What is the practical advantage of disk brakes over rim brakes? Disk brakes are becomming more popular on bikes now, and I was just wondering what the advantage is of this type of brake over the older rim brakes.

Working backwards from how it works:

Not using the rim means the brake is unaffected by how straight the rim is, and heating the rotor doesn't affect the tyre. The rim is not worn away by braking and the rotor material can be selected entirely for its suitability for that one purpose. This also allows smaller clearance between pads and rotor, allowing:

Increased pressure between brake pad and rotor compared to rim brakes means disks are less affected by water or other contaminants. Pads can be made of harder material giving increased pad lifetime.

Having the brake caliper further away from the tyre means it's less affected by mud, and it can be made partly or fully enclosed to further sheild it. The rotor is also less likely to  hit obstacles as it's further from the ground.

Being a hub brake makes unconventional designs possible. Single sided wheel mounts are the most obvious example, but some suspension systems are incompatible with rim brakes, and building a rim braked carbon composite wheel is much harder than building one to use a hub brake.

Disk brakes can also be fitted to both sides of a wheel for increased heat dissipation, and it's easier to vary the design for different characteristics (weight, heat capacity, modulation etc). Doing that with a rim brake means the brake manufacturer has to start selling wheels as well.

These combine to make disk brakes more reliable and easier to maintain.It's also somewhat easier to remove and reinstall wheels as you don't have to release the brake first.

Disc will always be better. Now there are systems lighter than v's. even a cheap set of disc brakes are better. i used traditional brakes until 2 years ago when i bought a bike with dual mechanical  disc brakes and immediately felt the huge difference. its not really that they stop better but how they feel when stopping. its the same feeling from braking in a car or motorcycle. with v's braking isnt as good even if it can stop the bike just as fast. disc is more superior and dominant overall. the control you have with disc is amazing compared to v. traditional brakes will never ever have the modulation and advantages that disc will always have. facts are facts. dont care if ur a v brake fan and a weight weenie. gotta move on same day ya know? dont need them? thats fine i didnt either but they are so good i want them and i got them. never going back to traditional brakes ever again :) ya wonder why u started to see more and more disc brakes on bike eh? maybe cuz they work so dam good? try them with a professional setup not one from kmart or walmart cuz those are not adjusted correctly therefore people sometimes assume they suck. have a nice day


Sizing guide for road bikes vs mountain bikes i usually take a 21 inch size in mountain bike, but I want to buy a road bike. I'm 6'2'' and have a 34 inch inner leg. How do the sizes translate from mountain bike to road bike?
Thanks

There does not seem to be a universal standard for bike sizing. Due to the variety of designs and geometry size will vary between manufacturers and intended use, touring, racing, commuting are all slightly different. You often hear about the importance of fit and it's relation to performance and comfort and this is where a good relationship with your LBS is key. Most brands will have a guideline to get you in a range. One brand may place you solidly on a 58cm frame a different brand might place you between a 58 and a 60. You really have to test ride several sizes and brands to see what fits. A proper fitting will take into account your geometry and the bike geometry and try to get a match. It may involve swapping stems, adding headset spacers adjusting saddle setback. These adjustments make the frame feel bigger or smaller to get you comfortable.

Sorry this is impossible to directly compare.  Because of subtle different purposes.

On a MTB you use the ground, for dabbing, for traction in turns, and as an obstacle to jump or reflect off..

On a road bike the ground exists only as something for the tyres to roll on.

So fit on a road bike is all related to how your contact points map to the feet/hands/backside, and how your various angles sit for comfort.

Conversely, on a MTB you want to be able to move the bike and body so they're in the right places relative to the ground, for balance and applying force to the bike, through the bike to the ground.

Answer A road bike needs to be comfortable sized for the rider when mounted, a MTB needs to be slightly physically smaller to be moved around by the rider.


Can a road bike's rear derailleur be used for either a 9 speed cassette or 10 speed cassette? I currently have a 9 speed 11-25T cassette on my road bike. I'm thinking about switching to a different cassette with more teeth on the climbing gear. The cassette I'm currently look at is a Shimano CS-5700 10 Speed Cassette.

Can I swap my cassette from 9 speed to 10 speed without swapping my rear derailleur?

Is a 10 speed cassette wider than a 9 speed cassette or is the spacing between the gears wider?

Do I just need to adjust the wire tension in order to alter how much the derailleur moves when shifting in order to accommodate for the difference in spacing?

The spacing between 9 speed and 10 speed is controlled at the shift lever.

A 10 speed rear dérailleur will work with a 9 or 10 speed cassette and shifter. A 9 speed rear dérailleur is not compatible with 10 speed.

The width of the chain and the cogs is the biggest issue. The pulleys on a 10 speed dérailleur are narrower, and a 10 speed chain will not rest correctly on the jockey pulleys of a 9 speed dérailleur.

That does not mean it will not physically work, only that the shifting performance will be slow, you may drop gears unexpectedly, or have the chain skip unexpectedly.

Long story short, 10 speed should be 10 speed all the way throughout your bike for it to work consistently and properly.

Cable tension has nothing to do with cog spacing. That is designed into the shift lever. It is not adjustable, except by replacing the shifter.
I hope that helps.

As far as my knowledge stretches,  the shifters control how far the derailleur moves with each shift so as long as the number of speeds on the cassette = the number of speeds on your shifters you will be fine. But be careful when selecting cassettes as you need a 10 speed wheel to run a ten speed cassette.

SO BASICALLY THAT IS A YES BUT YOU MAY NEED A NEW WHEEL OR HUB!


How to carry a large backpack on a bike rack? My 3 kids ride their bikes to school and carry 20 pound back packs stuffed quite large. They won't fit in any pannier I can find.

I've considered hanging them off the side of the pannier with bungies to keep them from shifting, and perhaps a sheet of stiff plastic to keep them out of the spokes.

Side baskets are too large for them to fit their bike @ the bike rack @ school.
I've also considered a very narrow basket on top of the rack but puts the center of gravity high, makes it harder to swing their leg over the bike, etc.

Looking for better ideas.

I too had this problem and found a somewhat unique solution. I explored using a pannier, but since I carry a laptop daily, I was worried about what would happen if the bike slipped on the ice and crushed my laptop bag (something that actually happened to me as a teenager)

Like you stated, baskets are too tall and cumbersome, so instead I found a 19 by 13 inch metal serving tray and mounted it with heavy duty rubber straps. It even matches the color of my bike panniers so I think it's a good solution. It's very freeing to be able to carry so much on my bike without the constant weight on my shoulders.

Since the laptop sits at the bottom of the backpack, I feel like the metal walls of the tray should absorb the shock of a slip or fall and protect it inside. So far I've received multiple compliments on this design. It's been over a year now on my bike and has held up well.

Best way is sidestep the problem altogether.

I take my kids on their bikes if I have time. If I don't take them they don't go by bike. I solve the bag problem by carrying all the bags myself. I have a home made pannier very cheap, very simple as you can see in the picture. It's quite wide and has two projections so I can hang a bag  off each side at the back and they're kept out to the sides clear of the wheel. Where the shopping is hanging in the picture. Usually I have my laptop and tools where my little daughter is sitting as well.

I've had more stitches than frankenstein so I'm not going to look much worse with a few scrapes if something goes wrong. But I'm not interested in losing a kid or getting my girls scarred up.


What road bike would suit my criteria? I own two bikes, both are vintage. Steel frames with 700C wheels, friction downtube shifting, drop bars, toe clips. One is more speedy with less comfort (fixed gear conversion), the other leans more towards commuting/cyclocross (touring).

I've recently been really wanting to get into more serious road cycling and/or cyclocross after re-starting riding bicycles this year. So far I've looked at many brands and models available to me where I live, and I'm still really unsure. I'm currently settling with Trek Madone 3.1, full carbon, used, but really cheap. It has a mix of SRAM and Shimano (105 I think) on there. I'd say my budget is somewhere between 700 to 1000 US dollars, that value is converted. Definitely not looking for anything professional, but for something that still at least has a carbon fork.

I already have fine commuters, this I need mainly for tougher exercise and recreational long-distance riding and maybe as an extra fast commuter, but not for racing, since in my country the road conditions are pretty bad and sportive cycling is rather unpopular (except for CX).

I'm also looking at B'Twin, Bianchi, Author, Boardman, Merida, Vitus, Raleigh, and some others.

Sportive Cycling ? Is your country France perhaps.

Anyway, for longer rides and tougher exercise, it all depends what you mean by longer rides and tougher exercise.

If by tougher exercise you mean more exertion then a vintage bike is perfect as it weighs more and you will get more exercise... or something. So save yourself the money and keep riding your current vintage bikes.

Personally I have a Bianchi Vertigo which I love.  The frame is carbon monocoque which makes it light and being carbon it means that I don't get as tired on longer rides and can recover faster to do more km's/miles the following day/s. That bike was a little more than your budget a couple of years ago, but you could easily pick up a full carbon bike for around your budget.


Why do bike tires suffer from frequent punctures whereas car tires don't? I have driven in my life 200 000 km by car and 20 000 km by bike. In my car, I have never had a single puncture. In my bike, my puncture count probably exceeds 5.
Why do bicycle tires suffer from frequent punctures whereas car tires do not?

The main reason is that bicycle tyres are much, much thinner than car tyres. A little tetrahedron of broken glass or a drawing pin that would puncture both tyre and tube on a bicycle won't trouble a car's tyre in the slightest.
A secondary reason is that bicycle tyres with tubes have additional ways to suffer punctures: an under-inflated tyre is susceptible to pinch flats.
It's pretty much as simple as that.

