair of jeans I've got holes in my pants from the saddle-jean rubbing.

My problem is probably accelerated by the fact that I have a fabric seat, the "Jamis Aurora Sport" saddle which comes stock with the Jamis Aurora.  However, I'm told that people experience similar issues with non-fabric seats.

Having said that, I'm trying to figure out whether I should get a new saddle (something smoother like leather or plastic), or alternatively wear a pair of athletic shorts over my jeans (easily/quickly removeable at work/ in public).

At my current rate I will need to replace and/or repair a pair of jeans every 2 months.

My question is, what measures can be taken to minimize the rate at which my pants wear through when commuting (without the obvious solution of having dedicated pants for cycling)?

The obvious answer would be to get some Cycling Jeans, i.e. jeans specifically designed for cycling in. These have reinforcement and stretch in the right places and often have other features such as deep pockets, a loop to carry a small lock and reflective strips.

Levi, Rapha, Muxu and Swrve all make cycling jeans, so there's a fair amount of choice.


What kinds of tools do I need to do bike maintenance, e.g. adding a rack? I just got a new Trek 7.2 for commuting and getting around town. It's a great bike but I want to add some stuff to it like a rack. I am fairly handy and have more or less a full toolkit in my apartment - do I need any special tools to do bike maintenance and also for adding things like a rack? Or will normal screwdrivers & wrenches do the trick?

(added from a comment) At the moment, I hope to mainly fix flats (but hopefully won't get too many of them) and set my bike up for commuting (adding a rack, lights, potentially bike computer).

The mainstay tools are really wrenches and allen keys, certainly these will be all you need for something trivial like fitting a rack.

But the more you get into things, there are a myriad of different tools around, often which can be used for one and only one task. For example if you want to get the cranks off you need a crank puller, of which there are a couple of different types. To change a cassette, you need the right lockring (possibly a half-a-dozen or more of these). A special tool to break a chain (you replace chains relatively regularly, compared to other maintenance). Another too to swap out a bottom bracket, a rig to check how true your wheel is.....

The good news is that you're not (certainly as an individual wanting to maintain your bike) going to want all of these tools at once - they can be collected over time. And if looked after they pretty much last forever.

I don't know whether you'd count these as tools (I would) but I'd say it is definitely worth buying, up front, tyre levers and a pump, so you're able to change a tyre and repair a puncture. These, unfortunately, are the most common tasks you'll need to perform.

Bike in general I suspect is covered in other questions.

Regarding the rack: Look at the rack.  About the only thing it would have special is hex screws.  Hex screws are also common on your bike.  Typically the instructions will list tools needed.  Tool needed vary by rack.

This is tools from one rack installation manual

4mm hex wrench
8mm open end wrench
Hacksaw
File or bench grinder
Grease
Electrical tape or friction tape
Tape measure, ruler, or caliper
Marker or grease pencil (optional)
Level (optional)
Linseed oil, Framesaver, Boeshield,
 or engine fogging oil (optional)

Admittedly, this is a strange and complex rack.
That is the point - the tools needed vary according to the rack that you're installing and the frame that you're installing it to.
Consult the installation instructions.
If you want to install the rack yourself and it calls for tools you don't have then consider another rack.
From the picture the Trek 7.2 does have two mount points for a front rack.  In that configuration it is as pretty easy install.


Can I use Avid olive and connector insert in a Shimano brake? Basically, this is the question:
I can use the olives and connector inserts proper for Avid in a Shimano Deore M596 brake/hose?
Has anyone tried and can report if it worked perfectly or if there was any problem?
Thank you very much.

No you cannot.  They are not cross compatible.  Shimano Olives, hose and inserts only work with Shimano components. The same is true for Avid brake equipment.

Beyond not being designed to work together you void any warranty claim by not using compatible equipment.  You also give up any legal approach to the manufacturer if you use other company's parts.  So if you crash because the brakes failed and want to say that's Shimano's fault and it actually was.  They will say it had Avid olives and inserts on it.

I have got a lot of shimano pins and olives here and now i switched to sram/avid HRD (Hydro road) - the prices for these olives/hoses/sets are ridicilous. So I had good look at both. shimano (brass-) olive and (stainless-) pin should work absolutely fine on sram/avid hoses. The cone of the housing/screw that actually presses the Olive onto the hose are the same (Diameter of the hose also).
This only accounts for the standard (silver aluminium - black pin) avid/sram hose olive. These Red ones "stelamajjig" or whatever (i only know of etap road) - i have these here - are a bit different but i don t have the corresponding etap levers. Somwhere someone wrote that these may press a valve when mounted - with the standard ones these valves would stay closed. regards from berlin


When using the front brake, should I always move my weight to the back or is just bracing with arms is sufficient? I always thought that OTB is caused by deceleration if the rider stops too abruptly. But I've found an article that says:

  Jobst Brandt has a quite plausible theory that the typical
  "over-the-bars" crash is caused, not so much by braking too hard, but
  by braking hard without using the rider's arms to brace against the
  deceleration...

And also I've found an answer, that supports this argument.

On the other hand, there are also people who say otherwise.

I'd like to read opinions, supported by actual practice or science, on that topic.

P.S.
Personally, I only use the front brake while standing on the pedals and never when I'm sitting on the saddle, so I'm more able to control my balance, shifting my weight to the back more or less and bracing against the deceleration with my arms.

What is the fastest possible way for you to stop?

For me, it's pulling hard on the front brake, with my rear end well behind the seat. Ideally my rear wheel will be a couple inches off the ground the whole time. Actually achieving this is virtually impossible, but it should be the goal.

The braking technique you should use is a "light" version of whatever can haul you to a stop the quickest. Every time you come to a stoplight, or are reducing speed on a descent, use your front brake and push your rear end a little further back (or whatever technique works best for you). You don't have to brake hard. Just connect those motions in your mind by doing it every time.

The benefit of this is that when you suddenly have to do an emergency stop, you will instinctively do the best possible thing.

So to answer your question, yes, you should shift your weight back when you brake (along with bracing your arms, of course). Because if you don't, you will fail to do so in an emergency stop, when it really matters.

I completely disagree with Jobst Brandt's theory. Bracing your arms against hard braking is of course necessary, but it's completely instinctive, and therefore not a problem. What's not instinctive is 1. using your front brake, and 2. shifting your weight back. Your goal should be to make those instinctive too.

On top of this, you could further hedge against going OTB by practice stoppies (lifting the rear wheel under hard braking). If you do this, you will be much more in control during emergency stops.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Newton's 3rd law.
In braking - especially sudden braking - the opposing force acts to destablize the bike and rider.

Riding motorbikes you learn - your most effective braking is through the front wheel - bigger disk, better contact, bigger contact patch.
An experienced MTB rider - before the back-end lightens up under braking will shift his body weight to compensate and stablize the bike under braking forces.

Explicitly, the centre of gravity is moved lower and rear-ward. Which makes it far harder to "flip" the object.

The idea of simply bracing one's arms prevents an OTB is therefore not entirely true on its own.


Turning MTB to hybrid I have one mountain bike with its own tyre. I would like to turn that to a hybrid. My MTB tyre size is 26×2.125 57-557 what size should I purchase if I am going with hybrid tyres?

You obviously need a tire of the correct diameter for a "26 inch" wheel - These may be marked 26" or ISO / ETRTO 559.
Generally you'll want a tire narrower than a MTB tire for on-road use. Narrower tires running a higher pressure have less rolling resistance.
How much narrower is up to you depending on the roads or trails you want to ride on, but you are limited by the width of the rim. See What is the maximum or minimum tire width I can fit on my bicycle.

go for narrow tyres in 26” or get apair of 700c road wheels these will fit straight into a 26” mtb frame.Never seen a 26” frame that didn’t take 700c wheels


Why do Mountain Bike helmets have visors? Visors seem pretty ubiquitous on mountain bike helmets, but not on road bike helmets.  Why do mountain bike helmets have visors? What purpose does the visor have?

One purpose of a visor is to shield the sun like a baseball cap.

There are many factors:

Wind resistance is not as big a factor on a mountain bike (slower speeds).
The more upright position on a mountain bike puts a visor more into
play.
On a road bike the rider is leaning forward and facing down and the visor can even block forward view.
A visor can help keep rain, sprayed up mud, or low branches off the riders face.
Mountain bikers think it's cool?

I spend a lot of my time on my MTB riding around forests so the visor is to keep branches out of my face.


Any tips on riding a roll-off, followed by a trench? Any tips on riding this section of the trail? The land is sandy and the clearance afterwords is several meters.

I can't ride it slowly, as it is too steep and the sand will slide off. I suspect the suspension could probably handle the trench, but didn't try, let alone for jumping.

What is the correct way to pass this obstacle on a long-travel full-suspension bike? What about a rigid XC bike?

When I come across something like that, instead of riding straight down the hill I will head down across the hill on a diagonal. You can carry more speed this way and you won't hit the far wall of the trench and risk being sent over the bars, when your bike comes to an immediate stop.

This goes for any type of bike, rigid or full suspension.

If the risk of crashing in the ditch is low, I'll go straight down the hill while managing my speed. When at the bottom, simply lift the front end enough to clear the far side of the trench. This of course requires quite a bit of effort and/or skill depending on the surface of the ground, the slope you are descending the size of the trench.

Alternatively, get enough speed and jump the entire thing.

You could try to wheelie the entire descent. This would at least avoid a flip-over, but you will probably lose most of you speed to the rear shock compression when you hit the ditch.


Cycling on snow in extreme freezing conditions: will my bike break? I plan on riding my Merida Matts 40-D in mountains like these:

The temperatures are usually around -20 °C and I was wondering whether anything can break on my bike due to the freezing conditions. Is there anything I should take special care of before/after any such riding?

-20C is -4F, cold enough to be uncomfortable for humans, but not particularly cold for mechanical equipment.  You will notice that lubricants get stiffer, but generally they warm up rapidly when you ride and the stiffness will be gone in a minute or two.  Hydraulic fluids, et al, should be good to -35C or below, though they will stiffen before that, noticeably increasing the response time of the brakes.

