Best option to get my cleats closer inwards to the crank due to a narrow stance I recently bought a road bike and also SPD-SL shoes/pedals, but have not been able to find a cleat position that feels natural to me. After long rides the hamstring tendon that attached at the outside of the knee starts to hurt and I feel like it's due to my feet being too far outward away from the center of the bike. I think my hips are on the narrower side and thus my stance also is.
My cleats are already positioned maximally to the outside of the shoe. What I don't understand is that the cleats can only be adjusted sideways about 5 mm. How can such a small range be sufficient for people with legs/hips of all sizes?
My question is: what is the easiest way to get my shoes closer to the center of the bike.
Photo of my bike and shoes: I would like to move the shoe such that is almost touches the crank. This feels most natural to me.

First, I should mention that when pedaling, we generally want the cleats' lateral position to be such that our knees are in line with the center of the pedal. This is a common principle in bike fit, as illustrated by the picture below courtesy of Rick Schultz, posted on the Bikefit blog.

You correctly deduce that having the wrong stance width may cause knee or other problems (but remember that knee pain is complex, and new cyclists may sometimes not have the correct intuitions about why their position is wrong - actually, the same is true for experienced cyclists as well). The blog post outlines a number of solutions, but most of them are aimed at widening your stance, not narrowing it. Anyway, changing the lateral position of your cleats is probably the first step, and you already chose the correct path of moving them outward on the shoe (which moves your stance narrower, not wider; note that I corrected some wrong language from my earlier response where I got confused). At this point, it is likely you would benefit from seeing a bike fitter.
That said, I am a 5' 5" tall male cyclist. The range of lateral adjustment available on both Speedplay and Shimano SPD-SL pedals has been sufficient for me. I don't think that many people will need narrower cleat positions than are available commercially (because most people below my height are women, whose average hip width is wider than men). If do you actually need your cleat position to be narrower, you may be an edge case not well-handled by the available equipment, and you would definitely benefit from a professional fit. If you can get your knees in line with the spindle on your current setup, then I'd urge you not to go narrower than that. If you can't, then a fitter is likely to know about available options.
Just to put one option out there, Speedplay pedals can accommodate narrower stance widths than most others. The link goes to an article on Slowtwitch (a tri website) written by Dan Empfield, and he articulates a number of other advantages of Speedplays.
Pertinent to the cleat stance issue: Standard model Speeplays ship with 53mm spindles, which I believe is about the same as the default spindles on Shimano pedals. However, Speedplay cleats appear to have a total range of 8.9mm of lateral adjustability (I measured this with calipers, measuring from the center of the mounting screws in both the extreme positions; note that Empfield characterizes the range as about two spindle sizes, which is 6mm; more discussion below). I believe SPD-SL cleats have a total of 5mm of lateral adjustability, plus the yellow ones allow 1.5mm of lateral float.
Last, Speedplay pedals may be available with custom 50mm steel spindles, i.e. 3mm shorter than stock. I say this because Wahoo recently bought the company, and I'm not sure if the company will continue to make these spindles available. While the titanium spindled versions are very expensive, they come in a stock 50mm length. Either the custom steel or stock ti spindles may be an option if you truly must have those last 3mm of adjustment. Also, I know that some China- or Taiwan-based eBay sellers may offer aftermarket titanium spindles in the lengths you would require. At the time of writing, I have heard good feedback about J&L, which is based in mainland China. I believe they've been selling spindles for some years. NB: their continued existence is not guaranteed, and there are likely to be at least a couple other aftermarket players.
Note that Speedplays require significantly more maintenance to both the cleats and pedals than Shimano pedals. I've written about this here. You will really want to take that seriously, otherwise you will chew up their cleats, and those are expensive.
Revisiting your question if the standard cleat position is really suitable for most human cyclists: it may well be, and moreover, many cyclists are not that sensitive to their cleat position. Consider that many cyclists switch between road and mountain bikes without major issue, and MTBs have much wider pedal stances. Many pedal manufacturers do make longer spindles available, and Speedplay have +3, +6, and +9mm ones. Apart from Speedplay, I only know of one pedal with a shorter than stock spindle (Shimano's XTR pedals have a -3mm spindle). As I said earlier, there are very few men my height and shorter, so I don't think there is a large market for narrower spindles. Additionally, if you have your feet that close to the spindle, your shoes may rub your cranks.
Last, I reiterate the need for a bike fit if you are having muscle or joint pain. While they are expensive, it is well worth it for serious cyclists. You may think the issue is your cleat position, but you and I are not trained in bike fit and physiology, and we could easily be wrong.
Side note: cleat rotation
For many of us, our feet probably don't point straight ahead naturally. Most likely, the OP's bike store set their cleats up pointing straight ahead. Shimano's yellow cleats have 6 degrees of angular float, which is likely to allow most riders to find their natural foot position. (NB: this is 3 degrees left and 3 degrees right of the pedal centerline, not 6 degrees left and right.)
If the OP's cleats need further rotation, or if they got the blue or red cleats which have 1 and 0 degrees of float, rotating the cleats consumes some of the available room for lateral adjustment. Stock Speedplay Zero cleats allow up to 15 degrees of float, which should mean that essentially nobody would need to rotate a Speedplay cleat. (NB: you can't actually rotate Speedplay cleats.)
The OP is almost sure to have yellow SPD-SL cleats. Blue SPD-SL cleats only come stock with Dura Ace pedals, their top of the line pedal. Red cleats must be purchased separately. Many commentators think the red cleats are a bad idea, especially for amateurs. Even many professional cyclists appear not to run the red cleats, or Look's equivalent zero float cleat. Zero float may help very competitive cyclists who are putting out a lot of power and want to waste zero motion, but it's not clear if this is just a placebo effect.