The reason for bike tires suffering from frequent punctures is simple. In order to have light weight and low rolling resistance, bicycle tires need to be about 30mm in diameter. Car tires can easily have over 8 millimeters of tread, and that's just the tread not the structural parts below it. A tiny shard of glass or a small sharp rock cannot penetrate such a tread and structural parts.
In contrast, if a bicycle tire around ~30mm in diameter had 8mm rubber, the air pocket diameter would be only 14mm. Such a tire would be heavy, have lots of rolling resistance and would not differ much from solid rubber tire.
Some bicycle tires are advertised to be "puncture protected". Foolish riders with the money believe this is a good thing, and has led to disappearance of reasonable non-puncture-protected tires from the market. Fortunately, in the high performance tires segment, the puncture protection is just a thin belt of Kevlar, that protects from punctures no more than a bulletproof vest protects from a sharp knife. The thin Kevlar belt does not add much rolling resistance, fortunately.
The reason for preferring no puncture protection is simple. For example, tests show that the Grand Prix 5000 tire has about half of the rolling resistance (10 watts per tire) of Gatorskin (20 watts per tire). I have used the Gatorskin tires and found them to be lacking in puncture protection despite marketing claims to the contrary. Just by adding minimal, non-sufficient puncture protection adds 10 watts per tire or 20 watts total more resistance. This is 10-20% of the rider's energy expenditure.
Bicycles are mostly limited by air resistance that has a third power law. Thus, 10-20% of rider's energy expenditure lost means 3.2%-6.3% speed lost.
If a bicyclist is using 150 watts average to have 20 km/h average speed, the speed reduced by 4.3% is 19.1 km/h. Thus, the rider lost 0.9 km/h because of non-sufficient puncture protection that won't do much. If the non-sufficient puncture protection (in the style of Gatorskin tires) saves one puncture per 5000 km, about 11.8 hours is lost per puncture that takes 5-10 minutes to repair.
Thus, by selecting tires with less puncture protection, the energy efficiency savings are about hundredfold greater than the time to repair punctures. As puncture takes 5-10 minutes to repair, in a typical distance it won't affect much your arrival time to your destination.
Of course, someone could protest that repairing punctures takes skill. This skill is useful to learn, because no bicycle tire is protected from punctures as well as a car tire is, unless the bicycle tire has more rubber than air, and therefore is more similar to a solid rubber tire than a pneumatic tire.


How does one become an official for bicycle races? What's the process? Are there classes? Fees? Do they get paid, or is it voluntary?

Edit based on comments:

I was hoping to get an overview of the process that wasn't based on any given country assuming that the ultimate goal was to eventually officiate at the highest levels, i.e., Olympics, classics, grand tours, etc. As these officials work internationally, there should be quite a number of similarities from between countries.

All of the information that you need is on this page for USA Cycling.

There are three levels for road cycling, starting with C, then B and A. C level I believe is just a clinic that you attend, pass the post test (70% minimum IIRC) and you must be 16. To move up from C to B, there are 11 modules that must be taken and passed, and then to move to Level A, there are requirements for races attended, level of races officiated, and other age requirements. The officials manuals detail these, and are located on this page.

There are different requirements for Mountain and BMX (I believe they skip the B level), and the local contacts for Missouri (If your profile location is still correct) are located on this page.

As far as fees, etc.,  that is going to vary from race to race and with the level of the race. I know at the races that our club puts on and a majority of the races in the region, the officials are compensated.

It probably depends on your country and region. I know that in Western Pennsylvania local races and cycling associations regularly seek out volunteers to help officiate the races. For instance, here's an email to the ACA list from this March (I removed names, emails and phone numbers):

The ACA is looking for USAC Officials for our Wednesday Night racing
series in 2013. XXX XXX and XXX XXX are pursuing other opportunities
this season that will keep them from officiating.
Please join me in thanking XXX and XXX for their faithful services
over the last several years. Their professionalism, consistency and
ability to responsibly handle most any situation were a huge asset to
the Allegheny Cycling Association. As is the case with many involved
with the ACA, it is time for others to step up and seize the
opportunity at hand.
For those of you interested, the Official's position is to essentially
run the race. There are two openings available. These are paid
positions ($40 bones a night!). The officials are in charge of the
races. Additional detail on officials responsibilities can be found
here. The commitment runs for twenty two (22) weeks starting April
10th through September 4th. It's OK to miss a night here and there as
we typically have other officials that can fill in. It's a glamorous
job that comes with a car allowance, paid vacation and unfettered
access to ACA celebrities such as XXX XXX, XXX XXX, XXX XXX. Actually,
just kidding on that sentence but I wanted to see who was still
reading. If you really want to hang out with XXX, XXX or XXX we'll
work on that once you're hired.
If you'd like to be considered for the Wednesday Night official
position(s), please contact me directly via email at XXX@gmail.com or
phone 412-XXX-XXXX.

I guess I would find out who runs the races in your region and inquire with them directly. And sign up for their mailing lists.
For this particular offer you may need to be a USAC-recognized officials, but I've seen many announcements for Wardens etc that either did not require an Official's license or included training necessary to get the license. Those requirements are just a google-click away; see http://www.usacycling.org/officials/ for fees, rulebooks and regulations, and, as an example of a training session, http://acccycling.org/news/usa-cycling-officials-clinic/


How do I deal with a dog chasing me when I'm touring? Once I was riding my road bike down a rural road. I heard barking over my shoulder and saw two dobermans running toward me. I can't think of a time in my life that I felt more endangered.

I reacted instinctively and accelerated. Unfortunately I was on a gravel road and going into a bit of an incline. There was no way I could outrun those dogs. I looked back over my shoulder and they were no longer chasing me. The cycling gods must have been smiling on me.

Another time, in a similar situation, a different dog ran along next to me, barking and baring its teeth. I maintained my speed and yelled at it (trying to assert some dominance) until it got tired of chasing me.

These two experiences have done a lot to put me off touring alone.

How do I deal with issues like this?

Oh... where do I even start? I love dogs, I am crazy about them, too. I have 3 labs of my own. I am from a place where street dogs are very abundant. If you don't see any dogs in the next 100 yards, consider yourself lost! :D

I am barked at often, chased often, even confronted sometimes. I used to run away before, because it is what a normal guy does.

I learned a very big thing about dogs.

They chase wimps. It's like what a bully does, going after the weakest target. So, don't you dare run when you are bullied. Take a bite instead but stand your ground.
They sense fear. If you are scared while approaching a dog, he is sure to suspect you and bark/chase you.
They love challenges. If they think you are a worthy adversary they will confront you either to be protective or to see who is stronger in the area.

Me, for a guy, who was constantly afraid of dogs, was suddenly in charge, after learning a little of these dog psychology tips.

Therefore, please believe me when I am saying this

I have never run away from a dog. (Unless I am very very late)
If a dog is chasing me, I hit my brakes hard, and stare right at it. Mostly he will not come forward, and bark from a safer distance, kinda like maintaining a line. So I can finally get moving slowly.
If dog is coming towards you even when you are standing ground. Get off your bike, show him You are not going to wait around, when he is coming towards you.

  Show them, you are ready. Call it like "Bring it on"

After a stare down, do not make a hasty move. (Got bit once by a shepherd this way.) Take it real slow. Be calm.
Suppose that, despite your confrontation, the dog is heading towards you, accepting the challenge. Still, you have a big weapon: Your Cycle. Lift the front wheels high and start swinging it, right and left. That is sure to stop his pace to think a bit.
If a dog passes this point, and still heading towards you then you are in a serious point. Where there are only three things to do.

Surrender: Another  psychology of dogs, if they pass that point, they are challenging you head on. So, better lower your body, sit down. Let the dog be taller than you. Don't care about him, or look at him. Instead hook a headphone in your ear and listen to the music.  Music will calm your nerves down and send positive impulses for the dog to sense. Let him smell you. After few moments, just get up calmly grab your bike, start walking with it (but don't ride off) I have tried this so many times, its freaky but works
Call for help: If the dog has an owner, (s)he may hear you if they are nearby. Or somebody might help you get out of this trouble.
Get ready to fight: When nothing works, better get yourself prepared for the fight. From my own experience, dogs love to tear limbs. If they grab your limb, you just feel helpless. Avoid this

more on fight situation ....

Don't forget its an animal. Could be your last fight.
Pepper spray is handy as well if it comes to a fight - it's also useful for any muggers that might try for your wallet :) @Credit: Nate Koppenhaver
Protect your neck, hands and calf muscles at all cost. If they are hurt you have very slim of escaping.
Be defensive, rather than offensive: Let him make the first move and on retaliation you can do whatever you want. Effective targets are nose and eyes they will buy you a lot of time and you can make a run for it.
If you are lucky try to find a long stick. They are greatest weapons against dogs. Don't hit them. Just point it right at them and show them you will do it. Even a mini pump works, if you find nothing.
Don't let him corner you, keep the motion going,

  Normally when this happens, me and dog are generally circling each other

Make a little cage out of your bike. When you are cornered, this just might save your life.
Grabbing tail, makes him more angry, try to avoid that.
Grappling is only safe on the back of its neck. He can reach every other part.

How to avoid all this?

Dogs are very friendly creatures, you can be friends with them, no matter what. Treat them with respect.
Don't give them any reason to confront you.

If speed is the problem, slow down
If big size is the problem get off your bike
If he suspects you. Let him smell you.
Friendly look, with lovely hello, calms most of domestic dogs.
If you see a dog that is sure to bark on you, change your approach. Get off your bike, start walking with it

If the dog has a owner, better complain to them to have better control.
Report to the law, if owner is not helping you
Pack some treats, they are better as friends than adversaries.

BIGGEST SUGGESTION

Do not scare a dog and run away. They become enemy for life.

Update: Rabid Dogs

Getting into a fighting situation with a rabid dog, is more harmful than it should be.

One of my little story:

  One of my friend got into a similar situation with me, on a village cycle trip. A rabid dog was being chased by locals (its not abnormal here) and the dog out of fright ended up attacking us. My friend was a pretty agile cyclist, he immediately changed to defense position with his bike covering his entire body stopping the first attack. But, at a moment when dog was jumping at us, he used his elbow to hit the dog, but it bit him very badly.

Very torturous and painful moment we were in.

  Worst part than the wound was the infection.