Steel and aluminum do get more brittle at colder temps, but not to a noticeable degree above -50C or so.  Plastics and composites, on the other hand, are a bit more unpredictable -- most plastics get noticeably more brittle below about -25C, though no doubt there is a wide variation depending on the specific materials involved.

You will notice that the tires get stiffer, and people have reported difficulty with the tires becoming rock hard and spinning on the rims at low temps (eg, -20F).  Also, of course, rubber brake pads get harder, and rim brakes become much less effective.

There's really nothing in a bike that isn't in a car, and cars can handle -35 or -40C.  And the places where you have trouble with cars is mostly the battery and fuel system, components you don't have on a bike.

I commute on a bike and I have on numerous occasions ridden my bike when it's around -15 °C. I haven't really thought about the bike to be honest and have not seen any damage to it.

However, the wind chill effect can be quite problematic and I have often had to shift hands and have one of them inside the jacket to prevent freezing.

Good luck!


Zero-gap stem (FSA Afterburner) inverted installation My question is somewhat related to this one.
I apologize in advance for such a long question! And thanks to everyone who manages to get to the end.
I've bought an FSA Afterburner 12° stem. On the picture in the product description, and in their Stem Installation Instructions the stem is depicted with a negative rise (-12°).
The instructions for installing the faceplate are:

Apply FSA Dynamic Installation Compound on handlebar clamp area. Insert handlebar between stem body ① and face plate ③.
Apply grease to faceplate bolts. Alternately tighten TOP stem bolts until there is no gap between faceplate and stem body. Torque to 60 kgf.cm / 6 Nm / 53 in.lbs.
Alternately tighten bottom stem bolts to 60 kgf.cm / 6 Nm / 53 in.lbs.

The product description mentions:

You have the
option to run this stem at a + or – 12 degrees to suite your racing style.

I plan to install it with a positive rise (+12°). If I just flip the stem over and follow the instructions to the letter, tightening the TOP bolts first, I will have no gap on top, and a gap on the bottom (where it says "No Gap" on the stem body). This seems like a wrong thing to do.
Here are some pictures:

Inspecting the stem body and the faceplate, I see that the stem's front part is symmetrical, it's only the faceplate that determines where the "No Gap" side will be (the side that has the "crossbar", top on this photo).
I see these solutions:

Flip the faceplate upside down, follow the instructions: TOP bolts first. The "No Gap" area on the stem will be the side that actually has the gap. Note: Somehow this "feels" to me like the right answer, however see note for option #2.

Follow the instructions "upside down": BOTTOM bolts first. Seems like violating the instructions, unless we assume that the instructions only refer to negative rise installation.
Note: There are two FSA logos on the faceplate - one normal and one upside down. FSA doing this makes sense if the stem was designed to be flipped together with the faceplate, however it is unnecessary if the stem is flipped and then the faceplate is flipped back. This makes me think option #2 is what the manufacturer intended, however this could also be just a design feature.

Follow the advice of the online bike shop that sold me the stem:

I like that you check the instructions very well, don't take them too seriously. Just install the faceplate, that the gap is almost the same at the top and bottom.

Personally, I'm guessing that options #1 and #2 are both acceptable, with #1 being possibly mechanically better, and option #3 is wrong due to reasons presented here.
P.S. I know it's a different product, but Easton Top Lock instructions contain this:

For positive and negative rise setup, top of faceplate should always be touching, bottom of faceplate should always have gap (Fig. 2).

Note how they point out the E logo being always in the right orientation, unlike FSA, which has one out of two logos always right side up. I just wish FSA would be as careful as Easton when creating instructions.
Bonus question:
The instructions say to use grease on the faceplate bolts (no mention of grease for the steerer fixing bolts). All the bolts have a white coating which I guess is a pre-applied thread locking compound. In my experience, when using liquid thread lockers (e.g. LocTite 243), we should avoid oil or grease. Is pre-applied thread locker different from liquid one, making it reasonable to grease such bolts? The bike shop told me "Don't use grease for the bolts". What are your opinions?

I'd follow your option 2. The labels on the faceplate and body of the stem appear in both orientations, implying FSA designed it and labeled it for use either way. Given that, they must have intentionally only put the "no gap" label in one place for use in both orientations.
Grease all the bolts, unless instructions say not to, or they are already lubricated/protected by another method like threadlocker. Aside from lubrication, grease or threadlocker creates a physical barrier between the threaded items, reducing corrosion.
Regarding threadlockers, there are various types:

Added liquid chemical threadlocker which cures to a solid between opposing threads, in theory preventing movement and loosening. Oil/grease can interfere with the curing process. When removing and reusing the fastener, the old threadlocker must be cleaned off and fresh threadlocker applied.
Preapplied malleable solid mechanical threadlocker. This works by remaining malleable and dampening vibrations, thus preventing movement and loosening. There is no curing process, so it should be at least somewhat compatible with oil/grease. When removing and reusing the fastener, the existing threadlocker is reusable as long as enough remains in place.
Preapplied "dry" chemical threadlocker. This is basically just liquid chemical threadlocker encapsulated in tiny beads which break open when the fastener is tightened. Oil/grease may interfere with its curing process, although Henkel/Loctite says its "dry" threadlockes are "Solvent/chemical resistant - all oils (motor, ATF), water, glycol, petrol, diesel". Like liquid threadlocker, when reusing the fastener, this needs to be cleaned off and fresh threadlocker applied.

Here's what I do:
a) follow the instructions for the part if available.
b) always use grease/antiseize/threadlocker of some type on threaded fasteners (unless instructions say differently).
c) if I feel the amount of pre-applied threadlocker is not enough to reach the full length of threaded contact, I may add a small amount of grease or threadlocker to the threads away from the pre-applied section. Just as with beer, one can assemble quite a collection of different types of threadlockers :)
Some references:
https://www.assemblymag.com/articles/85609-do-your-fasteners-need-a-preapplied-thread-locker
https://www.fastenal.com/content/documents/2014/08/Loctite-Threadlocking.pdf
https://www.henkel-adhesives.com/us/en/products/industrial-adhesives/anaerobic-adhesives/pre-applied-adhesives-sealants.html

There is a reason for the existence of no-gap stems.
Long time ago, handlebars (25.4mm or 26mm in the middle) were made of steel and quill stems were tightened with one bolt only, a bolt at the bottom of the attachment. The handlebar mount encircled the top of the handlebar completely.
Then somebody thought that because handlebars don't fail there's room for WEIGHT REDUCTION!!! So handlebar manufacturing switched to aluminum, using the same stems and 25.4mm or 26mm center section. Handlebars started to fail en masse.
Then the quill stem was replaced by ahead stems. A very great imporvement: the threadless headset means forks don't need to be threaded after cutting to length, the maintenance of threadless headsets is far easier and the new-style handlebar mounts allows changing the handlebar without removing the brake levers and handlebar re-taping.
However, handlebars, which already were failing en masse at this point, started to fail even more. The reason is that the four-bolt mount of the new ahead stems had gap both at the bottom and the top of the mount. Handlebars are in tension at the top and in compression at the bottom. Thus, the only location that should have a gap is the bottom of the mount. The top should be free of any gaps because tensioned parts are more prone to failure than compressioned parts.
Then handlebars switched to 31.8mm center section. This reduced the failure rate but didn't eliminate it.
Then somebody invented the no-gap stem. The idea is that it combines the property of ahead stems allowing handlebar replacement without removing brake levers and re-taping with the four-bolt handlebar mount, and the property of quill stems of having no gap at the top.
The jury is still out, but we can at least hope that the no-gap stem would reduce handlebar failure rate close to zero.
Unfortunately, the handlebar manufacturers aren't sleeping. Realizing that all of these inventions reduce handlebar failure rates, they have started a switch to more failure-prone but lighter materials such as carbon fiber.

Thus, this long explanation is here only to illustrate why you always want the gap at the bottom and the no-gap part of the head plate at the top.

And as for the grease question, all threaded parts should be greased.


Is this rim safe to ride? Picture is worth a thousand words, so I'll skip right to it.

Here's a closeup view:

Wheel is about 3 months old, has under 500 miles on it.

Take a look at the specs for the rim (or tell us what kind of rim you've got). There are two ways to join a rim. One is to weld the joint, the other is to use a sleeve inside of the rim extrusion that aligns the ends.

If your rim is welded, then I would be inclined to agree with Carel. But it if is sleeved then it seems likely that what you're seeing is a slight imperfection in the alignment of the ends

There is no need to "adhere" the ends of the rim to each other. The load created by the spokes put the rim in compression. There is no tendency on a built wheel for the ends of the rim to pull apart. The point of welding or sleeving the joint is to keep the ends in alignment.

I'd say no! There is a visible fissure. The joint was not perfectly welded and opened. I'd take that one back to the shop and have a serious discussion. Of course it could have cracked when you rode over an obstacle and if you hit it right at the weld.


Unbranded cranks vs FSA Vero cranks? What is the difference between the unbranded-cranks found on the Motobecane- USA- Mirage Sport vs the FSA Vero cranks(sometimes LSC) on the Motobecane-Record or Grand Record? Are they basiclly the same thing quality wise?