Here is an easy way to do this: switch to flats. Put your feet wherever you want and you can shift to endless variations during your ride to avoid overuse injury. You also reduce the chance of injury from a fall while constantly reinforcing proper pedalling technique. Why do people clip to their pedals anyway?


Bike with a hi-ten steel frame for getting around the city? Recently I bought a new bike which has the following characteristics:

Size of frames: M (44cm) / L (48cm) / XL (52cm)
Wheel size / Number of gears: 26 "/ 21
Frame: HI-TEN Steel
Fork: HI-TEN steel fixed 26"
Hedsch: A -HEAD 1-1 / 8 "
Stem: ZOOM, Steel A-HEAD, ML 80mm / XL 110mm

I'm not a bike expert, but a friend of mine made a negative remark about the hi-ten frame saying that he would prefer an aluminium bike frame, or maybe another kind of steel.
I'm mainly going to use this bike to get around through my city, and nothing serious like mountaneering etc. I would like to know what issues can the hi-ten steel frame cause and should I change it for another one (aluminium frame bike) if I can?

I have 4 bikes, and the one I keep for just riding around a city is high-ten steel. Yes, they're heavy, and normally cheap, but they can be tough and practical.

What's more important is that it works for you - that it's the right size and convenient.

Actually a lot of bikes are a mixture of Cr-Mo front triangles (TT/DT/ST) and Hi-ten rear seat stays and chain stays. These are called (Tri-Moly). Reason is simple, Cr-Mo although stronger does flex more than steel, so by using stiffer Hi-Ten for the rear SS & CS's this transmits the riders power more efficiently because the rear end isn't flexing under the down/power stroke "torque".
100% Cr-mo bikes are known as "Wet Noodles" because they flex all over the place. Yes they are light and do not crack as easy do to the flexing, but they are somewhat sad in getting the power torque to the ground because the torque is eaten up in the flex. And yes it will rust just the same as a Hi-ten will.
back in the day "Sling Shot" tried to introduce right and left side drive (two sprockets and drivers) One on each side of the bike to minimize the flex of the 100% cr-mo frame and sprung front tri. It never really took off.
Tri-Moly bikes have less flex so more power is transmitted to the ground.
Alloy bikes. The stiffest but at a much greater chance of failure "Cracking". The stiff tube transmits the vibration of use/shock to the welds and they crack easy.
A bike is a bike.
I have a bike that is Hi-Ten and it is not rusted and it is 40 years old, a BMX bike at that, that sees mud, rain and everything else thrown at it and it has not cracked or bent. I can live with the extra 3 pounds.
Reynolds is also a awesome not so much used anymore material that I would love to see make an appearance again.


Cylinder volume of hydraulic brakes and levers I've been asking around for a while now but even workshop pros couldn't answer this (by citing exact figures):

How big are the brake cylinders of disk and rim brakes in terms of volume and surface area? Specifically the Shimano RS505/685, SRAM Force and Magura HS33 R (FIRM-tech).

EDIT   I intended to build a full custom solution working around some of the limitations given by the brake manufacturers.