So, I suggest full defence no offence as much as possible, but if you are a fighter/ Martial Arts Expert or know how to protect yourself very well, then yes, sick dog are very easy to knock down just aim for the nose.

The best idea is to not see any doggie a long time.  Do not look in to its eyes it might think you are gonna attack it. When it is coming closer to you just do the confident stare at it and get as high as you can. If it comes too close to you get of the bike use it as your weapon. If you are attacked by two or more dogs just don't let them to corner you from four sides. When it jumps on to you get ready. To Kick some A**S. then just go off its territory. But the nest thing is to not look at dogs. Singing might hep you.


Good Quality Road Platform Pedals? I am trying to find good quality but not exorbitantly expensive platform pedals for a road bike. I tried Shimano SPD, but ended up concluding that for me it was more of a deathtrap. I did end up falling with the SPD; fortunately the only injury was to my pride.

Any suggestions as to a good quality, lightweight, road platform pedals. I would prefer to keep it under US$ 100.

Flat pedals are great for lots of reasons, but I won't get into the virtues or pitfalls of platforms versus toe clips versus clipless systems (though I am a big fan of plain old platform pedals.) I will try to give information pertaining to the different styles and a few examples rather than an exhaustive list of specific brands and prices. There are lots and lots of different models which are mostly variations on two themes: rat trap quill pedals and one-piece platform pedals. None are perfect, but many are cheaper and easier to use/maintain than clipless pedals.

Classic rat trap pedals have been around for a long time - one or two metal sides secured to a central body and quill (there were lots of poor quality pedals spec'd on bikes back in the day, but modern ones are generally of decent quality.) Variations use the same style of construction to much the same effect. Some people balk at using pedals without sealed bearings, but bearing maintenance on pedals is probably the easiest to tackle and shouldn't be an issue for most people. The VO Road pedals above use sealed bearings, while the MKS Sylvans use loose bearings. I would say they are both of reasonably high quality. They accept toe clips and reflectors and other forms of toe retention and are super easy to use (platforms on both sides so you can't miss.) A few brands make pedals that fold up so as to not catch on anything (MKS FD-7s...important if you have to carry your bike indoors frequently.)

Two drawbacks: these pedals are generally not as grippy as some others, noticeably in the rain/snow. Second is that the construction can be felt through thin shoes. In Chuck Taylors with thin socks I found the dip in the MKS Sylvans to be a bit uncomfortable. Generally folks don't mind it, though.

Track pedals are narrower and only have a platform on one side as they're intended to be used solely with toe clips and straps. These are great if you love toe clips, but there is no back side to the pedal so they're somewhat limited in flexibility. On the plus side, they're lightweight and narrow so that you can clear obstacles (cars, curbs, doorways, people's ankles...)

There are also many machined and forged one-piece pedals based on the above designs (plastic versions I've seen are not worth consideration.) Velo Orange Touring pedals are surprisingly light weight and use sealed bearings (their narrower Urban pedal would be comparable in width to a track pedal but still has two useable sides.)

BMX style platform pedals are super popular and work for lots of people. The cheaper ones are probably the most affordable/functional pedals out there. These pedals range from fat and chunky plastic to graceful CNC aluminum (and there are lots of garish colors out there for those into color-coordination.) Some of these pedals have provisions for reflectors and most allow for strap-type foot retention (but not toe clips.) The more expensive pedals will have sealed bearings, but you generally get what you pay for. The big benefit of this style of pedal is that they have a nice flat platform with lots of grip. Metal platforms frequently have pins set into the tops to add grip which, if you've ever ridden these pedals in shorts, leads to frequent bloody shins (so avoid expensive pants or delicate leg skin.)

Cruisers and utility bikes will sometimes have plastic or composite pedals with rubberized tops that don't tear your shins into ribbons. I have a set of VP 001 Thin Gripsters and they're great for commuting and hauling around town. They do have sharp little nubbins, but I can deal with it as they're really shine in the rain and snow. They're noticeably thinner than other platforms (hence the name) but they're wide and long so I never misstep.

The big drawback to these pedals is that they're heavy and wide (plus the bloody shins, but I covered that.) The weight is a compromise in any case, but the width can sometimes be a real problem i.e. a low bottom bracket with long cranks will dig your pedal into the pavement while cornering. Similarly, riding a bike with lots of toe overlap on the front wheel will lead to endless suffering in tight places. These can be avoided with careful maneuvering but will surprise the unawares.

If you had a problem getting out of your SPD pedals, the pedal release tension was probably misset. If you are looking for clipless pedals, the SPD type is popular and the shoes are pretty easy to walk in. The Xpedo Mountain Force Magnesium/CroMo Clipless Pedals MF-4B are:

Double sided
Light (274 grams for the pair)
Inexpensive ($83 on Amazon)

There is a rider weight limit with them- around 185 lbs.


What happened to pumps? I'm an old-time bike rider who commuted to grad school every day for 3 years on a bicycle.  Then after a 20+-year-long hiatus, started riding again with my son.  I cannot figure out the fitting on the modern pumps.  I can get some air in, but after several cases of the thing flying off or making an embarrassing leaking, whoosh sound with every stroke.

Q: Are pumps with the  old-style, screw-on fittings available anywhere anymore?

Q: Is there a good reason I should appreciate the new fitting?

There are two main standards:  Schrader and Presta.  Schrader is the standard auto tire valve, while Presta is thinner and has a little knurled knob on top.  Schader is relatively straight-forward to use while Presta requires a little finesse.

Most newer "floor pump" valves are "agnostic" and will fit either style without conversion, but some require flipping a gasket over inside the chuck or some such.

Floor pumps generally have a flip-lever valve where you press the valve on, then flip the lever up to lock the valve on.  Sometimes, if the tire is flat, you may need to press your thumb into the tire on the back side of the valve to keep the valve from sliding into the rim as you push the chuck on -- if you don't then the chuck doesn't get on far enough.  Plus on some valves you may need to adjust the chuck by tightening a knurled fitting on the chuck, to compensate for gasket wear, etc.  And of course there are cheap pumps that won't work regardless.

Presta can be a little tricky.  You need to unscrew the knurled knob ALL THE WAY, then press the chuck on.  And I like to tap the unscrewed knob once to free the internal seal from its seat -- sometimes they stick, making it hard to get air in.  When you're finished filling a Presta, just tighten the knob barely finger tight, so as to not unnecessarily deform the seal.

Current pumps are "push-pull On" and "Pull-push Off".  ie. you have to push the pump head on the valve, then pull the lever to get the pump head on the valve, then reverse the process to remove it.  This new style took a two-hand problem and made it into a three hand problem.  I need one hand to hold the tire, one hand to hold the pump head in place and one hand to pull the lever.  Old style pumps were "push-push On" and "Pull-Pull Off".  It only took one hand to get the pump head on or off leaving another hand to stabilize the bike.  That is what is needed. I have no idea why anyone, given the choice, would choose a new pump over an old one, but we aren't given a choice.  About 15 years ago, all manufacturers suddenly switched to a poor design and we have been stuck with it ever since.


Aerobars on a hybrid I got a set of aerobars for free and decided to install them on my hybrid.

1) I just tried them and feel a bit unstable. After checking it out online, I see this is normal, but I wonder if there is an optimal way to install them to reduce instability.

2) Does it make sense to install them on a hybrid? My hands do get numb during a long ride and I have always wanted to shift between positions.

3) While riding them, I feel more in control when my elbows are on my flat handlebars and thus not on the pads. Could this be because my seat isn't high enough (that's another problem altogether since my aluminum seatpost is corroded to my CrMo frame)?

They are unstable because of how your weight shifts on the bike when you move to the aerobars. Hybrids are not really designed to have aerobars, the geometry doesn't really lend itself to that.

My suggestion would be to get rid of the aerobars, and get handlebar extensions for the ends of the bars, much like you see on many mountain bikes. This will allow you to switch between different hand positions, while still keeping control and weight distribution where it should be.

Bike geometry- The main difference is in the seat tube and head tube angles. As you go from a hybrid (upright riding posture, slack seat tube angle) to a road bike (slightly more leaning forward, steeper seat tube angle) to a time trial frame (leaning on forearms, even steeper seat tubes), you progressively move the weight on the frame further forward.

There are also differences in how the bottom bracket is placed in relation to the ground/seat, etc. that are designed to produce a more comfortable ride.

As the weight shift forward happens, the handling of the bike is different. TT frames are notoriously poor handlers compared to road frames, and hybrids handle much different than a traditional road frame.

So when you move forward on the hybrid like you would for aerobars, you are moving the weight/center of gravity out of the "sweet spot" for the frame, and handling deteriorates as a result.

if you place your pads more separately more stability you'll get..


What position of saddle is best? Almost all cyclists who ride road bikes set the seat so high, and when they're in the drops their body can be almost parallel with the road, reducing air resistance. However,their legs can't reach the road from the saddle, and their head is pushed down and it could be dangerous in some situations. With a low saddle position, I feel comfortable and can easily reach the road from the saddle, and my head is upright. When I want to be more aerodynamic, I can drop my upper body and push my rear behind the seat. So why don't cyclists use a low position seat?

Road cycling position is generally a performance position (although not always) and can be viewed as a  compromise between three components:

Power - different positions will allow you to output differing levels of power depending on your biomechanics.
Aerodynamics - some body positions reduce your power, but can reduce drag even more therefore allowing for higher speeds.
Comfort - The position needs to be sustainable for long periods of time.

Depending on your goals you tend to weigh one category more heavily.  For example, endurance riding tends to be more upright which prioritized (3) at the cost of (2).

Saddle height tends to have the biggest impact on (1).  Too low and you do not use all of the power stroke of the quadricepts, too high and you start leaving the power stroke and can over extend your hip and knee. The most powerful and efficient saddle height leaves a small bend in the knee at the end of the pedal stroke. This lets you use your quadriceps to the end of their power stroke without over extending. You will not be able to reach the ground easily while remaining on the saddle.

Therefore to answer your question:

  When I want to be more aerodynamic, I can drop my upper body and push my rear behind the seat. So why don't cyclists use a low position seat?