In general, there are several factors that go into a crankset:

Mounting: What kind of bottom bracket do they go on? Square Taper, Octalink, etc. Are they cottered? cotter-less? one piece?
Single/Double/Triple: How many chainrings do they have?
Chainring Shape: Some chainrings like the Biopace are somewhere between a rounded rectangle and a circle rather than circular. Biopace is supposed to be more comfortable than the usual circular rings, for example. You can also design different tooth shapes to improve shifting performance. Other chainrings seem to have slightly different vertical profiles (SRAM X-glide for example).
Chainring Type: How are the chainrings mounted? Are they fixed into the crankset? Are they 110 BCD and replacable?
Chainring Material: Usually Aluminum for the outer two, Steel for the inner for a MTB triple, but other options are possible. This affects durability and weight- just because you're using the same materials doesn't mean the quality is the same.
Crank length: 170 mm is probably most common.
Chainring size: A compact road double is usually 50t/34t, for example - different chainring sizes give you different gearings.
Q-factor/Tread: Width of the crankset. This will affect comfort and is usually narrow to match how we walk.
Crank Profile: The angle of the crank arms leaving the bottom bracket. If you ride with your toes outward, this prevents interference and affects Q-factor.
Crank arm material: Affects durability, strength, weight.
Power Meter: Some high end cranksets have a power meter built into them for measuring riding power which can be sent to your cycling computer.
"Speeds": Often these days, cranksets are marketed with a different number of speeds in the back in mind. Mostly marketing.
Pedal type: Pedals come in 1/2" or 9/16". You need to have the right sized holes for the pedals to screw into, for a given set of pedals.

Between manufacturers of compatible cranksets (i.e. they can be mounted to the same bike and have essentially the same geometry (Q-factor, crank length, number of chainrings and chainring sizes), there are likely to be different durabilities of chainrings, weights of the crankset assembly and aesthetics.

In your particular case, I'd guess the non-name brand one is probably a bit heavier and has softer material for the chainrings so they don't necessarily last as long. The geometry may also be slightly different. Its hard to tell with Motobecane when the parts aren't exactly specified since something just shows up on the bike depending on whats in the factory that day which meets the specs stated online.

Just copped some FSA Vero’s! I Always buy name brand when it comes to bikes. FSA offers high dollar parts, very reputable brand! Unbranded always cuts corners!


How to clean white handlebar tape? I have bought not so long ago (about two month) brand new and the shiny white from my handle tap have become pretty dirty:

I am tempted to just change the tape to another color - that would be problem solved for me - but that would basically be a dirty hack. How can I clean the white tape and remove the dirt?

Grab some of the disinfecting wipes in the round containers that you normally use for kitchen counters, etc. I like the Clorox brand in the yellow (Lemon Fresh!). Wrap around bars and squeeze a bit as you twist/rotate in the same direction as the wrap.

With cork based wrap this is fairly effective. With some of the slicker surfaced wraps (Lizard, etc), it's downright awesome. If you start cleaning with the wipes on a regular schedule your wrap will get even cleaner over time.

Use your old toothbrush and a normal toothpaste


How often should I change my mountain SPD bikeshoe cleats? I bought a pair of Shimano PDA600 SPD pedals along with a pair of cheap-ish Garneau Terra MTB shoes in early 2012.

I wear them for my daily commute (approx. 18 Km) and semi-regular long distance rides. I also walk on the street with them - to the office, pub, etc...not very far.

The cleats when new have right-angled edges, but now they have been "worn"/"smoothed" into more curved edges.

To use they "feel" a little bit loose, but sometimes they feel quite sticky (hard to remove my foot from the pedal), so I'm not sure.

On other pedals, I've changed cleats every few years, but I rode a lot less.

Is there a recommended period of time (based on usage, etc) to change cleats on MTB shoes?

Also, is there any suggestions on how to increase the life of your cleats? (I guess one would be don't walk on the street!)

Thanks.

I have similar problems as you describe, but mine come from dirt, mud, and other things that get caught in while doing MTB.

Aside from that, the Shimano SPD pedals develop some sort of a lip as they wear out, in the side "ramps" that rise the cleat when you twist the foot sideways. It happens in similar fashion as if you repeatedly hit the end of a metal rod with a hammer, until it deforms and starts to look like a nail head. This "lip" makes it very difficult to twist the foot, hence it is difficult to release the cleat from the pedal. The solution I have implemented is to file those lips out every now and then.

Close inspection to the pedal clamp mechanism is all it takes, scratch the ramps with your fingernail and if you feel a little stop near the end of it, then you file it and repeat the fingernail test until your nail can freely slide out of the ramp... Sometimes it is so little that even sandpaper can do the job. After that, clean the mechanism the best you can with a toothbrush and apply some lubricant. Apply lubricant also when you feel it's necessary. (I do it before every MTB ride, but almost every 10 rides for city commuting)

Regarding cleats, at least for me, I never change them, my shoes usually die first, then I try to put the same cleat on new shoes, and only if the bolt is too hard to remove (happened once) then I use new cleats...

My oldest pedals are 13 years old now, in the bike I use the most (the MTB for XC and light DH), have other 2 bikes with old SPD on them (commuting or urban riding), but only one pair of shoes for everything.

About 8 weeks ago I fell from a stopped position on my bike because my left SPD cleat would not disengage from a brand new pedal. The pedal was not adjusted at a high setting. The SPD shoe and cleats I was wearing were 8 years old. I put my hand down in a natural reaction to the fall and ended up breaking both bones in my left arm near my wrist. I now have a metal brace in my arm with 8 screws for attachment.

Trust me, buy the new cleats when the old ones give the first sign of difficulty to release. It's way cheaper and less painful than what I went through.


Upgrading cassette from 11-28T to 11-32T? I recently got a road bike that is equipped with a cassette that is 11-28, and while it runs like a dream on flat surfaces, I burn out on extremely steep hills. With that being said, is it worth the investment to upgrade the cassette to a 11-32, or should I suck it up and keep the 11-28 that’s on there now? I have an Ultegra 50-34 compact chainring, and a Ultegra RD-6800-GS derailleur, which according to their site, will accommodate a 11-32. This may be a silly question, but even if the rear derailleur can accommodate a bigger cassette, is the 11-32 much bigger than the 11-28? Will it fit in my tiny 47cm frame?

Thanks!

Frame size doesn't really matter.

11-32 does make a substantial difference; remember its the ratio of the front gear to the rear gear that matters. Your lowest gear will be 12.5% lower. Also, you'll get a wider (and likely more useful) spacing in gearing between changes.

You will need a new chain as well, but it should be fine to install. Putting a bigger cassette on is a good starting point.

Of course, you have to shift appropriately -- if you're running 50/11 all the time, you're going to be tired regardless of what the biggest cog is. A 11 small cog is not very useful all the time.

Finally, "extremely steep" has a different meaning to everyone and their abilities (and the type of biking they're doing). For example, a touring bike in the mountains might be using a chainring in the 20's of teeth and some huge cassette to get the gearing needed to comfortably ride up the mountains. Most racing bikes aren't really built with that kind of riding in mind remotely.

Also, if you're using a 47 cm frame and it has 700c wheels, you can also get a reduction in gearing (and height) by switching to 650b wheels (easy if you have disc brakes; bit more work if you have rim brakes, but might be possible). My personal view is people below 5'5" ish shouldn't be riding 700c wheels.

Let us assume that you weigh 70 kg and the bicycle weighs 15 kg.
70 kg at the pedals for 170mm cranks is 116.74 Nm.
34T chainring and 28T rear sprocket translates 116.74 Nm into 96.14 Nm.
The rear wheel has about 339mm diameter so there is 283.6 Newtons or 28.9
kilograms of force when cranks are horizontal. To get average propulsion force
over one crank revolution, multiply by 2/pi, so there is 18.4 kilograms of
force.
This allows climbing hills up to 18.4/85 = 0.216 grade, i.e. 21.6% grade. Such
hills are extraordinarily rare. Where I live, 10% hills are common but
over 20% hills are not.
If the minimum speed at which bicycle stays stable is 10 km/h or 2.78 m/s, then
climbing a 21.6% hill at this speed would require 501 watts or about two thirds
of a horsepower. A bicyclist producing 501 watts would tire out very quickly.
I suspect the limitation here is not lack of gears but rather lack of power.
Going up a steep hill is always difficult. No amount of low gearing is going to
change that.


Food during cross country ride I'm trying to put together a list of foods I can easily replenish in the USA as I tour around the country on my bike. I'm looking for things that are:

non-perishable or last in 100F heat for at least 4 days (Assuming desert summers in my bags).
Preferably light-weight.
At least relatively healthy.
Low-cost and ready availability.

Thus far I have various thick-skinned fruits/vegetables that should be alright (especially if attached to vine), peanut butter, beans & rice.

Are there any other suggestions here? I will naturally find information for the area I'm in to scavenge for natural sources of sustenance. However, in the deserts of the southwest where I will be starting this and doing all my training these sources are few and far between so they can't be readily depended upon.

I finished the ACA southern tier just this last month!

I'd usually be carrying bananas, sardines, peanut butter, oatmeal, knorr rice sides, whole wheat tortillas & granola bars. Less could certainly have been carried, but I'd usually go crazy at the grocery store. Most days you'll pass by a couple reasonably priced groceries so you don't actually need to carry too much on you.

Granola bars are your friends! I started off w/ rice & beans, but they take too much energy to heat up with a stove, and starting a campfire every night is not realistic.

"I will naturally find information for the area I'm in to scavenge for natural sources of sustenance" Don't know how much luck you'll have with that, but you'll be suprised at people's generoristy towards you. There were times when I'd go one or two days without touching my food stores.

Little Debbie Nutty Bars (and the like) are available in most gas stations, nonperishable, and have a lot of calories to the pound and to the dollar. They're not the best food in the world nutritionally, but you're going to need a ton of calories in your body to travel ~70 miles a day. I picked up the idea from 2x RAAM winner Danny Chew.


Compatibility of Tiagra 4700 shifter with MTB front derailleur I am aware that with the introduction of the Tiagra 4700 groupset Shimano now uses the 11-speed road cable pull ratio also for their 10-speed road systems. Therefore a  Tiagra 4700 right shifter is only compatible with Tiagra 4700 rear derailleurs and 11-speed road rear derailleurs.

Because I would like to run smaller chainrings in the front for my 2x10 setup I need to use a MTB front derailleur. Is this possible with a Tiagra 4700 left shifter or did the cable pull ratio change there as well? If not: Can I use a Sora ST-R3000 left shifter from their 9-speed road groupset instead? What are my options? Which MTB front derailleur would I have to use with which road STI shifter?