In short, shifters from brand A on brakes of brand B. I went a different path so I'm not limited by this question any more.

Is it not a sealed system though?

If the reservoir holds 30ml fluid the only difference will be the fluid within the brake lines adding to the total capacity of fluid needed or used.

Even when pads get low you don't lose fluid, it may seem like you have as the reservoir will look like its gone down, it has but you still have the same amount of fluid you started with.

well the snarky answer is 0, a brake cylinder is used in a drum brake.  What you are referring to is a caliper.  Drum brakes have a cylinder.  Disc brakes and the HS33 use a caliper.

In terms of volume it is a varying amount I hope you understand that - volume at rest =/= volume at full activation and the function of volume inside the caliper at any given time is continuous between rest and full activation.


Gear to protect against hand injury in a crash I commute to work a few miles on my bike in the city.  Today someone walked out in front of me and I squeezed the brakes too hard and went over the handlebars.  I suffered a mild elbow fracture because I put my arms out in front of me and the palms of my hands are destroyed.

I started thinking, I have had several incidents while commuting (mostly in snow or on leaves) and I almost always get hand injuries as a result.  I'd like to get gloves that protect my hands.

But:

I don't want the gloves to make injury to elbows, arms, head, scaphoid, or anything else greater.  That is, they shouldn't stick to the asphalt too hard nor slide too much (I think...I'm open to suggestion)
They should be comfy to ride.  I can have a separate pair for winter and summer riding.
I'd prefer if they were tough enough to withstand a few falls without taking too much damage.
I'm always on roads and bike paths, so asphalt is the only landing consideration.

I'm not sure what kind of stuff to get.  Cycling gloves seem like they are mostly leather and it seems like they would be damaged from a fall like I just had.  Motorcycle gloves seem heavier duty and have more protection, but I don't know how they would have affected this situation.  That is, I'm very glad my hands are hurt and face/head/shoulders are fine.

Is damage to wrists or scaphoid bone a serious concern?  If so, are there good gloves for that?  I'd love some suggestions.

Edit: BTW My commute is only like 20 minutes each way per day.  Long distance issues are not of concern for me.

Thankfully I never ride without gloves. The light weight gloves with padded leather in the  palms is all you need - they are cheap, comfortable and effective - what more could you ask for. I had a crash after my bike was tampered with and the front wheel fell off. I am a programmer, and although I emptied the company first aid kit of dressings, and could not walk properly or bend my elbow for days, I could still type. Had I not been wearing gloves, I would have been off work for weeks.

As I see it, if you damage the leather enough to make the gloves unserviceable, and walk away - keep walking - straight to you lottery shop. Leather is tough and slide - in my case the gloves, which took the full impact of my fall, had no visible damage - unlike my shoulder, elbow and hip....

Wearing big heavy gloves might protect you hands, but downhill riders and motorcyclists that wear these also wear full face helmets and body armour - unless you do the same you will come off and although your hands will be fine, the rest of you won't be.

Any bone damage is a problem - if you don't want it, don't fall off. You can learn to fall to minimize injury - downhiller riders are the masters of this, question is - can you be bothered as the only real way to learn is to do it.... You could wear body armour but its no guarantee.....

Edit:
Since writing this many years ago, I have taken up Martial Arts with my children (I am over 50). The techniques taught have helped enormously in a couple Mountain biking falls I have had, including one where I went 'over the bars'.

Answer Your are asking for a technical solution to a people problem.
Go to an Aikido class for a month, and learn how to fall.
If after that you still feel unsafe, add elbow protectors to your knee pads.
Also ride an MTB and fall a lot onto soft ground.
EDIT:
Years later, I still uphold this opinion. Do see the last paragraph of the accepted answer.


Why aren't average speeds computed over distance? Average speed is computed so that average speed = total distance / total time. This means that if you go up a hill, which takes a long time, your average speed drops. This isn't regained on the downhill, since going down takes so much less time.

If you compute the average over distance instead (i.e., your speed every tenth of a mile), the uphill and downhill are equally weighted, since they have the same number of samples. This means that your average is closer to what your speed would be on flat ground.

Your speed over flat ground seems more important to me. It doesn't depend on how hilly your route is, and that way you could compare cyclists more easily. Why don't we compute the average speed over distance instead?

Clarification edit: I know that average speeds are computed with time because we care about the average speed -- it'd take me that same amount of time to travel a certain distance if I traveled my time-average speed.