You may be able to change body position to maximize aerodynamics (2) but you are still sacrificing power (1) and will be going slower than someone who first maximizes power (1) then gets as aerodynamic as possible. Finally, a low saddle position can affect hip flexion (making your hips and knees flex more) which can be further affected when getting the body into a lower position, therefore you could also be affecting comfort (3) which makes the position unsustainable in the long run.

when you sit on the seat upright the ball of your foot shud just touch the road.Its the most ideal and safest position.There is no point in getting maximum efficiency at the cost of safety.Another bench mark is, your knee angle shud be as much as when yu are running on a flat road


Would a backpack or cargo rack be better for commuting? Right now I use a backpack to hold all of my supplies including spare tubes, pump, patch kits, tools, my change of clothes for work, etc.

This is the backpack I use:

It's about as comfortable as a backpack can get without getting into the hiking backpacks with frames. Altogether I would say it weighs no more than 10 lbs max. The muscles in my back get slightly irritated during my commute.

Would it be more comfortable to use a rear cargo rack on my bike instead? Will adding more weight to the bike change how the bike rides and feels?

EDIT:
After doing some research I came across this article that explains the different methods of carrying your gear on commutes and how it affects your body. It's worth a look.

EDIT #2:
Having tried both for a couple of weeks now, I can say that (for me personally) the backpack is the better way to go given the relatively light weight I have to carry.

If you do use a backpack, make sure that the straps are tightened enough so that it's positioned higher up on your back and to the point to where there is little to no movement on your back. This makes a world of difference when it comes to comfort.

I avoid backpacks where possible

1) Sweat - I get damp enough wearing just a cycling top.  Putting anything else on top makes it much worse.

2) Crashing - Occasionally I have carried a toolbox in a tramping pack.  One of the worries is "what happens if I end up rolling on this?"

3) Visibility - can be off-set with reflective tape or an overbag/wrapper/cover

You should at least try a rack or basket or frame bag.  See if you can borrow one for a month or so.

Been there, done that.  Mount the stuff to the bike, don't carry it on your back.  Some bikes don't support that, like my current one.  Then you are stuck.  My current use case says this is acceptable for me, but you feel it a lot less on the frame than on your back.


How do airlines calculate the cost of a Brompton? How do airlines calculate what to charge for a Brompton in a bag as checked luggage?

I’m flying on Iberia and from their website it looks like they will charge me US$75 to take it from BOS to BCN, but the text is not completely clear.

I wrote to them asking, providing weight and measurement, but they did not respond.

Do they charge based on the weight and size of the bag — as with other types of luggage? Or is the fee based on my declaring it to be a “bicycle” regardless of whether it might be small and light enough to be regular luggage?

Notes:

I will have it in a Radical Design Chubby, which is slightly bigger than the B-bag.

NOTE: This is about costs, NOT about protecting the bike.

This is a hard question to answer. Not only does each airline  have its own rules as to handle bicycles or what they consider oversized luggage — the airline counter staff at check-in have “discretion” which usually boils down to a degree of capriciousness. The checkin counter staff may or may not follow their own airline’s posted guidelines in terms of overweight, size, contents, or how much they charge. Usually this discretion is in your favor (ie they will waive the charge or lower it) but not always, especially if you come in with an attitude. In other words, there’s no consistency in what you’ll be charged unless you are obviously under weight, under size, and have non-surchargable contents.

That all being said, it’s still helpful to know the rules ahead of checking in so you know how much they charge for overweight and oversized luggage, versus how much they charge for a bicycle.

A bare brompton in a light bag (like the b-bag) will usually be underweight and just under the nominal size. Many hard cases will push it to oversize and some will push it overweight.

However, if you know the bicycle charge versus the overweight or oversize charge, you can go in with the following algorithm:

Approach counter and attempt to check in bicycle without any specific declaration. If the checkin clerk allows it without comment or extra charge, success!
If clerk attempts to assess oversize fee and it’s in excess of the bicycle fee, then state it’s a bicycle and get the lower bicycle fee.
If clerk asks what’s inside, ask first how much the oversize / weight fee is. If it is less than the bicycle fee, then declare the bike as “circus equipment” or “spare parts for a mobility device” (many places calling it “sports equipment” carries a special fee too) and pay the lower fee.

Note that I’ve found the brompton in a bag is very close to the 64 linear inches and with case can be close to the overweight limit. In those cases, it’s helpful to remove the saddle and pedals and put them in your other luggage. This will reduce both the weight and the overall dimensions as well as making it harder to break. You also want to remove all of the hinge locking bolts as those tend to snap.

Depends on the airline.  Some charge more if they know it’s a bike; some waive oversize or overweight fees if they know.  Some, like WestJet, will treat it more gently and make good any damage if they know.  Some, like StarPeru, may do severe damage and “By telling us it was a bicycle, you absolved us of any responsibility.”  I don’t (yet) have any experience with Iberia, other than noting their rules description makes it obvious they haven’t considered folding bikes.

UPDATE: The original question was (hopefully) answerable, about a specific airline.  As edited, it impossibly asks for all the policies and practices of all airlines (more than 125 of them).  I did finally get someone I could understand from Iberia on the phone.  She said there will be NO extra charge, but I am not confident she fully understood my repeated statements of the dimensions and weight.  Oh, well, I've got the ticket and if I get charged extra, C’est la vie.


getting in and out of shape I was recently really sick and stopped biking for about 2.5 weeks. Before that I was biking 10 miles per day for about 2 years.

Since getting better I've been biking 10 miles per day for about 2 weeks. I am not 100% done being sick - I still have rhinorrhea, but I feel like I am unable to go as fast as I used to before the sickness.

Am I just imaging things or did I really 'get out of shape' during my sickness? Has anyone else had a similar experience?

(On a side note, I also think that maybe the winter is making me go slower - though there is a chance that I am crazy)

You're probably just still overcoming your illness. 2.5 weeks isn't really enough time to lose any noticeable amount of aerobic fitness for an average, healthy person.

The bad: anything 3 days or more and you will noticeably lose endurance fitness.

The good: You will be able to recover the lost fitness relatively quickly, generally in about the time that you took off for whatever reason. If the time off was for illness, you may have some effects from whatever made you sick as well.

Bottom line is that a body that was once fit can get fit again and usually fairly quickly. Even after years of no exercise, a once fit individual can get back into top shape (not counting effects of weight and age) in a matter of a few months.


What are the advantages of a building an electric bike from a kit vs. prebuilt I'm trying to decide on what would be the best option for me for my first electric bike. I need a way to get around, and as I live on a hill where I will have to manage a fairly steep incline coming and going I am wondering what kind of bike I should get.

There is a bike on Craigslist right now with a 36V 12amp battery and 500-750Watt motor, but as it is a Huffy bike I am pretty sure it is a kit build. They are asking 700. -- My other option is the Kickstarter kit by Barak Electric (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1354698863/barak-electric-bicycle-conversion-kit-electrify-yo) that has a 500 watt motor and 36V 10amph battery, and as I already have a mountain bike laying around I could install it myself and it would cost 655. I have no idea what they would be charging in a couple years when the Lithium batteries die for replacements, but I'm sure I could figure that out then. I don't have a ton of money, so going to a bike shop isn't really an option even though I would love the security of being able to return it if it doesn't work. I was looking into the Currie Electric bikes as they seem quite reasonable, but it doesn't look as though they will have enough power to get me anywhere with their small wattage and SLA batteries (not to mention to upgrade to Lithium with Currie is basically the price of the bike!)

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

First, check your local laws. As others have mentionend, in some countries (EU), maximum power for an electric bike is 250W. Go beyond that and the vehicle will be considered a moped and will need license, insurance and and license plates. Your local laws might also require an assist-only option for your bike to be considered an e-bike. That means usually a pedal sensor, and those can be difficult to install especially with exotic or outdated bottom brackets.

Selecting a kit is not necessarily easy. If you're going to front mounted motor, check that brake type is compatible (disc or v-brake) with the kit and that fork spacing is suitable. E-bike kit should come with brake levers with a cut-off switch so the motor stops pushing immediately when braking (problem with some e-bikes).

Kits can be had cheap, but installing them takes time, effort and experience with bike mechanics. If you got all three, go for it. If you need to get up and running quickly, an entry-level e-bike is probably better option.

My recommendation is that if you are good with understanding how electrical motors and circuits differ, thats where you should begin. Stepper motors servo motors are what you are after and amperes is your power output. Watts is how long your power lasts until recharge is needed.


Vegetable oil to oil a bike? Is vegetable oil as good as motor oil to oil a bike?

Vegetable oils tend to "polymerize", that is become sticky and solid.  Castor oil, for instance, is an excellent lubricant that was favored for racing autos and motorcycles for a long time.  The reason it never became popular for regular cars was that it also built up a lot of sticky, cruddy goo.   Racing engines are regularly torn down and rebuilt; no matter.
Not so your sedan.
The oils used in oil-based paints are usually vegetable-based as well; they tend to become quite solid after a while.

As I've noted before, lubes, especially chain lubes, seem to be a "thing" for serious cyclists.  Chain lube threads on dedicated bike forums tend to go on and on and on...
It's the engineering mentality at work.  "Maybe I can get 100 more miles out of my chain if I concoct my own special blend!"   Maybe...
Chain lubes are cheap.  They cost at most what, 10 bucks for a bottle sufficient for a year?
As well, chains are cheap.  Oh, you can spend a lot for super-deluxe items, but a good, well-made standard chain is under 20 bucks and will last most riders as long as they keep the bike if lubed and cleaned properly.

Related

"Best chain lubricant for road bikes?" Asks about the best lubricant out of conventional oils and lubricants
"Substitutes for chain lubricants" Asks about non-traditional substitutes for chain lubricant

I use Green Oil chain lube and it works just as well as dry lube/petrochemical oil/gt85 ever did. It smells much better too, like some kinda cooking oil.

http://www.green-oil.net/environment.html


What is the reason for starting before the traffic light turns green? I've noticed that a lot of commuters come to a complete stop at traffic lights but go before the light turns green. They start riding as soon as the light in the intersecting direction turns red. I usually get annoyed and assume that this could only reinforce negative opinions held by motorists, but I've suspected that there must be some valid reason for the early start.