With doubles this sort of setup can usually be made to work reasonably well. There's at least one bike I know of on the market with the exact setup you describe, the 2019 Salsa Fargo Tiagra, and it does work. Putting a triple STI on a mountain front triple crank and derailleur is where it gets bad.

Why not install a larger cassette on the rear?
I have a full 4700 road bike. The rear derailleur is a 4700 GS. It easily accommodates a MTB 11-34 and stretches out to 11-36. I run the 11-34 on gravel trails.
Front end is 50/34.
11-36 cassette with 50 - 34 goes up steep hills. 34 -36 combination is almost so high, if you are not careful you can fall off going so slow forward.

MTB's have a different seat tube angle to roadies. MTB derailleurs are shaped to cater for the different angle. As you havew mentioned 4700 is a new 10 speed cable pull ratio. You "might" get away with using a XT 11 speed derailleur "might".

If you have a braze on FD, changing to smaller chain rings might not let the FD to get low enough.


SPD shoes that look like normal shoes We all know that SPD shoes can be worn off the bike (that is why they were designed), however there are not many SPD shoes that you would want to wear off-bike. There are even fewer (if any) SPD shoes that look presentable in a smart workplace. As for getting into one of those nightclubs with a strict 'your name's not down' door policy, as things stand, no SPD shoe would get you past the bouncers.

If you do know of any SPD shoes that look like normal 'interview grade' work-shoes please tell.

If you have looked for such a shoe and not found anything remotely appropriate, what would be in your dream specification? A gore-tex liner? Reflective heel tab? Carbon-fibre reinforced toe-box?

I am also interested in SPD shoes that you can and do wear to work and at work, particularly if they look completely different to the 'Shimano Golfing Shoe'(TM) / 'Bling innit' efforts foisted on the cycling public.

I know some people do not see any point whatsoever in a SPD shoe that you can wear all day or as part of a mixed transportation journey (e.g. cycle to the train station, catch the train and/or tube...) - it is different strokes/different folks. Some of us want to ride like the Dutch do - everywhere and all the time - but with some decent SPD pedals and sensible footwear.

I wear a pair of Austin Pedal shoes by Keen to work at my government office every day.

They're a fine shoe—they look decent and accept SPD's.

They aren't anything special.  There is no gore-tex liner (I think it'd be overkill for my commute most days).  There is no reflective tab, though that would be nice.  There is no carbon-reinforced toe-box—also probably overkill for my commuter shoe.

I think that they are a pretty good match for what they do.  I have worn them to symphony, job interviews, and meetings with the higher-ups.  No worries.

I guess that, since you really are polling, I would suggest that I wish that they came in more colors!  It would be nice if there were more options.  I purchased these specifically because they didn't look like cycling shoes—not that I think cycling shoes are distasteful.  I did want something that I could wear around though, that would never be a potential distraction for others.

I interviewed at a large corporation wearing Shimano M076s, and got the job. In fact, I'm wearing them at my desk right now.

http://bike.shimano.com/publish/content/global_cycle/en/us/index/products/shoes/mtb/product.image.+media+images+cycling+products+actionsports+SH+SH-M076_600x450_v1_m56577569830655087_dot_jpg.bm.512.384.gif


Pitted Cups - Can I get away with this level of pitting? I have two bottom bracket cups that I'd prefer to reuse (finding Avocet Bottom Bracket cups even on Ebay is hard!). I have purchased a replacement Avocet spindle of the correct size. I'm wondering if I also need to replace the cups. The condition of the cups is better than the condition of the axle. The pitting in the picture is only on one side of the cup - I tilted to cup to catch the light so that the picture would take - and it's not on the side of the cup that is hidden from view in the picture.  Here's a picture of the cups. What do you think?
edit: They are French threaded bottom bracket cups for an Avocet/Ofmega crankset that was known for using their own taper. The French threading is the real issue, and it's well known to be a problem. Now people use ISO aka BSA, British, threading, or, less commonly, Italian threading, both of which are non compatible. Additionally reaming and rethreading to those standards is not an easy option. You would have to add material and then do that.

My life has been such, living in this corner of the world, where it simply hasn't been an option to buy new.  And growing up here in a world before internet, if Lakeside Cyclery or Sears didn't have it, you weren't getting it anytime soon no matter the cash-flow. So...

One can often at least ease the pitting with the use of fine steel wool, fine grade sand paper, or a rotary tool spinning a ball-shaped grinding stone or felt cloth wheel & polishing compound.  It's always best to be conservative so I'd start with the steel wool first, and if I feel the benefit would out weigh the risk of damage that wrecks the piece, I move up the list I've put forth. I'll add here for general knowledge sake that regarding grinding or sanding a finish onto a work piece, the technique i advise is reversed.  One would typically start with more aggressive measures and work down to the finest finishing techniques. In fact that's what we'll end-up doing here---i finish a deal like this with #0000 steel wool.

I've had decent results getting pitted cone nuts and wheel cups into shape.  I define decent results here as grinding and rough feeling hubs spinning smoothly and quietly.  Reports from others whose bikes I've worked on reporting, "that wheel's still running great!" months after repair and repacking.  The times I've had occassion on my stuff to do this repair, ride for a few hundred miles and then dissect the hub, there hasn't been any real hints that it was doing more damage (wheel spun smooth, no appearance of unusual wear, the bearing balls came out looking quite the same as going in).  Anyway, this is obviously not as ideal as replacement, but I'm confident your cup will do fine for some time after this.  Quite frankly, cleaning and repacking a hub or bottom bracket with good clean grease (and new bearing balls if at all possible--there a dime a piece or less) is probably the chief reason for these successful out comes.

Here's a few tips:  Take locking pliers (ie: hemostats) or a needle-nose pliers and from a pad of steel wool (#0000--very fine), rip or cut a 2.5 cm wide strip. Fold and roll this strip to a general shape of a cylinder. Grasp with the pliers the ends of the cylinder causing it to bulge into a hard, round tip. Continue to hold this shape while working it aroun the inside of the cup. I go all around the cup, working the pitted area a little more.  Same technique if sandpaper required. No lower than 220 grit.  Care should be used to not involve tip of pliers into the cup. Also, prior to repacking CLEAN! out the cup or hub of all grit or steel wool fibers.
If you use the rotary tool, practice before hand and just barely touch the cup. I only do the pitted areas with this and then finish whole piece with fine paper then wool.
For cone nuts I'll have a thick piece of steel wool over an axle spacer, and with the race of the cone nut, I pinch the wool into the spacer hole and turn.
There've been times that I've paused in this endeavor only to find the pits were growing larger and more appeared where the already stressed metal had flaked away under the addition abrasion applied.  If you note this i would stop and just proceed with repacking and new bearings.  There's not a great deal of thickness to a cup (as compared to a cone nut)which makes it much tougher and riskier to hand-machine a cup's race smooth again.
Get er done.

I've personally not done it, but you may get some more life out of this by using a 2 part metal epoxy mix to fill the pits, bake, then smooth off.

The repair would probably not last more than ~months at best and may chew out within one ride, because the filler will not be anywhere near as hard as the hardened steel race.

The proper fix in terms of metallurgy would be to heat the race to remove the temper, then turn it in a lathe and skim off enough metal to equal the bottom of the lowest pit.  Then sand in the lathe, and re-harden the part, and finish by retempering.   This is well beyond the home mechanic's skill level.

Also risks taking too much metal off and leaving a thin wall without the material to resist sideways forces.

The most practical fix is to simply replace with new - A quick google suggests they're 68mm  diameter, which is common. but doesn't say if they're left/right hand thread.   Surely these can't be too hard to find a suitable replacement ?


What should I look for when buying a bike from an auction? I'm going to an auction to look for cheap gems. Each bike is shown only very briefly and the bidding starts immediately. No hands-on inspection is allowed.

What should I pay attention to when trying to decide how much / if to bid? Are there some immediate signs that I should look for that either hint to the high or low quality of a bicycle?

I don't know brands very well and the brands here in Finland might be different from other countries. However, brands I should look for or avoid are welcome, but any other more general external indicators for quality would be better.

I know this is similar to What should I look for when buying a used bicycle? but I think the situation is different enough to merit a separate question.

Just like with any other area of expertise, there is no substitute for years of experience. If you need a simple heuristic though, brand recognition in combination with a general knowledge of groupsets and their quality can go a long way.

At the very least, know how to tell forged components from stamped. Learn Shimano's and Suntour's groupset lineups. Groupsets are generally a good indication for the overall quality of the bike.

Know about the different qualities of steel (hi10 < 4130 chromoly < branded {reynolds, columbus}). Learn about the qualities of good steel lugs (some framesets are worth money that won't have any parts on them).

Back all this up with a smartphone and you should be good.

A aluminium frame is lighter then a steel frame. Old bikes and retro bikes often still have steel though. You can recognize an aluminium frame by its thicker tubes and welds. You will most probably not find carbon and titanium frames at such an auction.

Determine what kind of gears you want.

In case of an internal gear hub: Look which models and brands of gears would suite you. For example: for a gearhub you might want to have 7 of 8 gears from Shimano, or perhaps 3 gears of any brand would be sufficient.

In case of a derailleur: The most common brand is Shimano. I have listed them for you from bad to good: Altus, Acera, Alivio, Deore, Deore LX, Deore SLX, Deore XT, Deore XTS. For mountainbiking you'll need at least Deore but rather even better. This shifts quicker and lasts longer in case of mountainbiking. For commuting you want Deore and up, or Alivio if you wan't a real bargain. These are sufficient for commuting since less wear occurs and quick shifting is less important then with mountianbiking.

Altus and Acera are less reliable and don't shift as comfortable, so avoid them. Also, when a cheap Altus or Acera derailleur is assembled, other parts are often also of less quality.

Other parts such as steer, cranks, saddle post, etc. can be from a well known brand such as Shimano, SRAM, Contec, AVID, Sturmey Archer, and many more. Or, they can be no-names.

I know this is all not very precise, but it can give you a clue about the quality.