I don't care about time anywhere here (minus speed) -- the definition of average speed doesn't bother me, I'm just wondering why this isn't a more widespread metric.

This is an interesting point of view. Let's unpack this a bit.

Assume I have a ride that is 10 miles of flat, 10 miles of ascent, and 10 miles of descent.
On the flat I maintain a constant 20 miles/hour.
On the ascent I fall back to a constant 10 miles/hour.
On the descent I maintain a constant 30 miles/hour.

My average speed for this would be:
(10 miles + 10 miles + 10 miles) / (0.5 hour + 1.0 hour + .33 hour) = 16.39 miles/hour

By the proposed calculation I would have:
(100 tenths/mile * 20 miles/hour + 100 tenths/mile * 10 miles/hour + 100 tenths/mile * 30 miles/hour) / 300 tenths/mile = 20 miles/hour

If I had an average of 20 mph I should be able to complete the course in 1.5 hours.  The trouble is that the course would actually take 1.83 hours to complete at the actual average of 16.39 mph.  I know it hardly seems fair, since by all rights you did the vast majority of miles at 20+ mph.  The caveat is that you spent by far the greatest amount of time at 10 mph.

Your speed over flat ground seems more important to me.

Or you want to ignore outliers, correct? The median is remarkably suited for that. Why not collect speed values and then compute the median?
The two methods, collecting the speeds via time or distance are just different sampling methods to estimate the distribution of speeds. One may give a better approximation of the speed distribution, but hopefully the median is invariant to this.
Computing the median has solid theoretical backing: OP would like to minimize the effect of outliers on the data. This is a feature of medians.
We can think of our speeds as a random variable X that changes according to terrain/weather/etc. In continuous time, thinking about the probability distribution function (PDF) of X implies that we collect data points at every instant.
But given some samples, how can estimate the PDF? Probabilists have considered this problem, and have developed maximum likelihood estimation and the Bayes estimator (which requires a prior on the PDF of your speeds X).
EDIT I have generated graphs that show the difference between time- and distance-based sampling.

With this data, we collect median values of
| Sampling method | Median | Mean  |
| --------------- | ------ | ----- |
| native          | 16.02  | 15.68 |
| time            | 15.74  | 15.36 |
| distance        | 16.33  | 16.02 |


To Cold Set or Not To Cold Set? I have a Trek 620 (Reynolds 531 lugged steel frame) from the mid-80s the rear dropouts are spaced at 126 mm. I'd like to be able to run an 8- or 9-speed cassette and I was wondering about the issues involved with running a modern road hub with 130 mm spacing without adjusting the frame spacing.

It seems to me that the rear triangle would have the ability to flex 4 mm without needing to be cold set – at the expense of a small misalignment of the dropouts.

Are there problems with doing this? Other than the slight hassle when installing the rear wheel?

Would it impact the value of the frame – the bike is a rider, probably not a candidate for a restoration (frame could use repainting and I'm not sure the components are original, the wheels definitely are not)?

No need to cold-set.

I have a BSO with the same problem. The rear dropouts are about 6mm too close for the hub. I can just flex them apart and let the hub in.

The misalignment of the dropouts would be virtually nonexistent at 4mm flex.

If you remove your wheels often, and putting the wheel on is a pain, it might be worth cold-setting your frame. Other than that, don't bother.

Do not flex, otherwise wheel is probably not aligned with the frontwheel. Axle could be broken, because the dropouts are not longer parallel. If microfusione made they could crack. Better you have exactly the cogs you need, having different cassettes will help, if you are one day in the mountains, the next in the plaines.


Is standing up and pedaling on multi-gear bicycles a bad idea After reading  While pedaling standing up, bike crank gives in as if shifting, what is causing this? , I was thinking "one should probably not be standing up to pedal under normal circumstances". Is this an accurate assumption?

I remain seated while pedaling but I am not sure if it's right, or how to justify why one should not stand, other than it may be unsafe due to unpredictability in the drive train.

Instead I shift gears to make the bicycle easier to pedal so that I can remain seated at all times.

Should we remain seated at almost all times when on a multi-gear cycle? Why?

As (almost) always, the great Sheldon Brown has covered this particular topic. Standing while Cycling

  To Sit or to Stand?