This is a separate issue from taking an Idaho stop at a quiet intersection or blatantly running a red light. For rolling stops and blatant running, there is a significant saving in effort from not completely stopping, and there is an understandable, if not necessarily justifiable, tradeoff between efficiency and legality.

There doesn't seem to be the same tradeoff for early starts at traffic lights. In this case, the saved time is only two seconds, and there is no saved effort (since they have already come to a complete stop).

I've seen enough people do this that I'm sure there must be some logic behind the early start. Are commuters really desperate to save two seconds, or is there (as I suspect) some deeper reason for taking an early start at traffic lights? Does this behavior just hurt relations with motorists, or are there safety benefits that make this something that should be pushed for legalization (as with Idaho stops)?

The "early start" allows cyclists to clear the junction ahead of motorists, this is useful for cyclists making off-side turns (right in the UK, left in the US). It also helps cyclists going straight on avoid conflict with motorists making near-side turns (left in the UK, right in the US).

The UK and many places in Europe have Advanced Stop Lines (Highway Code rule 178) at traffic lights:

These allow cyclists to get ahead of motorists without jumping the red light.

For junctions without an Advanced Stop Line you'd have to weigh any benefits of clearing the junction against the potential legal consequences, the likelihood of increased driver hostility and the risk of colliding with a vehicle jumping the lights from another direction.

Personally, I don't jump red lights. On the roads I cycle on I think it would be more dangerous than waiting for them to change.

" sure there must be some logic behind the early"

I have seen enough of the behavior of motorists and cyclists to know this is the fundamental flaw causing you confusion. Where does it say you have to be logical to ride a bike?

  or is there (as I suspect) some deeper reason for....

Almost certainly no rational one. Most people who willingly break laws will claim a deep and meaningful reason why they believe they are above the law, and why "It won't happen to me" applies more to them than other people.

  Does this behavior just hurt relations with motorists, or are there safety
  benefits that make this something that should be pushed for legalization

I definitely does hurt relations, however legalizing it will make limited difference. Legalizing it would be equivalent to the euthanasia debate, however Darwinism theory lends some support to the idea of legalizing it for those who have not yet procreated.

The "claim of right" (a legal defense in some countries where you can do illegal stuff if you truly believe it is for a greater good), is probably around it is safer for the cyclist to clear the intersection ahead of the cars and allows the traffic freer flow etc - something that is supported in some jurisdictions by special lights and road rules. It sort of fails when you consider the safety issue of what happens when a cyclist is T-boned by a couple of tons of steel racing to (illegally, but the result is the same so its irrelevant) clear an intersection.


How long should a well maintained chain last and what can I do to prolong its life? I commute on a fixie. I'm using KMC Z410 chains.

Every evening if it's wet I wipe and re-lube my chain, using ProLink lube. Every weekend I remove the chain, soak it in kero, brush it with a citrus degreaser, allow to dry and then re-lube.

My current chain is 2 months old (about 800km) and is over .75 already so I think I'll replace it this weekend. Mind you, it is winter here and it's been pretty wet most weeks. Also there is a lot of fine sandy grit on the paths I tend to ride.

I read questions like this and am amazed how long people's chains will last. I don't mind replacing the chain often as it's a cheap chain ($15) and I want to protect my chainring and cog.

Is there anything I'm doing wrong with my maintenance regime? Is it surprising that my chain isn't lasting that long? Or is everything okay and I should stop worrying about it?

Update: I relaxed my maintenance regime. I just wiped down and re-lubed occasionally. The chain was very quiet and smooth. However today, after just 20 days and 353 kilometers, it's already over .75!!! I checked the chain guage on a new chain and it is definitely indicating that the new chain is under .75. Why am I burning through chains so fast?

Update: A little about me and my riding. I weigh about 88kg (195lbs). I ride fairly aggressively on bike tracks on the way to work (I almost never get passed). There are some hills so I am reasonably often out of the saddle and pushing pretty hard. I will take the old chain into a bike shop next weekend and let you know what they say.

A new chain has factory installed lube inside on the bushings and pins. It is a thicker, stickier lube than anything you can put back on the chain after a cleaning which is that thorough.

I love that you take time to maintain the bike. Definitely check your chain checker, as Daniel said, but on your next chain, try relaxing the maintenance a bit.

Clean the chain by spraying a light citrus degreaser on a rag, folding the rag in the palm of your hand, and running the chain through the rag. This will clean the exterior and the accessible bits without soaking away the internal factory lube.

Once clean, lube the exterior of your chain with a quality lube (I like Boeshield T-9 or Dumonde Tech yellow) and wait 15-20 minutes. Then wipe off all excess lube.

Starting with your new chain, do that for the first 6 months, or until your fresh lube job sounds unlubed again within a few on the bike hours.

Once that is not working, go back to your current method. I'd say do the complete strip and relube once a month, with the process described above on the in between weeks.

After your next chain, let us know if and how your mileage changed.

As long as it can till it falls to pieces, no mechanical part will ever fail as an identical one at the same time ever. Prolong it? Don't use it!


Giant Overdrive 2 fork replacement I have a 2014 Giant Trance with an Overdrive 2 tapered steerer (1-1/2 - 1-1/4). As we know, the standard tapered steerer is 1-1/2 - 1-1/8 inch. I want to replace my OEM fork (Fox 32 Float Evolution CTD 140) with a more advanced Fox or RS. Is it possible to fit the bike with a standard steerer? I know that it would mean changing all the front end of the bike (fork, headset, stem) which I am prepared to do. Is there a headset to accommodate my frame and new fork. Would a standard tapered integrated headset do? Has anyone have an OD2 Giant bike here that have done the same exercise? This bike is problematic!

You can just buy a standard tapered headset. Or if you can firnt it, only the upper assembly for 1 1/8". Giant uses the same diamete for their 1 1/8" and 1 1/4" headsets as it says here: http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Giant-OverDrive-2-Steerer-tube-sizing-2011.html.

Another solution I can think of is to turn a spacer yourself (or have it done by someone) to work as an inner race for the bearing. It's more demanding (since you would have to turn both the spacer and a cap), but could probably work out a bit cheaper than the entire headset.

the Cane Creek 40 Series ZS44 Zero Stack Tapered Conversion Headset seems like it would get the job done.


Is chemical stripping as good as bead-blasting to prepare a steel frame for repainting? I have a rather nice old hand-built 531 frame and fork that I'd like to have repainted. Some companies offer bead-blasting to prepare it, but others offer chemical stripping.

Is this as good as bead-blasting for steel; does it offer any advantages?

Both processes serve to remove paint coat from your frame. The only difference is that bead blasting may (or may not, depending on the medium used) scratch/damage the metal surface of your frame.

If you don't like that possibility, then you can opt for chemical stripping (especially if they'll treat the frame after for effective coat adhesion), but I'd consult with the establishment first on how your steel frame would react to the chemicals.

With that said, the link you gave also advertised giving treatment to your frame to prevent under-coat corrosion, so that's a nice touch for me.

Chemical stripping is preferred as bead blasting will effect the surface tension of the frame tubes altering the ride quality.


Creaking on hard pedaling I'm trying to locate a creak when I pedal uphill.

Tightened chainring bolts and rear derailer hanger. I don't see much to do with the bottom bracket (sram xx1). Pedals are tight. Chain, cassette, and rear hub are new.

It sounds like it's coming from the bottom bracket but everything sounds like it's coming from there.

What could it be?

2015 Mondraker Foxy carbon

edit: It's not the bottom bracket or the chainring or the wheels. I can reproduce it by pushing the suspension. I have no idea what to do with the linkages though.

I have a carbon hardtail which I used to ride the Great Divide MTB route last summer. About halfway through I had a similar issue which I couldn't seem to resolve; a creak everytime I put power through the pedal stroke. I took apart and cleaned the cranks, pedals, axle, checked BB bearings for play, etc... No change.

Finally, I took my bike in to a local bike shop when we got to the next town and the owner there straight away asked if I'd checked the rear axle. I hadn't as it didn't seem a likely suspect... It turns out, with the large amount of dust and occasional mud the bike had been subjected to and with no opportunity to give it a good thorough clean, some dirt had accumulated between the rear axle quick release clamp and the frame. When I put power through the pedals, the frame was flexing quite significantly ( exacerbated in part because of all the bikepacking gear strapped to it) and causing the axle to creak as it shifted on each stroke. I gave it a good clean, added a drop of lube, tightened it up and... hey presto, problem solved.

Not guaranteed to be this but it's an easy thing to check (especially compared to pulling out your BB) so worth having a look.


Can I swap my front 2x chainring on my MTB to a ~46T chainring? The type of cycling I do means I'm never really presented with mega-steep climbs.
I used an online calculator and worked out I never really use gear ratios below about 39, which on my MTB at the moment is gear 1 at the front and 6 at the back.
I was thinking about going for a really large chainring at the front and removing the front mech.
If I were to use a 46T chainring, this would give me a minimum gear ratio of 36.5 in the lowest gear, and 112.9 in the highest gear, which is much more appealing for me, as opposed to my current max gear ratio of 88.4.
Currently my bike has a 11-34T cassette at the rear and a 36-22T double chainring at the front.
I want to know if this would be possible. I am prepared to replace the cranks as my bike has a very low end Prowheel crankset on it at the moment. I have read a bit on this site and have seen that potential problems could revolve around the rear derailleur not being able to handle the longer chain I will be needed if I were to do this.
Is this possible? Thanks a lot

It is possible to do a 2x to 1x conversion but as stated in other answers you generally need to do something to keep the chain on the chainring. Generally a narrow-wide chainring is used on 1x setups to retain the chain. Leaving the derailleur in can also accomplish this.
Re-using a double crank with a single biases the chainring to one side, ending up with unavoidable cross chaining. I’ve heard special rings that offset the teeth are available.
If you want a chainring larger than your current one you may run into chainring-chainstay clearance issues, especially on a bike designed for small rings such as yours. A significantly larger ring (46 instead of 36 in your case) is very likely to have clearance issues.