(edit: I hope I improved my answer a bit)


Real measurable benefit to ceramic bearings? Is there a real difference between riding on ceramic bearings and riding on stainless steel?

How would you measure it? Does it require it to be every bearing in the drive train, or will each set of bearings replaced improve performance?

Does anyone have real world experience with them to relate?

Edit:

I don't know if it matters on the bike, but I saw this today. If this is an indication of the difference in the level of friction resistance ceramic offers, then I'm in.

In the video:

The left pulley shown is Shimano DuraAce, the middle one is Campagnolo Record 11 speed. All three pulleys are fixed to 5Nm of torque at the axle bolt. And all 3 three have at least 1mm of play at the pivot, so there is no extra tension on the bearings compared to normal install in a derailleur. There is a difference in movement of about 18 seconds of spin in the video. It's crazy.

The short answer to your first question is "the power savings from using ceramic bearings compared to good steel bearings is almost zero." The short answer to your second question is "yes, it is possible to measure the difference but it's not easy." The longer answer, and the support for the shorter answers is below.

First, however, it depends a little on whether you're talking wheel bearings, or bottom bracket bearings, or both. If you're interested in measuring the difference, the way you measure differs for the two. BB bearing drag would show up in differences in drivetrain efficiency, while hub bearings would show up as a component of rolling resistance. The difference, of course, is that drivetrain losses only occur when you're pedaling, not while you're coasting, while rolling losses occur as long as you're rolling, whether pedaling or not.

You can measure differences in no-load hub bearing drag by holding the wheel up in the air with a fork, using a home-made speed sensor jury-rigged with a reed switch connected to a digital voice recorder. You spin the wheel up, then record and calculate the difference in timing "clicks" as the wheel decelerates. Swap bearings, lather, rinse, repeat.

However, this would be in a no-load setting and you might think differences in bearing drag might be amplified in load-bearing situations. If so, you'd have to test that way. You could do it in the lab but it's also possible to do yourself, in the field, with the jury-rigged speed sensor.

First some background. The rolling component of drag is typically measured by the coefficient of rolling resistance, Crr (the coefficient of aero drag is Cd, which is usually multiplied by the front surface area, A, and described by the combined term CdA). Crr can have a speed-dependent component but at cycling speeds this is negligible so we can assume Crr is constant. If so, the power demanded for moving a bike and rider at a given speed is pretty well known and understood: rather than go through it all here, I'll point to a (um, brilliant) method that allows you to estimate CdA and Crr which can be found here.

Now, if you do all of this, you'll find that for a typical bike, the total overall Crr from all sources (tires, tubes, hub bearings, and typical "smooth" road surface) of around .005. The Crr for really good tires on that same surface might be .0045; for really lousy tires the Crr might be .006; and for a really rough surface the Crr might go as high as .01. And, some context if you look at the power equation linked to above, you see that Crr scales exactly like gradient in its effect on power so when the Crr is .01, the effect on power is exactly like climbing a 1% grade. Likewise, an increase in Crr of .001, due either to a different tire or to putative bearing differences, is just like climbing a grade 0.1% steeper.

Here's one more fact, also derivable from the link above: a rule of thumb is that at 25 mph on a flat hard surface, a cyclist in good aero position needs around 250 watts (an exceptional aero position is achievable with under 200 watts). At 25mph, a difference in Crr of about .0005 is roughly equivalent to a difference in power of 5 watts. That is, a difference between a good tire and a very good tire is worth about 5 watts at 25 mph.

If you have done any field-testing of bicycle drag you'll realize that 5 watts difference in rolling resistance is pretty noticeable. Riders report that the difference between using ceramic and steel hub bearings is not noticeable.

Besides the supposed reduction in friction resistance some other issues have crossed my mind.

Let me bring two analogies - prosthetic hip joint replacements and car brake pads/discs combinations.

For the first one - a metal cup is used with ceramic head. Since ceramic is much harder than the metal, the metal cup wears out (the body can handle the metal ions and excrete them). Some time ago someone (source needed) came up with an idea to make the cup also from ceramics to prevent the wear down. The cause was that ceramic rubbing on ceramic (there is no possibility to grease the hip joint whatsoever, is it?) caused the ceramic particles being released to the body. Those were not excreted and caused serious health issues. What I'm getting to I'll explain in the moment.

Now about the brake pads/discs. For the pads there are different hardness of the pads available, and quite often the softer, the more expensive. Why would you spend more on softer pads if they wear out sooner, you may ask? The answer is simple - it's not the pads that wear out, it's both the pads and the discs. Thus the less the pads wear, the more the discs get ground off. And in turn, the harder the pads you use, the sooner the discs need to be replaced (extra costs and labour).

TL;DR; part starts here:

When using hardened steel cups with stainless steel balls it's the balls that wear out leaving the cups mostly intact. When tightening does't work anymore one would just replace (pretty affordable) balls.

When using ceramic ball bearings in hardened steel cups it's the cups that receive more wear as ceramic is harder. Then after the while not only one has to replace old ceramic balls but also replace worn out cups. Of course this does not apply if a complete ceramic cartridge bearing is replaced.


Can I put a 10 speed 11-36 cassette on a Road Bike with a 50/39/30 crank? I have a road bike with a Shimano 10 speed 105 group (2007).  It has a triple 50-39-30 crank. I want to put a 11-36 cassette maybe the Shimano Deore XT CS-M771 10-Speed Cassette  (Note: I can’t find an 12-36 cassette for sale).  The way I understand capacity  I would need 45t (50+36=86 30+11=41 86-41=45).

First is the shift ratio of my 2007 Shimano 105 10 speed shifters compatible with the derailleurs listed below:

The Shimano Deore XT RD-M772-SGS Shadow Rear Derailleur appears to have the 45t capacity but is rated for 34t max cog.

The Shimano XT RD-M780 Shadow Rear Derailleur SGS is rated for a 36t max cog but only has a 43t capacity.

Harris Cyclery list their Shimano XT RD-M772 Shadow SGS Rear Derailleur Top Normal as having a 36t max cog, this may be an error or what they have successfully run.  They want full list price of $129.95.

Most likely yes, the M772 will work.  As you have already calculated, the capacity is within spec, and the maximum sprocket size is out of range by just 2 teeth.  In my experience this is very likely to work, so long as the rear dropout on your frame is not especially near to the axle, and so long as you tighten the "B screw" more than normal with a smaller cassette.

Whatever you do, don't buy a "Dyna-Sys" model, because they aren't compatible with your shifters.  This rules out the M780.

Also note that with the super-low gear of 30x36, you do somewhat increase the chances of breaking a rear spoke (or the chain) if you put a large amount of force into the pedals with such low gearing.  This isn't a big concern, but don't get carried away with it unless your body weight is quite low.

I can see two issues- one being you can't expect the detents of your 10spd shifter to correspond to 11 positions- unless you decide you only need 10 of them, maybe.
The other issue is trying to use crossed gears, max forward to max rear, and especially min forward to min rear having the chain climb the pins on the larger gears.


Why are 36-spoke wheels a touring thing? I've been looking at tourers recently and they tend to have 36 spoke wheels (as does my hybrid on the back after I broke my original rim). What I don't understand is why high spoke counts aren't used on more bikes.  Race-style road bikes with low spoke counts and smooth roads I understand. Maybe 26" wheels are tougher than 700C (I don't know). But CX bikes run (sometimes much) rougher surfaces on 700C and similar tyre widths to tourers -- without luggage but surely it's shock load that breaks spokes.  Or 29er hardtails -- rougher conditions still, and it's not like you can expect good technique from all riders all the time.

Summing up comments into an answer, including a few points of my own:

More spokes are stronger; more holes in the rim weaken it. So a sweet spot must be found.

Standard numbers are good, for hole count and spoke gauge

Tourers have to keep going a long way from support, so durability counts (see also brakes); a little extra weight on a laden bike makes little difference unlike in a race.

One broken  or loose spoke in 36 doesn't make the wheel go as far out of true  as one in 32. I'd already experienced this on my hybrid; on the tourer I broke 2 rear drive side outer spokes (damaged in an incident with the chain) and still got home with a nearly true wheel.

Although materials have improved, touring is a conservative discipline in which there's no imperative to change what works.

Touring can mean sitting and spinning over rough roads for hours on end with a lot of weight on the frame.  In CX most of the weight is above the suspension formed by the rider's legs and the rider can stand as required.

I've been looking at tourers recently and they tend to have 36 spoke wheels (as does my hybrid on the back after I broke my original rim).

A touring bicycle needs a durable wheel, something that is repairable with lightweight equipment carried with you if it fails, and something that is likely to not fail in the first place.

What I don't understand is why high spoke counts aren't used on more bikes.

It's a cost reduction thing. For machine-built wheels, installing less spokes makes the wheel building process faster. At the same time, you can claim the low spoke count thing is an "improvement", supposedly reducing weight, and the fools with the money pay anything for the supposed "improvement". They don't realize that to make the rim equally durable, a low spoke count wheel needs a stiffer/heavier rim, something that adds more weight than the few eliminated spokes remove.

Race-style road bikes with low spoke counts and smooth roads I understand.

I don't. As I said, to reduce spoke count while keeping durability the same, you need a stiffer and heavier rim, which probably increases more weight than what is saved by eliminating few spokes.
Fortunately, everyone with money can affect the market. Let's start a campaign to buy only 36 spoke rims and hubs! If people buy the good stuff, the manufacturers are going to keep it in production.


Need cycling eyewear, but fogging is a big problem I'm commuting in temperatures ranging from -10 to -25C without windchill factored in. I have a typical pair of interchangeable lens wrap around cycling glasses. I find that they, without fail, immediately fog up when I ride due to the moisture in my exhalation. Wearing a balaclava as I sometimes must doesn't help.

I'm considering trying to find a cheap pair of ski goggles...

Given the poor road conditions, eye protection from debris and dust is imperative. How do other very cold weather commuters deal with this?