  It is my belief that a great many cyclists stand up to pedal much more often than they should. I've often said:

  "If you find yourself standing to accelerate, on level ground, it is a sign that your gear is too high or that your saddle is too low."
  Standing pedaling allows you to apply more force to the pedals than is possible seated, because you can rest your entire weight on the driven pedal, and, even more, by pulling up on the handlebar, you can push the pedal with more than your actual weight...but is this a good thing?
  Pedaling that hard is very stressful to the joints, and to the bicycle, and usually involves a level of effort that cannot be sustained aerobically. Unless you have unusually good form, it also tends to involve a fair amount of thrashing from side to side, which is a waste of energy. The added stress flexes many parts of the bicycle, and the energy required to do this flexing is not usually recovered when the parts straighten back out.

  These extreme stresses also greatly increase the risk of breaking things. If a pedal, crank, chain, handlebar or handlebar stem should break under this abnormal stress (a very real possibility) you are almost certain to suffer injury in the resulting crash. Even a simple missed shift or the skipping of a worn chain can toss you to the ground when you throw all of your weight onto a single pedal. You should never stand up to pedal a bicycle that you do not know to be in excellent mechanical condition!

Some sports physiological professor at a USA university point out that cycling is not a sitting sport. I totally agreed now.

I have been cycle commuting over 16 years and recently started riding standing up for a round trip of about 15KM. I removed a 24' wheel bike's saddle to force me stand up all the way back and forth and enjoyed it very much.


Lighter bicycle locks not made of steel Nowadays there are so many different high-tech materials, so I wonder if there is a suitable material for bicycle locks that would be much less heavy than hardened steel. If there isn't one, can somebody explain from the perspective of materials science why?

The only non-steel material used in locks that I could find is Kevlar, but mostly just as a coating around steel, and from various reviews I don't get the impression that they are better or lighter than ordinary steel ones. My understanding is that kevlar has good tensile strength (so gun bullets can't tear kevlar fabric) but it doesn't resist being sawn or cut. Carbon fibres would presumably have similar issues, it's fairly easy to damage carbon frames if you compress them so a potential carbon fibre lock wouldn't resist bolt cutters.

So are there any light materials that would have the correct properties for a bike lock? And if not, why not?

There isn't all that much point.

We have a lot of knowledge on how to make steel tough. It's also pretty cheap. This basically makes it win-win for manufacturers: use enough tough steel in a good structure with a good locking mechanism to get a decent lock. It doesn't cost a lot and its easy to fabricate.

The weight of many good locks is not that much to begin with; the main design goals with a U-lock is to leave as little space as possible to get a jack in, hard enough to cut, and has a proper lock mechanism. So, locks like the Kryptonite Evo Mini line are very good for many locking jobs and don't weigh all that much (about 1.5 lbs for the Mini 6). So, there's not all that much point in reducing weight.

There are some locks which are not steel -- Tigr makes titanium locks, for example. But they're less well known and twice the price of a high quality steel lock, such the well tested Kryptonite New York Lock line. And the smaller units don't necessarily hold up.

I redesigned an Electric cattle prod, fitted it under my seat, wired it to the bike frame. It is remotely armed and at discharge it releases 70000 volts at 4 amps. It is very effective. It has already knocked one person out and stunned another when they tried to steal my bike. I still use a normal $30 lock and don't arm the shocker in safe places but if I am visiting out of area I do arm it. So far I have still got my bike and will defend it with their lives if I have to.


Are MIPS helmets actually any safer than standard helmets? Independent Research? A friend just told me about a relatively new bike helmet technology that reduces torsion (rotational) stress in a bike accident. My wife is a speech therapist (and I write speech therapy software) so I'm well aware that tearing is more damaging than concussive forces.

It's called MIPS: Multi-directional Impact Protection System.

But, I'm not convinced the MIPS system actually improves on that. The only independent research I've seen a citation to is in swedish.
And the next best research was on motorcycle helmets

Summary

Research into brain injuries has been ongoing, but tended to focus more on direct impacts. In the last 70 years there has been more research into rotational brain injuries, and in the 1990s and 2000s scientific, evidence based proposals were made to reduce these. The Multi-Directional Impact Protection System is an implementation of these, and it's effectiveness has been validated by independent research.

Discussion

There is lots of research into brain injury. While much of it has focused on direct impact leading to scull fracture, the effects of sudden head rotation have been studied since the 1940s. These (pay-walled papers) are typical

A study on rotational brain injury (1984).
Physical model simulations of brain injury in the primate (1990).