I was thinking about going for a really large chainring at the front and removing the front mech

Don't. I have a bicycle without front derailleur.
If there is no front derailleur, when riding over a bump at high speed, the chain is at danger of falling from the chainring. This has happened to me.
Not only that, but the only way to get the chain back to the chainring is to touch it with your fingers, making your fingers oily and full of chain dirt. This has happened to me too.
With a front derailleur, the chain is unlikely to fall as it acts as a chain guide, and in the unlikely event the chain falls, you just operate the front derailleur to raise the chain over the chainring.
The rear derailleur does not care about the chain length. It only cares about the total needed capacity which is (large_front_chainring - small_front_chainring) + (large_rear_sprocket - small_rear_sprocket).


Headset can't tighten enough without stiffening steering, damaged bearing retainers? I've just cleaned and regreased my headset (which is the stock Cane Creek headset on my bike). In doing it I've noticed that the bearing retainers are out of shape; they are not perfectly circular or flat. I have reassembled but now struggling to get the headset tightened appropriately; it's either too loose such that it knocks (wobbles when front brake applied and bike pushed back and forth), or too tight such that the steering is very stiff. I've followed the protocol for (dis)assembly in Zinn, and checked out the headset problems discussed here and here. I've also performed this job with no problems a few times before, but I guess I was just too heavy handed when cleaning the old grease off.

Could this problem be linked to the retainers being out of shape? What is the appropriate course of action?

If it could be the misshapen retainers: I'm not tempted to leave it loosely tightened, I think that has the potential to cause damage and make the bike unsafe. What problems, other than stiffer steering, do I face if I leave it too tight (both short and long term damage and safety considerations)? Is there a good way improve the shape of the retainers myself?

Or should I just get down the local shop and have them replace the retainers? Or would it be better to replace the entire headset, bearing in mind that it's seen 6 years of all weather usage over several thousand km's per year. I'd like to have an idea of what needs to be done to fix it so the shop doesn't try to rip me off (I just moved to this city and haven't found a bike shop I really trust yet).

should I just get down the local shop and have them replace the
  retainers? Or would it be better to replace the entire headset

Replacing the bearings and retainers is cheap and easy (you should be able to do that yourself), you just need to work out what size you want. Since you have all the parts, measure the size of the ring and the bearing diameter and match it up with what you see online. Then you have two options - take just the bearings to the shop and buy matching new ones (if you can get there easily without your bike); or ride down and buy replacements that match your measurements. I would try that first.

If you want to pay the shop to do it, it's not a complex job but fundamentally anything a mechanic does takes half an hour because of the time to get the bike up and look at it, then test ride and return it. So you're looking at half an hour times whatever they bill mechanics out at, plus the $10-$20 cost of the new bearings.

The counter-argument is that a whole headset is only $40, and you could upgrade to a sealed bearing one for little to no extra cost. If you have a few tools that's relatively easy, although a length of threaded rod and a few nuts that fit it makes pressing the new cups in easier. Some shops don't bother stocking replacement bearings because the price difference to the customer between just bearings and new headset is small, and the cost of someone coming back and saying "still ugly, new headset" is more than the profit on the job. Viz, the mechanic time is, say, $50 either way, but the bearings are $20 and the headset is $40. Is it worth paying an extra $50 if you're wrong to save $20 if you're right?

That equation changes dramatically if you're doing the work and the bike shop is easy to get to. Then it's purely $20 vs $40.

(edit) I disagree with the comment. Modern frames and headsets are designed not to need a viciously tight fit into the frame, so removing the old headset should take a few gentle taps with a drift rather than any real force. Older steel frames with steel headsets were often designed to be very tight and required considerable force to remove. With those it was sometimes necessary to re-ream the head tube to fit a new headset in. These days, especially with an aluminium frame, while it's easier to dent or bent the aluminium, you also need much less force to remove or insert the headset.

Doing the work yourself should be straightforward. I find that often I can twist the headset cup and work it out just with my hand, or tap it out using a drift just working round and round tapping the drift with a small piece of wood. Similarly, inserting the new one can often be done just by pushing on a piece of wood resting on the cup, but it's safer to use a length of threaded rod and some big washers or a couple of bits of wood drilled appropriately. The point of that is to make sure you're pushing the headset in exactly true so you don't deform the cup or score the frame.

This is another time when "if you find yourself using a hammer on a bike, you're doing something wrong". The hammer is essential if you have a proper headset removing tool but a bad idea otherwise.

http://www.parktool.com/product/head-cup-remover-rt-1

I would be inclined to replace the headset. It's a simple fix, guaranteed result.


How much of the saddle rail is suiteable to use Is it possible to safely set the seat to the max to get the saddle as far forward as it will go. Or should it only be clamped within the marked range 0 to 3.5? I have marked the points in red. The reason I ask is because I don't want the saddle to tilt forward while riding if I have it set to max.

As long as no part of the clamp touches the rails outside the max lines, you should be safe.

The scale is simply there to help you. It would be nice if it ran right up to the max lines, but it might still be helpful depending on the size/design of your clamp.

It seems to me that such an extreme position indicates a fit problem with the bike.  Maybe that's what you should attack first.


How to solve issue with self-unscrewing Praxis Convo BB for Shimano? I am looking to solve the issue with Praxis Convo BB which unscrews by itself during the ride. What would be the best solution?

On my second ride on a Specialized Venge Pro 2019, I noticed that my Praxis "SHIMANO-BB30/PF30 CONV BB 68MM" bottom bracket is loose. I immediately stopped riding and brought my bike to the nearest bike-shop.

According to mechanic at the bike-shop drive-side cup of the BB bottoms out before rubber expanding collet even starts expanding. They installed new BB (just a new Praxis BB) but it's also doesn't sit there very tight, just barely starts expending before bottoming out.

Loose cup (just removed crankset and touched cup to show how loose it
is)

When cup is screwed in by hand it bottoms out before starting expanding:

P.S. Keep in mind that I have Shimano Ultegra R8000 crankset

Check the obvious things, which are that you have the cups in the right sides, and the expanding rubber collet parts are present and in place. It may be helpful to take the BB all the way out and then take before and after measurements with a caliper to confirm that it's actually expanding as much as it should.
This problem could be caused by the frame bore or shell width being out of tolerance, by the Praxis conversion BB being out of tolerance or not doing what it purports, or any combination thereof.
Since the Praxis BB is probably going to readily fall out of the bike when you remove the cranks anyway, there is not much oppurtunity cost in this case to doing so and taking the basic measurements of the shell.
It is easy to measure the shell width from point to point and take a sampling of simple point to point measurements of the bore with a vernier caliper. That is usually sufficient to find most problems with tolerances if something like this is indeed the frame's fault, although there are some other ways a BB30 shell can be out of tolerance that need more sophisticated tools to pick up, i.e. the alignment of the bores relative to each other. Here are the official numbers BB30 shells are supposed to conform to:

It is pretty common for frames in practice to be out these tolerances. But, I also have no experience with the Praxis BB in question.
A likely way to make the bike functional is put in a normal BB30 bearing set (not a conversion bottom bracket, just the set of bearings and snaprings that numerous companies sell interchangeable versions of), use retaining compound on those if indeed there is a problem with the bore being too large, and then use the plug-in type 24mm to BB30 adapters. The downside here is you could be letting Specialized off the hook in some sense if in fact there is a problem with the frame, you're giving up on the promise of a screw-together bottom bracket to mitigate creak problems, and the bearing spacing is unnecssarily narrow for a 24mm crank, which is another nice thing about the screw-together concept. The positive is that it's likely to work and it's likely what you'll get sooner than you would a new or reworked frame if you try to warranty it through a Specialized dealer anyway. There are a lot of problems in the world right now with out of spec BB30 frames, and slathering bearings with retaining compound has become the de facto solution to many of them.
You could also try another company's similar screw-together 24mm-to-BB30 product. This would be reasonable to do if you found the problem was with the Praxis unit, i.e. you found that it wasn't expanding like it should when you measure it out of the frame. To my awareness, most of them pinch rather than expand, and so it would be hard to see them having this kind of problem.

Is it a threaded bottom bracket? if so maybe apply more grease and torque it down to the manufacturer's recommended amount. if that doesn't solve your problem, maybe go to a bike repair shop and get it checked out.


Cycling base layers in warm weather? I understand wearing base layers in the colder months, but I see cycling clothing companies (Castelli, Assos, Rapha, etc) also making undershirts specifically for hot summer riding. Given how lightweight and breathable some of the summer jerseys are (like Castelli's Climber's Jersey), why would riders want to add another layer during the summer?

What are the advantages to wearing an undershirt during the summer?

Many of these claim to make you cooler (temperature, not social standing :-)) but whether they actually do or not is another matter. Some fabrics can certainly feel cooler to the touch, and thus may make you feel cooler when riding - which could give you a psychological performance advantage - but whether they physically help cool you down is another matter. Finding information on the actual technology and any sort of scientific testing is difficult.

I ride in Florida and the temperature range can sometimes go from cool in the morning to very hot by afternoon. I've worn UnderAmour Heatgear base layers to keep warm at the start of a ride and found them to be fine when it warms up and they help to wick away sweat if you're not wearing a tight fitting jersey. However that's only up to a certain temperature. Once it gets beyond that I found it just makes you hotter.

Another reason may be for sun protection. Many cycling jerseys are so thin they don't offer much.

Some base layers offer a compression fit, too. Again, companies market this as performance enhancing. Whether that's true is entirely subjective, IMHO.

Lastly, (and if you choose to wear a base layer because of this then you may want to practice riding more) they offer some physical protection. I hit the deck at 25 mph once. My jersey was torn to bits and my skin underneath would have been too if it were not for that fact that I was wearing a base layer that came away relatively unscathed. (The weather was warm enough that I didn't need the base layer, btw).