I suffered from foggy glasses a lot, I prefer to wear clear lenses since I tend to ride after dark frequently. I tried a few of different cycling glasses with clear lenses, eyeglasses with anti-fog coating, motorcycle goggles, and several pairs of safety glasses with no luck.

I finally found a pair of $9 MSA Safety Works safety goggles with anti fog coating that work well, don't fog easily, and have good peripheral coverage without obscuring my vision. They sit far enough off my face that they prevent fog when I'm stopped. So far this has been the best alternative to bulky ski goggles that I've used.

One of the biggest things you can do for any glasses to prevent fog is to keep them clean and free of sweat, oil, and residue.  I don't know if this is the best method, but i tend to just clean my glasses with a touch of dish soap and rinse well. Don't use harsh cleaners like windex or alcohol which may strip the anti-scratch and anti-fog coatings.

Also, do your best to avoid scratching your glasses, as this will make it harder to see and often can causes refraction when looking at light sources. I keep a glasses case in my bag for storage when not in use.

Any snorkeler will tell you... Saliva is a great anti-fog coating for the inside of your goggles.


is there an easy fix for worn down brakes? I have a really cheap Walmart bike with originally came with questionable brakes. After more than a year of commuting, they have worn down to next to nothing. Is there any easy fix at home to improve brake performance?

UPDATE: Brought it to a bike shop and they said its a mixture of cable stretch and worn brake pads.  Getting front and back brake alignment for $14

The easy fix is getting new brake pads.  The hard fix will be when they are worn down to metal and start to dig into the aluminum brake track of the wheel. At which point you will be better off getting a new bike rather than paying to replace wheels and brakes on a BSO.

I am pretty sure that cable stretch on brakes is bogus. A brake cable can support a really heavy load, and its main enemies are flexion and rust. A cable can slip, however, if it isn't clamped tightly enough at the brake. But getting a brake adjustment for $14 is pretty decent, and if your brakes work better afterward, your money was well spent.


What road bike tire pressure is best for speed? Is the maximum tire pressure always the fastest on a road bike? I've seen the Michelin chart on tire pressure from another question ("What pressure should I run my Road Bike tyres at?"), but they don't mention whether it is optimized for speed, safety, comfort, or some combination of these.

I have heard that the more pressure a tire has, the faster it goes. But this is not always true on a mountain bike, depending on the road/trail surface. Could it be that a smoother, less jittery ride at 105 psi might be faster than 120 or 130 psi on a road bike?

I generally agree with Angelo's answer. Tire diameter and your weight will determine the optimal pressure. Beyond that, this is actually a controversial subject.

Let's assume that you want to minimize rolling resistance. "Rock hard" isn't necessarily the best approach. One widely cited opinion is that above a certain pressure, there's no benefit in terms of rolling resistance, and the target is a 15% "drop" (vertical deformation under load)—it is argued that even with less drop than that (i.e., higher pressure) you do not see an improvement in rolling resistance, so all you're doing with that extra pressure is making the ride harsher.

Here are a couple of articles (pdf) discussing pressure, rolling resistance, and tire drop. You can see that there's a diminishing-returns curve in terms of power savings at higher pressures. The second one includes a graph showing how much you should inflate a tire to get a 15% drop depending on how much load there is on that wheel and how wide the tire is.

I should point out that this opinion is not universally held. Jobst Brandt, for one, is skeptical, but I'm not sure what he recommends.

From my own personal experience on a paved road, I found that I am generally a lot faster on my road bike when the tires are inflated to maximum pressure. I found that a lower inflated rear tire slows be down by as much as 11 minutes on a 15 mile ride. But I must add, that I was riding with a tailwind on my way back with the inflated tire. Nonetheless this 11 minute difference is accurate for the most part as I did the slower trial 15 mile run with the lower pressure tire fighting a headwind. So I guess the wind factor sort of cancel each other off.


How do I stop punctures for good? Last night I came out of work to a flat tire. This is the second time I've got a puncture with less than 100km done on a brand new set of schwalbe smart sam tires. needless to say I was quite annoyed. The first puncture happened after about 40km and the second was after 95km, last night. It was the same wheel both times. After the first puncture, I checked and double checked for any foreign objects in the tire and rim and I found nothing. I pumped the tire and kept it at about 55psi because I read this is good for avoiding punctures. All this to no avail.

I'm just wonder what can I do to stop punctures for good? I'm a heavy guy (about 110kg) so maybe this just isn't possible? I've tried slime before and that was useless. I currently ride on Smart Sam 26" x 2.25

There are a few things to do. I'd start by reading this link from Sheldon Brown.

First determine how the flats are occurring.

Inspect the tube. Is the rim tape on the rim properly? (if not, you'll see a puncture on the wheel side)
Is the tube being pinch flatted? (a snakebite flat, two very closely placed punctures - usually a sign of too low pressure)
When you re-install the tube, are you pinching it between the tire bead and the rim? (You can make a rolling motion over the rim with the tire after its seated to prevent this from happening).
If you can't find the puncture easily, pull the tube out of the tire, give it some air and then try to find the hissing. If you can't find the hissing, try passing the tube around your lips or dunk the inflated inner tube into water.

Check the inside and outside of the tire for any embedded debris, carefully. If you find some, remove it.
If the tube doesn't have any punctures, is the valve good? Sometimes a faulty valve causes pressure loss. You can either re-core the valve in some cases, or more easily just buy a new tube.

Many manufacturers make kevlar belted tires which have stronger puncture resistance (such as the Schwalbe Marathon Plus), but if your punctures are happening due to rim tape or something, then its not going to help.

If you are running such big tires at 55 psi though, I don't think it's low tire pressure -- I've had about 300 pounds of stuff (bicycle, rider, cargo) on a bike with 26x1.9" tires at around those pressures without any problems on some pretty shabby roads.

If the first flat was indeed a puncture due to debris, my guess is that you didn't actually get all the debris out.

put carnations condensed concentrated milk into your tube take out valve stem get a applicator bottle u need a hose that will either snug over stem or inner to fill up tube use half a can to a can per tube 3 fl oz should due. this id recommend if u are a green slime believer depending on thickness and type tires entry level regular tires no high end racing or rolled up tires!1 more method adhesive spray and use a bad tube spray inside of tire cover inner topside only cover with spray adhesive very well and cut off old valve stem apply old tube to the inside of good tire let set for awhile then re install


How long is it safe to store new tires before they degrade in quality? I bought some road tires that were made for flat resistance, but within two months, the sidewalls on both got damaged to the point where I was getting repeated blowouts. I wrote to the manufacturer, and they were kind enough to send me a replacement pair.

In the meantime, I bought some new flat resistant tires to replace the busted ones.

Now I have two new pairs of flat resistant tires, but I only have a use for one at a time. How long can I store a new pair before I have to worry about the material degrading, dry rot, etc.?

(not mentioning the brands here because I don't want to bash the manufacturer that sent me the replacement.)

It depends on the storage conditions. If kept at room temperature, not excessively humid or dry, and kept in the dark, they can be stored for a long time. Oftentimes for years.

Your best storage bet is to wrap them in plastic and stash them in the back of a closet. I've kept high-end tubulars for two years that way and that rubber is much more sensitive to storage/dry rot compared to puncture-resistant tires.

I got some 15 year old new tires I've had in my garage for years. I put them on my car last week and they're fine so far.


How bad is switching derailleur gears under load? I have heard several times the wisdom that you should not switch derailleur gears while pedalling hard ("under load"). The "right way", according to those people, is to pick up speed, stop pedalling, then switch gears, then pedal lightly (without any force actually pulling the bike) until the chain switches, and only then can you resume pedalling with full power.
Otherwise Unspeakably Bad Things are supposed to happen.
My wife however doubts this, and upon a little thought I have to admit, I don't see anything that could go wrong either. But then neither of us are very experienced.
So... how bad is it to switch gears while putting a lot of force on the chain? Is it total bullshit; will the bicycle explode immediately; or something inbetween?

The answer heavily depends on the groupset construction/generation and personal perception of what is "bad", among other factors. Below are a few aspects that I am aware of.

Switching gears in the traditional bicycle drivetrain assumes there is a momentarily side load on the chain, twisting it and forcing it to jump/fall from one cog to another. The chain is very flexible in one plane, but has limited sideways flex before the metal becomes too stressed. In the worst case, "Unspeakably Bad Things" is one of links of the chain breaking because of that excessive side load. Usually, bad shifting manifests itself as horrible metal clunking and abrupt pedal jerking, but nothing breaks (yet).

Aside from the chain, similar side load is experienced by the cassette and chainrings. Similarly, a potential for bending individual teeth on them exists.

The probability of a mechanical problem during shifting can be increased by several factors. Among them are: front-shifting while loading the pedals, back-shifting while pedaling hard, weak pin in the chain, fast shifting over many gears at once causing the chain to twist too much; misaligned derailleurs; worn drivetrain components; bad luck.

Older (more than ~40 years old) cassettes were made of plain cogs without any features to help shifting. Recent cassettes and chainring have ramps and pins that assist shifting, making the opportunity window for chain overload smaller. Most modern MTB cassette designs were reported to greatly alleviate the problems with shifting under load in either direction, according to many reports I've seen on the net. Even for cheap Deore 12-speed cassettes, it is said to be safe to shift without taking it easy on the pedals.

Your description of events "to pick up speed, stop pedaling, then switch gears, then continuing pedaling" applies to internal gear hubs, but not to the cassettes/derailleur designs. In order to complete the shift, one must keep the chain moving over the cogs, which means pedaling (even if with less effort) during the whole shifting process.

In terms of practical advice, I'd say that there are several situations.