Such studies progressed to proposals, such as

A proposed tolerance criterion for diffuse axonal injury in man (1992).
KINEMATIC ROTATIONAL BRAIN INJURY CRITERION (BRIC) (2011).

  [In] 2008 ... Swedish neurosurgeon Hans Von Holst, along with mechanical engineer Peter Halldin, developed a new technology called MIPS (Multi-Directional Impact Protection System).

A couple of (non independent) articles are

New Helmet Technology Reduces Brain Injury
MIPS

Mips has been received with acclaim

Precious Protection (2010).
Senseless: An In-Depth Look at the State of Bicycling Helmet Technology (2014).

There has been at least one study of their effectiveness

Angular Impact Mitigation system for bicycle helmets to reduce head acceleration and risk of traumatic brain injury. (2013).
This found a 34% reduction in peak angular acceleration and predicts that AIM helmets reduced the risk of concussion [by] 44%.

But not everyone is convinced regarding helmet effectiveness. For a helmet skeptic's view see

Cycle helmets and rotational injuries.
The views expressed here are out of date, but it's the only skeptical view I found regarding rotational brain injuries.

Certainly, more independent validation would be good, and in future better designs could appear. At present MIPS seems to set the brain protection benchmark.

http://www.bhsi.org/mips.htm

Conclusion, they test with computer models and dummies which don't have hair and their scalp doesn't move... Soo, unless your bald, your hair is MIPS.


How can I tell the difference between a J.I.S. and ISO square taper bottom bracket? I have a square taper bottom bracket. How can I tell whether it is a J.I.S. or ISO taper with a minimum amount of disassembly?

FWIW, it's a Ritchey from 2004. However, it would be nice to get answers that apply to other brands as well.

The width across the narrowest part of the flats (end of spindle):

JIS = 12.65mm

ISO = 12.33mm

Use calipers.

If its the length of the taper that matters,  let measure that.

JIS =  16.96mm

ISO =  TBD


Deore Derailleur w/ Tiagra STI Shifter Compatibility I have Shimano Deore RD M591 Rear Derailleur (http://www.jensonusa.com/Shimano-Deore-M591-9-SPD-Rear-Derailleur) that I am having trouble dialing in shifting when used with Tiagra 4700 2x10 STI shifters (http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/shimano-tiagra-4700-2x10-speed-sti-shifter-set/rp-prod137777) and a SLX 11-36t 10 speed cassette. I was working off of the general hypothesis that a 9 speed mountain derailleur would have the same pull ratio as the 10 speed STI shifters. I can adjust shifting to work as needed for the first 3 highest gears, but then when I shift beyond that towards the "easier" rear cogs it is consistently skipping over a cog (from 3rd to 5th for example). This continues up to the 10th cog, shifting two gears for every one click of the shifter. If I adjust cable tension so shifting is smooth in the middle or low end of the gear range, it is then not accurate at the high end of the gear range.

My goal was to extend my climbing gear range as much as possible so I could take my winter/cyclocross frame and turn it into a gravel bike capable of climbing some steep Vermont dirt roads.

Any thoughts or ideas appreciated. Thanks!

I was working off of the general hypothesis that a 9 speed mountain derailleur would have the same pull ratio as the 10 speed STI shifters.

That's true, except for Tiagra 4700, which rather inexplicably uses the 11 speed pull ratio.

See https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/52277/24228

  Presently there are two different 10-speed Tiagra generations, 4600 and 4700. (So the STI from one is ST-4600 and the other is ST-4700, etc). 4600 uses the same classic actuation ratio that all pre-11-speed Shimano road groups used other than first generation Dura-Ace. 4700, however, is an oddball group. It's 10-speed but uses the new 11-speed actuation ratio

I have four bicycles with Tiagra 3x10 shifters; two with 4600 shifters and two with 4700 shifters. I ran into the same problem as above and was eventually able to get the 4700 shifters to work with Deore RD M591 rear derailleurs, but only if I used Shimano cassettes and Shimano Tiagra chains. When I first installed the 4700 shifters with the Deore M591 RD I was using SRAM cassettes and SRAM chains and could not get them to shift well over all 10 cogs, but once I changed to Shimano cassettes and Tiagra chains the 4700 shifters work well with the Deore M591 RD.


Can I use super glue for punctures? I want to fix my puncture with super glue, can I use it ? I do not have any glue left in my puncture outfit so can I use ordinary super glue?