I think that you need to buy clothes for cycling based on your own body sensations. I wear a tank top with one layer in the summer, it dries quickly and feels comfortable for me.


Will slightly loose bearings result in damage? I just overhauled some cheap bmx hubs. I installed new bearings and cones. Now I'm trying to get the hubs adjusted so that the bearings will last as long as possible.

I had always thought that leaving bearings even a tiny bit loose (be it bb, pedal, or hub) was one of the cardinal sins when it came to maintaining a bike. But reading this from Sheldon Brown put that in question:

  If nothing you can do will eliminate both the binding and the play at
  the same time, it is better to adjust a little loose and accept a
  slight amount of play then to have the hub bind

This is the situation I'm in. Is a little bit of bearing play a legitimate option? Will my bearings wear down more quickly if they are slightly binding or if they are slightly loose?

A bearing that is adjusted too tight can actually seize completely. This happened to me once. I overhauled my front hub and tightened the bearing cones too much. Result: a front wheel that plain stopped turning at some point.

Too tight adjustment will exert more pressure on the cones and cups, and will probably wear out the bearings faster than too loose an adjustment.

For proper adjustment, the Park tool website has good instructions: http://www.parktool.com/blog/repair-help/hub-overhaul-and-adjustment

Years ago the weight weenie road racers used tae leave out a bearing in each hub, saving mebbe 100/150gms on bike weight. They never had problems! pack in more grease.

As you say, they're cheap hubs and more likely ye'll break them before they wear anyway.


How can I prevent bicycle theft while bikepacking? I’m planning a multi-day gravel ride with a few friends. We would have to sleep in public campgrounds, which are also full of people because of the camping season. What is the best way to secure our bikes at night? As you might imagine, having your bike stolen 150 km (100 miles) away from home in the middle of nowhere might be a harrowing experience.
We’re afraid that locks won’t work because the thieves would literally have all night to remove them. There also might not be something to lock to (what do you do if you’re sleeping in an open field?). Furthermore, a group of expensive-looking bikes laden with camping gear would probably be an attractive target for thieves. Any tips?

With multiple bikes, locking them together prevents them being picked up or ridden off. The latter is often the biggest risk when camping - simple opportunism.
A reasonably long cable lock would lock all the bikes together (also outside cafes), and if you use it in an awkward position (down near the chainrings), getting cutters to it would be noisy, and tricky in the dark.  I like my Masterlock Python  for this sort of thing - it can be pulled tight meaning less stray cable at risk of cutting. It could extend into your tent locked to a bag right next to you, if you're worried. In fact even a piece of ground-coloured cord tied to the outermost bike and run through the grass into your tent, where it's tied to your bag or your cooking pots is an effective alarm; you're worried about theft in the dark, so mainly someone quickly picking up a bike and taking it away - if they make a lot of noise they'll run away empty handed.
There are ways to lock bikes to the ground, which I've used while camping. I doubt they're necessary, but I've used this when leaving the bikes on site completely unattended during the day. What I've done is to buy two corkscrew dog stakes, and screw them into the ground as close together as possible. A cable lock run through the triangular handles of both (not the free-spinning leash points) and through the bike(s) is too stiff to allow the stakes to be unscrewed from the ground. If you lean the bikes against each other the right way up, with this arrangement underneath, you can also lock the top tubes together. It can be tricky on rocky ground. Another secure anchor is two sturdy stakes hammered into the ground forming an X, locked together through holes where they cross. This probably means carrying too much weight.
Another suggestion, an additional measure, is to peg down a tarp over the bikes (and any other kit that won't fit into your tents).  This will slow down a potential thief, especially if you bang the pegs right down into the ground.  They either have to pull the pegs or cut the tarp,   before they can even discover how well-locked your bikes are.  In addition it protects your stuff from the elements.

A new generation of alarm type bike GPS trackers are coming out that rely on iot networks https://seesense.cc/products/see-sense-air-pre-order


Why don't cyclists wear all-encompassing motorcycle-style helmets? It is possible to get a helmet that covers your entire head and face, and in theory would protect you against more kinds of falls. In particular, Why don't bicyclists wear them, and why do motorcyclists wear them?

I'm not asking whether helmets are a good idea in general. (Please try to answer this with complete answers, rather than the single-point style of the currently running helmet thread.)

Some bicyclists do wear full-face helmets; in particular, downhill mountain bikers and BMXers will frequently wear full-face helmets, as the chance of a crash causing you to land on your face is greater.

The problem with full-face helmets is that they're hotter; your head is great for getting rid of excess heat, and the full-face helmet helps trap more of that in. Motorcyclists aren't pedaling furiously, and don't need to lose as much heat; heat management is essential for bicycling.

Furthermore, motorcycle accidents tend to happen at higher speeds. On a bike, you're pretty unlikely to wipe out at 60 MPH, while on a motorcycle, it's all too possible. Between the lower risk on a bike, the heat issues, and the extra cost of full-face helmets, for most people it's not worth it to wear the full face helmet on their bicycle.

Any safety feature is a trade-off, between the costs of implementing the feature and the harm or damage that it prevents. When the cost of implementing the feature exceed the expected value of the feature in harm reduction (taking into account the likelihood of the particular form of accident happening, and how severe the damage is), then it doesn't make sense to use that feature. People all assign different values to certain types of harm or damage, and also have different risks based on how they ride and what their environment is like. For some people, wearing a full-face helmet may be worth the extra expense and heat, but most people don't find it's worth that trade-off.

Sadly, for many of these decisions, we don't have enough information; there isn't very much conclusive real-world data on the efficacy of bike helmets, let alone different types of bike helmets.

Motorcyclists use full face helmets because the 'happy biker with bugs on his teeth' experience.
The speed most motorcyclists go makes that they get bugs and other things in their faces at quite high forces. As they have to wear helmets, (in most countries compulsory,) they might as well add the face protection part.
At the speed they go, there is enough cooling from the air.

Most cyclist go at much lower speeds, the bugs are not that much of a danger, although at every speed they can be a nuicance.
The cooling factor of speed is much lower.
Those cyclist that mostly wear helmets have a very awkward head position, anything that makes it harder to look up will endanger the cyclist rather than protect.

On top of that, for many cyclists helmets are more precieved safety, not real life, the current helmets are enough to believe in the fairytale, nothing else is needed.

I have seen enough proof to not believe in that story and would not don any helmet, even less one that fully encloses my head.
One of the good things of cycling is the fresh clean air around my head, no way I will put a plastic case around it. A pair of glasses (and a shawl in front of my mouth in case of very nasty bugs) is all protection I need.


Do we know this type/brand/model of vintage bicycle? JUNIOR (MADE IN AUSTRIA) AND THE FRAME SAYS ''JUNIOR FLIPPER''

ITs a generic BSO made for the 70/80's 10sp market, likely basic cro mo or gas pipe type.heavy as lead...not worth wasting effort or money on..


Can I just fit a cassette with more gears with the same derailleur? I've got a Boardman Road Sport which I use for commuting and doing reasonable length rides during the week etc. I have Shimano Claris as my rear derailleur and so is some of my groupset. I would like to upgrade my cassette to an either 9 or 10 speed to give me a greater variety of gears. To do this do I need to change my rear derailleur from 8 speed to Shimano 105 or something similar? Or can I just change my cassette? Do I also need to change my shifters as well?

If you want to change your cassette to something with more gears, then you will need to replace the rear shifter and possibly the rear derailleur.  A cheaper option would be to get a wider range cassette which still has 8 gears.  You'll have bigger jumps between the gears, but you'll have a bigger range of gears.  With a wider range cassette, you may need a new rear derailleur with a longer cage.

You can upgrade to as much as 1 speed up from what you have, as long as the rear derailler supports it. To see what your derailler supports, you could have a look at velobase and search after your derailler model. For extra speeds, usually, the most important part is the rear derailler. It does all of the heavy lifting when changing gears. That means that if your derailler's max stretch is not able to encompass the extra cog, you won't be able to shift to that gear and you'll have a dead cog. Also, the length of the shifting cable will possibly need to be changed too.


DIY: what material to use as DIY shim seat post? Seat tube shim adapters are quite expensive, what kind of material do you recommend as a shim?

I have seen in a thread some guys talking about home made shim:

paper tape
alloy drink can as a shim (aluminium or steel?)
Thin and quality paper/cardboard

Which one would be the best?

Definitely alloy drink can or other thin sheet metal as it is not compressible and is not affected by water, oil or grease.

Done this a few times, including on trailer DIY axle and the standard pop alum held up over a couple years there without issue.  Also on a prior seatpost issue.

TO THE GUYS WHO SAY BUY THE RIGHT SIZE SEATPOST there are manufacturers (AND OTHER APPLICATIONS) who don't think standards are for them.  Example - just bought a folding e-bike with 36mm seat post. It's also literally twice as long.  It spans use from 5'2" TO 6'5" (157-196 cm) (FUNNY!) and (it says) is good to support 395 pounds (180 kg).  Well - there you go.  Now I want a suspender to go with my hard-tail - and the biggest they have is 31.6.  Which means folding or layering that can - which I did before.

However I would also be willing to try thin sheet aluminium/aluminum from the hardware store - and some kinds of plastic sheet used for durability (thick heat pressed packaging keeps it's properties under extremes.)
I also discovered a handy source of stainless in just about that thickness (2mm/79 thou) - hidden inside just about any hanging file folder.  I went to throw out a bunch and said - hey -- these would be like 40 US cents apiece.  And not only that, but I THINK the folder material would be good for most stenciling apps since it's a hard all through and somewhat water resistant.  Where else do you find 20x15 sheets of stencil blanks for free?
So yeah - I think you just cut a bunch and drop them in to make a circle - if it fits. Bend, solder, cut, done!


Fixie/Single speed frame information for beginner I don't want to buy a ready made bike because singlespeed or fixed gear bikes are way expensive due to their popularity.