It is usually safer to shift to smaller front or rear cogs while pedaling hard than the other way around.
It is usually safer to shift at the back than at the front under load. The twisting angle at the cassette is usually smaller than it would be at the chainring.
It is recommended to be conscious about shifting when pedaling uphill. The pedaling torque is the highest in such situations. If possible, one should choose the right gear combination just before starting the uphill movement, at the trajectory's lowest point. Making such predictions requires some experience.
Similarly, never shift while standing still. The torque is high at the starting point, the chain may be cross-shifted over multiple cogs, making it more twisted than usual. If you cannot safely start in current gear, it is safer to lift the bike and pedal "it in the air" with your hand to complete the shift.

in my experience it is better to shift gears with no load on the chain. So there is no rattle. My bike is over 9 years old and is in good working order.


Why are both Schrader and Presta valves still used on tubes? It is standard for road bikes to adopt Presta, whereas nearly all else use Schrader.

I personally think Schrader are better:

I've had fewer Schrader valves break on me than Presta
No problems if needing to use car pumps
Have also seen long Schrader valves for deep rims
Less fiddly

The main thing is that the Presta valve is thinner, and takes less of a bite out of the rim.  This is quite important as the rims get narrower.

Further, the Presta works better with hand pumps in that there's no spring that the pump needs to overcome to get air into the tire.  Also, the Presta always has the fully-threaded body (which is possible with Schrader, but rare), so a nut can be used to hold the valve in place -- again, quite important with hand pumps.

Never had a bike valve stem break on me, that I can recall.

When I was racing sixty odd years ago you either had a valve with a Valve Rubber, or high pressure valves, the thinner high pressure tires and tubes, and Tubs [so called tubeless tires] had these as you call them Presta valves we called them high pressure and I would think they are a refined Schrader valve.


Windproof jacket for winter riding where I live winters usually are -15°C to 5°C. For MTB I wear sports base layer and fleece jacket, but problem is wind goes right through making stomach and chest area very red and painful. I have a cheap windproof jacket, but it's unbreathing and sweat condensates on the inside, so stopping even for a short time in those temperatures while wet is dangerous for health. Wearing base layer + fleece + backpack i don't feel cold at all. All I need is something windproof in the front and still very breathable.
Would cycling gilet/vest/waistcoat be sufficient? Are their fabric windproof? Maybe long sleeve windproof jacket is better, but are they breathable? Or maybe loose fleece at all and go with something else like softshell jacket? Please share your experience.

Specific product recommendations are off topic on this site as they tend to become obsolete quickly.

There are plenty of breathable windproof, cycling specific jackets available and reviews are easy to look up.

Wearing a wind-permeable fleece on a bicycle in cold weather is less than optimum because cycling always involves wind (although you are moving relative to the air, rather than the wind moving relative to you.

When you add a wind-proof layer to your fleece you are probably over-insulated and get sweaty when riding, then cold when stopped. Try a thinner insulating layer, and open zips etc to get some ventilation when working hard and avoid over-heating.

The problem is the backpack.
It will keep your back h and sweaty, while the rest of your body is cold.

If you could use a panier or a bike packing saddle bag, you could just wear an all around heavier windproof coat with pit vent to let air out.

I've not seen a winter cycling jacket with a lighter back and a heavier front side.


Alternating brakes on descents: is it really useful? I heard from many sources (some of them on this site, e.g. on answers to this question here) that you should be alternating the use of your front and rear brakes.
Most people give as a reason that the brakes can cool better that way.

I have been mostly doing the same, but I never really understood if it actually helps and/or if there is a good explanation for it.

The way I see it: when descending we transform all our potential energy (at some altitude) first to kinetic energy, then to heat in the brake pads/rims/disks.

Does it actually matter if we first heat up the front brake a bit more, then the rear brake, then front again etc. compared to just braking evenly with both of them?

I looked at modelling this and it's surprisingly complicated.  There are quite a lot of time constants and heat flows to consider.  If I had a bunch of logging non-contact thermometers I'd consider an experiment.

In practical terms you might want to think about the failure modes if both brakes are working equally hard: If you need to slow down more but both sets of pads/rims/discs/brake fluid are already hot you have less in reserve than if one is cooling while the other is heating -- that last bit of braking might be enough to tip you over the edge.

For a finite length of descent, getting one brake hot enough to lose significant amounts of heat early in the process can help, but heat transfer is linearly proportional to temperature difference,  which will counteract the effect of having one brake hot early. The front brake will get more airflow and so cool faster than the back brake; but if you need to stop you'll need the front brake to work well (and predictably), so running downhill with the front brake lightly on probably isn't a good plan.

For the same total heat input per brake, if the peak temperature of the braking surface is higher it will lose heat into the air faster, potentially (and this is the hard part to model) reducing the transfer to the rest of the system (tubes for rim brakes, fluid for hydraulic discs).  In addition this can only increase the heat lost to air from the working face of the pads as a hot pad touching a hot rim can't give up heat, but a hot pad close to a hot rim with air blowing though the gap can. This is more applicable to rim brakes as the airflow over the pads in a disc sysyem is tiny -- clearances are smaller and there's often a mechanism blocking the airflow. Most pads have poor thermal conductivity meaning little or no heat out the back (sintered metal disc brake pads are an exception).

Whether you use both brakes evenly or alternate, you have no idea whether one of them is getting hotter than the other.

You cannot control a variable that isn't monitored.

If you had a display showing brake temperature, then the best way to brake would be whatever manner keeps both brakes at the same temperature. This would be almost certainly be achievable with a multitude of braking patterns, alternating and not.


Higher saddle height and pressure on palm It is recommended to adjust saddle height using a formula. I made calculation and adjusted the saddle position to a higher point than my usual riding position. But now pressure on my palm increased significantly in spite of comfort in riding. Should I use some hand gloves or put some good type of handlebar cover? What are the recommendations for saddle height and palm pressure adjustment?

Rather than setting your seat height according to a formula, I recommend setting it through experimentation. The rule of thumb is that you should set your seat height so that when one leg is fully extended at the bottom of the pedal stroke, that knee should be almost but not quite straight. You should be able to pedal comfortably without rocking your hips in this position. Note that this height can change based on how much you ride, the fore/aft position of the seat on the seatpost, your age, etc. This is just a starting point--you need to repeatedly fine-tune your seat height to find what works for you.
Raising your seat without making any other changes is naturally going to rotate your torso forward so that you carry more weight on your hands, as you've discovered. You may simply get accustomed to this in time. You could also raise your handlebars to rotate your position back. Lots of cyclists (myself included) do wear padded gloves, and it's not a bad idea to try them, but these are more to smooth out shocks transmitted through the handlebars than to redistribute your weight. Either adapting to your position or correcting it is more important.

That calculator doesn't ask any questions about the geometry of your bike, your foot length, cleat position (or normal foot position if flat pedals) or shoe design.

If you have large feet, you may need to move your saddle back. Having your saddle too far forwards moves your body further over your hands, increasing the fraction of your body weight your arms and hands have to support.

If you don't already have another similar bike where you don't experience this discomfort, I strongly recommend you ask your local bike shop about a bike-fit session.


Tubeless tire deflating through sidewall On my mountain bike I have Continental X-King tires (tubeless ready) on tubeless ready rims. I rode them a couple of times with tubes and now I went for tubeless setup with Stan's NoTubes Sealant.

At first everything looked fine, but they keep on deflating slowly. From 3 bar to 1 bar in roughly 10 hours. I've submerged the tires in water to see what's wrong. There are no major cuts or holes, just very small bubbles are leaking through the sidewalls. I did a couple of rides to distribute the sealant inside the tire, I also tried leaving the wheel laying horizontally overnight, but no luck so far.

Is it going to fix by itself after a few more pump-ups, or is the tire bad?

I've found Contis in general to be a bit harder to seal and take up to a few weeks of riding before they settle down.  I've tried Mountain King II and XKings both the "Protection" versions I also have friends who have tried this.

Two things that might help

Before fitting wipe the inside of the tyre with Isopropyl Alcohol.  The theory is it removes the "release compound" which the sealant might have issues with.
Put lots of sealant in (like 150-200ml) and ride for a couple of weeks.  You can then remove the excess sealant if they've settled down (either using a syringe through the valve or by pulling one side off the rim).  Riding generally seems to be much better than wheels sitting in the shed for sealing.

I've fitted 3 new Mountain King 2s and an XKing and the last two I fitted seemed to be better using the techniques above.  Obviously I've not done an "A/B" test so this is just my experience.  My current fix is to buy Maxxis instead which seem to go up no problem.

My sidewalks start leaking in my Hodag fat bike tires after they get sufficiently worn that the cords start showing. So far sealant hasn't helped because I think centrifugal forces tend to keep the sealant up against the tread area. I'm going to replace the tires when they get to this stage of their life.


Why would one ever buy a 12-25 cassette when an 11-25 is available? I was looking at purchasing a new cassette and chain. Looking at the available cassettes for SRAM components, there is a big variety of sizes available:

11-23: 11-12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23
11-25: 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-23-25
11-26: 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-23-26
11-28: 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-22-25-28
11-32: 11-12-13-15-17-19-22-25-28-32
12-25: 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23-25
12-26: 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23-26
12-27: 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-24-27
12-28: 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-22-25-28
12-32: 12-13-14-15-17-19-22-25-28-32

Now I can understand why someone would choose a cassette based off of how many teeth the big gear has. Some people live in hilly or mountainous areas and desire a higher number of teeth. Some people live in flat areas where they simply won't use those cassettes with a lot of teeth on the big gear.

But why would anyone ever choose to buy a cassette with 12 teeth on the small gear instead of 11? 11 teeth = higher maximum speed. I doubt many people buying a nice set of components (Shimano, SRAM etc) would ever say "I don't need to go faster so 12 teeth is fine with me."

What's the point of 12 teeth when you could opt for 11 instead?

If you want to maximize your max. speed, go for an 11 tooth cog. If you want to maximize your average speed, unless you're a pro you probably are better off without it. Even cruising at 40km/h does not require and 11 tooth cog.

For example, take a look at this table, showing cruising1 speeds for a 11- 21 tooth cassette:

And compare to this table for a 12 - 25 tooth cassette:

You can see that the 11 tooth cog is only really useful for cruising speeds that riders at the professional level can maintain, or for short bursts. So, like I said, if you aren't trying to break your own max speed record, you may be better off with a 12 tooth cog.