I want to make my own bike, I haven't build a bike from scratch before. I want a light, simple bike, a fixie or a single speed, maybe a flip-flop. I am going to use it in city which practically doesn't have a single hill.

It seems that first step is to find a frame. What kind of frame should I get? How do I understand that a frame is compatible and good? When buying a second hand frame, what should I look for? (most common stress points to check, or similar...)

Building a frugal dumpster/secondhand singlespeed or fixed gear is definitely one of those tasks that has become much more difficult with their growth in popularity.

So, let's say you've found a frame that's in your relative size range.  You've figured this out already by riding other bicycles and visiting bike shops and figuring out a rough range of acceptable seat tube and top tube lengths.  And you obsessively carry around a metric tape measure (probably not that hard in Europe).

The first thing to check when selecting a frame is its suitability for conversion.  For a fixed gear or singlespeed without chain tensioner that means it needs to have horizontal dropouts or track ends.  (Expensive options like an eccentric bottom bracket or sliding dropouts would work here as well, but those are rare to find on inexpensive frames.)

The next thing to consider is completeness relative to your parts supply.  A frame with fork is almost always better than a bare frame - finding compatible road forks, particularly threaded, can be annoying as there are a number of odd old sizes out there.  If you've got no parts to start with, a complete bike makes a good base point.  Singlespeeding a complete bike is relatively trivial - remove the chain, remove the shifters and derailleurs, and then shorten the chain and reinstall it over your preferred gear combination.  As you find additional parts you like you can replace them piecemeal.

As far as damage goes, the main stress points to look at are going to be where the rear dropouts meet the chainstay and seatstay and where the seatstays meet the seat tube.  But give it a quick gander at all the joints to look for any obvious cracks.  You'll also want to check just behind the headtube for any sign that the bike has been in a front end collision or roof rack crash.  In general, any kind of bunched-up paint is usually a sign of a bent tube and a compromised frame.

I will give you the short and best answer.
Find a frame.  Road or mountain.  whatever you can get.
Buy a White Industries Eno eccentric flip/flop hub.
Start with a medium gear try 45 chainring and 18 cog.
Ride that for a year with a front brake to learn.
When you are confident remove the brake or keep it.
Change gearing if necessary.
If you don't like riding fixed keep the brakes and put on a free wheel.


Why do new road bikes come with handlebar tape attached? It appeared to me that typically new bikes are sold with tape already installed on the bars. That is both buying from a local bike store (LBS) or online. (Please correct me if I'm wrong, I have not have had a road bike yet.)

However, it would be quite unlikely that the drop bars of a new bike would fit the new rider. Likewise is it not very likely that the levers are correctly positioned.

Since removing the glue from bars is rather arduous, it is not convenient for dealers to sell or return them. However, looking at advertised bikes, I did not get the impression that the bars are there only as proxies to hold the levers in the store.

The question was thouroughly answered in the comments. I shall try to summarise the points given.

@rclocher mentioned that handlebar tape today can be removed easily without much residue. Thus making replacing bars and tape simple. This is contrary to my assumption which was based on limited and outdated experience. The tape is inexpensive for dealers and manufacturers (mentioned by @mattnz)
In my question I overestimated the use to cyclists of having bars that differ from the original (@mattnz). The assumption that customers or dealers are willing to replace handlebars seems also unfounded (@mattnz, @batman)
A typical fitting session typically includes only saddle height and position, stem spacers, and adjustable stems (@batman). More effort on this would erode the dealers profit margins and the patience of 80% of the customers (@mattnz). This is disputed since the typically high value of bikes and possibility to further service the customer is an incentive for the dealer to invest in good fitting (@andy256).
A bike without tape would be uncomfortable to test ride (@batman) and would look bad in the showroom (@Criggie). It cannot be compared to bikes without pedals, since attaching pedals is done in a moment, taping however takes time (@batman).

In case I misrepresented someones comment or overlooked it all together, please be so kind to mention it in a comment on this answer. I do have a few questions on some of these point, which I shall also post below.

Than you very much for the very interesting comments, they were informational beyond the initial, somewhat trivial, question.

When the bike is sized for the new rider, the seat and neck is adjusted. The handle bar levers are fixed and the tape does not need to be changed.

Handle bar tape is typically used only for high end road bikes. Mountain bikes, hybrid bikes and middle, low-end and consumer grade all have rubber type slip on handle bar grips.

Consider it from a typical consumer standpoint:

Many high end road bike purchasers are light use riders and the stock handle bar tape will last for many years. Most high end road bikes are purchased completely assembled and ready-to-ride.

The stock handle bar tape installed by the manufacturer has been
studied to be best fit and comfort for the typical consumer.

Pro and competitive road riders may opt to have the bike shop swap out tape
to their chose brand, style and color.


Is there a way to make activity wristbands read bike rides more accurately? Is there a way to make simple activity tracking wristbands like the fitbit work more accurately during a bike ride. Currently I wear the wristband on my wrist, but the rides tend to read like barely any exercise is occurring during these sessions. I believe these devices act more like a pedometer. Would wearing them on an ankle be more accurate?

A decent amount of bike computers have bluetooth or ANT+ on them, which you can connect to your phone or whatever and read out (as a work around). Apps like runkeeper can also track distance based on GPS roughly.

To quote the fitbit people:

"All Fitbit trackers are optimized for walking, running, and general household and lifestyle activities.

It will not be as accurate for activities like biking, but will record steps if you wear your tracker.

For increased accuracy, go to http://www.fitbit.com/activities or click the "log activity" icon from your dashboard to manually log activities like cycling. This will allow for a more accurate estimated calorie burn to be included in your daily totals. Our online database of workouts makes it easy to save and access your favorite activities. For detailed information see How do I log or record an activity?"

Wearing on ankle may work better, but you'd need to check against a cycling computer or something to see how it works. Alternatively, just use something else like Runkeeper or a bluetooth/ant+ cycling computer or enter stuff from your cycling computer in manually after a ride.

I wear it on my thigh, under my workout pants, when I take spin classes.  Works well.


Conditional clicking from back wheel This drives me nuts for months, I cannot figure out where the clicking sound comes from.
Only comes out after driving uphill, and not on the largest back gear, also not on smallest!
Only happens when I pedal with force, not when just follow slowly or backpedal.
The funny part that it settles down after I backpedal! (thus it cannot be spokes/wheel)
I don't see any dirt in the back derailleur, it has all teeth, but sounds like some consistent metal hitting metal.
I can only feel it via the frame not through the chain.
Chain is well lubed, no stiff links, super silent normally.
Back wheel and gear set is only ~6months old. Gear set is screw type not cassette.
Shifting is perfect. I tried to isolate the spokes so don't mind the paper.
Video with slow motion

It does seem to be in time with your pedalling. If this is the case in any gear, then it would indicate the issue is in the pedals, crank, bottom bracket area.
Check it isn't the front derailleur cable clicking on the right hand crank... rule out the easy one first! The mudguard too, anything that could be rubbing that shouldn't.
Then you would check the pedals, crankset and bottom bracket one by one. If you can swap out the pedals then you can isolate them and see if the problem goes away. Then check the crank bolts are tight and that the chainring bolts are too. Then if not solved you can pull the bottom bracket and inspect it for play in the bearings, replacing it if necessary.
btw, can't see in the video resolution but it almost looks like the front derailleur is incomplete? might want that replacing sometime. If that indicates the condition of the bike (poor) then the bottom bracket could well be worn out and be a strong contender for the noise.

I used to have, not a click, but a creak, from the rear wheel.
The background of the problem was that I bought an e-road-bike. Because decent e-road-bikes were not available with 36-spoke wheels, I had to purchase a bike having 28-spoke wheels. I thought that because the rear wheel is the most likely wheel to have issues and because the frame was an asymmetric frame (Cannondale AI), 28 spokes might be just enough (normally I prefer 36).
They were not. The front wheel suffered a complete and total loss of spoke tension (probably due to 28 spokes being inadequate for braking loads) and the rear wheel also had few spokes with lost tension.
I asked the bike shop where I bought the bike from to solve the issue. Their "solution" was that they put thread glue into each nipple, gluing it in place (thus making it probably impossible to re-adjust spoke tensions after the glue has dried), and tensioned each spoke to a varying not-so-high tension. Thus, I can by plucking the spokes to see that their tension is neither high nor equal.
The thread glue did in fact prevent subsequent tension loss but the rear wheel creaks when I pedal with great force uphill.
I decided that those wheels will never be good and built a wheelset with 36 spokes each (triple butted 2.34mm/1.8mm/2.0mm), a rim with double eyelets and hubs with cup and cone bearings (as opposed to the half-complement industrial non-bike bearings on the original wheelset).
The new rear wheel never creaks when riding hard uphill. The old rear wheel still has the creaking problem, and probably can never be fixed due to the thread glue.
So, your issue could be that rear wheel has a non-equal or non-high spoke tension.


How much should a long distance touring bike weigh? I'm planning in the far future to do a long ride of around 3000km (~1864mi). As I just have a single speed, I've been looking at what is in the market "designed" for that purpose in the price range 1000-2000€/$ and everything is around 14-15kg (30-33lb).

Is that normal for such a bike, or is it too much, considering that you still have to carry some luggage?

People tour on everything -- bso's , specialized touring bikes, mountain bikes, etc.

Find something that works for you and is within your budget. Unless you have a decent amount of experience with touring, I wouldn't worry about something that does 3000 km tours without breaking a sweat. You need a lot of planning to do something like that, which will affect what you carry (e.g. are you camping, staying in hotels, etc.), and you need that information and experience to choose the right bike for you.

For reference, a standard touring bike (like the Trek 520) is 13 kg in disc form for a 57 cm. Note that the weight isn't that big of a deal; how it handles long rides carrying loads and how tough it is (e.g. are the wheels going to break in a little pot hole) is far more important.

This is normal. On sale there are lightweight models of bicycles with reinforced main parts. Watching what kind of luggage you take with you. I take only the most necessary things.