(Tables screen captured from bikecalc.com. Check it out.)

I remember reading a while back about how most riders can't maintain a high enough wattage output to make an 11 tooth cog worthwhile, but I couldn't turn it up. Maybe another contributor will post it.

1 Cruising here means pedalling at 90 r.p.m.

This might not be welcomed but Michele Ferrari has a website http://53x12.com. The idea is to use smaller gear and higher cadence because using 11 cog requires tremendous amount of torque that makes it hard to pedal efficiently.

With 11 speed cassette now available, tighter spacing between cogs is achievable with 11 cog. But use 12 if you want to be efficient.


Replacement dropouts with derailleur hanger for Kona Unit A friend of mine has a single speed Kona Unit and wants to make it geared. The model he has (likely 2012 or 2013 model) uses sliding dropout. He currently has single speed dropout plates without a derailleur hanger. What replacement plates are available for the sliding dropouts with a derailleur hanger?  Are these paragon dropouts (or compatible with paragon), Tange dropouts, or custom to Kona?

Any suggestions on which dropout plates to use to replace the drive side with a geared dropout plate would be helpful.

FYI: I referenced all sites listed in the following question and didn't find sliding dropouts for this bike on any of them:Determining which derailleur hanger is compatible with a frame

Current dropout looks like:

(source: bikeman.com)

Is this what you're looking for?

KONA #CMPHCC Derailleur Hanger

I think you could get it directly from Kona.
Kona dropout


Since hybrid bikes may be a compromise with no benefits, why are they still often preferred for commuting instead of drop bar bikes? Since hybrid bikes may be a compromise with no benefits, why are they still often preferred for commuting instead of drop bar bikes?

According to at least one opinion, hybrids are a compromise with no benefits.
What is the downside to me purchasing a road bike instead of a hybrid?

Using drops bars instead can make you a few mph faster because the posture makes it more aerodynamic. I felt that my road bike with a pannier was faster than my hybrid bike without it! It seems like a lot of cycling commuters I see are missing out. My city's pretty bike friendly.

From what I've read, bikes with drop bars can be comfortable, be affordable, have wider tires, have fenders, and carry panniers.

Some of those features are more common in cyclocross and touring bikes than road bikes.

Interestingly, people find that drop bars make the bike more comfortable for longer distances. Often, when there's discomfort, bike fit or changing the posture or pedalling form is recommended. If the rider isn't used to such a low posture, the stem could be raised.

It's possible to get a used bike with a drop bar at a reasonable price. If a faster bike makes you drive less, you might save more even if you had to pay more for a faster bike and its parts.

It's possible to get bikes that have eyelets for mounting racks for panniers, and fenders. If they don't have them, it's possible to get adapters so that they could be mounted. Another option is bikepacking bags.

So far, the only advantages of hybrid bikes that I know of are peripheral vision and braking power. In bike friendly cities, they shouldn't be as much of an issue.

Simply, I reject the premise of your question and I'm sure I'm not alone. I say that as someone who has a tourer and a hybrid, and commutes on both - the speed difference is much less than the variability in traffic volumes.

In practical commuting conditions you're rarely aero-limited anyway, rather it's the speed of traffic, and to a lesser extent the acceleration. The extra visibility from the more upright position can mean getting away from a junction a touch sooner than in a lower position.

The biggest aero benefit from drop bars is when riding in the drops - and you don't often see people commuting in the drops. That position is much more useful for sustained effort than the typical stop-start commute.

Hybrids generally have a sufficiently forgiving fit that you can buy nominally the right size, get the saddle height right and go. No hassle, no need to be particularly flexible. Most commuters won't have heard of the concept of having your bike fitted properly, and would rightly have no interest in it.

I have this theory "The Couch On Wheels Mentality". This means, most people, likes being comfortable the whole time.

Most riders are casual riders (most can't even hop a pebble) the less they get involved in the exercise the better. A drop bar bike get you involved in the handling, you need to push your weight onto those bars, you need to check your 7 and 5 o'clock for cars (5 and 7 o'clock in England and such) and if it's a fixie you would be pedalling, etc.

Whereas in a hybrid you are upright on a fat seat, pedalling makes you sweat less because of assistance, your waist doesn't work that hard, etc.

Basically it comes down to preferences. For me, in Santiago de Chile, the perfect whip for commuting is a Dirt Jump Bike, or a BMX. Round fat wheels because streets have pot holes, you can hop if you need to, compact and light enough so you can take them in elevators (this city has lots of tall buildings) and if you ride brakeless chances of getting it stolen are slim to none.


How to assemble this headset? I bought a new threaded headset for my old steel winter beater bike, but it is slightly different from the current one and I am not sure about the correct order and orientation of the parts. I placed the bottommost one on the left.

Is this the correct order?

Without knowing the exact model of headset you're installing it's difficult to give a confident yes, however it looks correct. From left to right you have a fork crown race (this gets pressed onto the fork), two head tube cup and bearing assemblies (see below), upper race/dust cap (installed directly onto the upper head tube cup assembly), and finally a lock nut (this should be installed above any spacers you may use). The orientation of the parts in the first photo appears correct as well. If you've never installed a headset Park Tool have an article on servicing threaded headsets and Sheldon Brown has an article going over headset types and service procedures.

The only unknown is if the two head tube cup assemblies are identical (ie, can be swapped freely) or if there is a specific upper and lower assembly. There should be markings on outer housing or something in the installation instructions to help identify which is which if they came as an upper/lower pair. You may also find that only one fits snugly into the dust cap and the other is loose which would indicate which one to use as the upper.

it's depending on what kind of fork shaft you do use.But you will commonly see the lock nut,lock nut is a big bolt,next of lock nut is adjustable race ring which was mounted tightly so you have to use the spring supported pliers to open it.then you will see the bearings.


New Chain causing skipping on cassette - will this work itself out or is it unsafe? I just installed a new chain on my 2002 Trek 2200 Road Bike.  The old chain was a Shimano 9 speed that I installed 18 months and about 5000 miles ago.  It had stretched modestly and was full of winter cruft/grime.  The new chain is a SRAM 9 speed, my first time using the gold snap ring system.  I followed instructions and made sure I have the same link count as the chain that came off the bike.  The cassette was new with the old chain, so it has about 5000 miles on it and doesn't appear to have significant wear.  After installation and a clean/wipe/lube/wipe, I took it for a 15 mile easy ride at about 15-16 mph.  It shifts perfectly and I didn't have to make any adjustments to either derailleur.  Three times, however, when putting it under stain (once on a modest hill climb, once starting from a stop sign in a fairly big gear, and once on an acceleration coming out of a sharp turn) it skipped several teeth and caused my foot to slam down hard.  On the hill, it actually hurt as I had my weight off the saddle (not really standing) and I came down hard on the inside of my thigh.  I think all three were on the right side (power train side) pedal stroke, and I don't think they were all in the same gear.  I'm pretty sure it was the rear cassette that skipped, not the front chainring, but it did happen really fast each time.  I will also say that it's not like these were the only three times I put substantial pressure on the pedals in the ride - I wasn't going hard, but I wasn't being tentative or anything.  Also, in case it's relevant, it was cold, about 40 degrees F or about 4 degrees Centigrade.

My question:  Is this going to get me hurt, or will the new chain 'settle in' over a few rides?  I searched here and pretty much got confirmation of what I had previously thought, that you always get a new chain when you get a new cassette, but you should be able to get a few chains out of each cassette.  Thanks!

Over time an old chain and cassette wear together, so you don't notice the wear until it gets really bad.  When you replace the chain while leaving the old cassette the tooth profile is no longer correct and the new chain will skip off of the teeth, especially under load.

Unfortunately it won't get better and the only recourse is to replace the cassette as well.  In the future you can save money by changing the relatively inexpensive chain more often as the cassette wears faster with an elongated chain.

More info:  http://sheldonbrown.com/chains.html

If you change your chain you must change the cassette or you're looking for problems.

The chain basically molds the cassette and when you put a new one on, it's fresh but the cogs are shaped by your old worn out chain.

So the new chain will not work well with the old, worn cassette.


How do I check my steel frame for water ingress, and minimise the risk of rust? I have a bottle cage on the upper side of my downtube, and yesterday I noticed that one of the screws has gone missing.  I don't know when this happened, but it could have been months ago.  I often leave my bike parked in the rain, so I'm now concerned that water has entered the downtube through the exposed screwhole and settled in the frame, which is made of steel.

How can I check if there is water ingress and minimise any damage?  My first thought is to turn the bike upside down for a few hours and let any water drain out, but is there a better way and/or more I could do?  I would like to stop any rust in its tracks.

Water will always find a way to enter the frame, if not through the bolt hole then via the seat tube or head tube or gas exhaust holes. Turning the bike upside down will not be very effective unless you fall into a river often. What you can do is 1) make sure that water has regular ways to leave the frame; 2) use special coatings on the inside surfaces to inhibit or prevent rust ; 3) perform regular maintainance to prevent bike parts from binding together.

The lowest point of the frame is its bottom bracket shell. That is where all water tend to come. Check if the frame has a hole there so that water can drip out.

You will need to strip your frame before applying a rust inhibitor. See a good guide here: https://surlybikes.com/info_hole/spew/spew_care_and_feeding_of_your_steel_frame

Lastly, you should put grease at the places where the frame holds other parts: bottom bracket threads, seatpost, quill stem (if you have a threaded one ). That would prevent parts rusting together, making it impossible to detach them later.

I would pull out the seat-post and flip the frame over to make sure no water is inside. Then let the bike dry out in a warm and dry environment for a few days.

For a quick and dirty fix:

Take the bike outside and spray a bunch of Fluid Film inside the steel frame tubing and let it soak in.
Turn over and drain out any excess (if any and dispose of properly). This stuff seems to work great and stops metal from further degradation.

(Read Amazon reviews and other product info about safety precautions.)