It won't work very well at all. Superglue, unlike rubber glued with rubber cement, doesn't stretch. It will probably open up again as soon as you inflate the tyre. If it holds at first, it's likely to let you down soon.

If you're absolutely desperate it might be worth a try, especially if the tube doesn't have to expand much to fit the tyre, but only to get you home or to the bike shop. And it's risky - the tyre could go down quickly when you don't want it to. You'd probably have to replace the tube after that as a proper patch wouldn't stick to the dried superglue.

Among household glues, evostick or a similar contact adhesive (that's used in the same way as patch cement) would be a better bet, but would still probably write off the tube

I used super glue and it's worked fine. I also spreaded it out before it dried though.


My bike leans to the right. What should I check? The bike I use to commute - a cheap, no brand city bike - is unbalanced, and naturally leans to the right. This is not noticeable normally, but it's enough to make riding without the hands on the bars requires quite some effort to avoid drifting right.

Of course I can't just ask you what the cause is, but could you help me in finding it? What should I look for/test/check?

a) Is the headset tight? Over time that can loosen up and it'll start to lean in one direction or the other (usually based on which side of the pothole you just hit).

b) Are your wheels true? this probably won't make a major difference but it might combine with the previous point.

c) Is the weight on the bicycle evenly distributed? E.g., do you wear a messenger bag across your left shoulder so the weight of the load pulls the bike in that direction?

d) Does this happen in a parking lot as well as on the road? Don't forget that streets aren't flat - they curve off to the edges to allow water to shed from the roadway (and into nice deep puddles for motorists to drive through and splash cyclists). If it only happens on the road (and you always ride on the right hand side of the road) it's probably because of Gra-vi-ty.

Had this problem myself and fixed it by tightening the quick release mechanism on my front wheel; which I mean tightening the two nuts that hold the mechanism in the wheel.


Older rims, newer tires Can I put "new" 27 and half inch tires on "old" 27 inch rims?  Looking to
save the trouble of finding out!

Have not seen 27 x 1/2 tires before but the old 27 x 1 1/4 rim probably will not care if the width is greater.  One question is whether the wider tire will clear your frame.


How to relate wind chill, temperature, and cycling I'm interested in how wind chill and temperature come into play while cycling.  If I rode on one day with the temperature at 15°F (-9°C), but the wind chill was 1F (-17°C), how would that relate to a day where the temperature is 10°F (-12°C) or 20°F (-6°C) with the same wind chill?

Ok, let's start with wind chill.  The faster the wind, the more chill Wind Chill chart from the National Weather Service Read along the top for the temperature without wind, then down for wind chill at different speeds.  So, for example, at 15 degrees Fahrenheit (-9°C) in a 15mph (6.7 m/s) wind, effective temperature is 0 degrees Fahrenheit (-18°C). (chilly!) That chart only works up to 40 degrees F (4°C), but it gives the idea! This Wind chill Calculator allows you to put in any value, and speed of air

Of course, that's if you're standing still.  If you're cycling you almost always have a headwind, Here is a link to a page with masses of detailed information about headwinds.  The faster you go, the faster the effective windspeed, and the lower the temperature felt.  This can be really helpful on a hot summer day, or really chilly in a cold winter!

When cycling you have to take this into account - in the winter, layer up (and find a wind proof jacket if possible.)  In the summer, it means that you can actually go up that big hill without totally overheating! I remember one hot day, on a steep incline, I rounded a bend, and came straight into the lee (wind shielded) side of the hill - in seconds I was feeling way too hot, without the cooling breeze.


Bushings vs bearings - maintenance difficulty I consider purchasing a full suspension bike with a linkage using bushings, instead of bearings for the pivots (Ghost Path Riot). A review says:

  The bushings are said to wear out quick, two to three new sets should be in your tool box during a full season of racing, but it makes for a very light and compact frame design.

I don't care to maintain my bike a bit more, considering that bushings cost less then bearings. But I know that changing bearings in the rear linkage requires a set of tools (presses for each bearing diameter), that's it's among the small number of repairs I don't do it myself. Is it the same with bushings, or maybe they require a cheaper generic tool, so I could invest a few bucks and replace them myself?

Bushings and bearings are nearly identical in terms of the replacement procedure. Personally I think bearings are the better option because bushings typically are manufactured and supported only by the bike manufacturer. This means when the bike becomes discontinued, most of the time, so do the bushings.

If you need a bearing replaced, you can typically look on the dust seal and get an equivalent Wheels Manufacturing Bearing.

As far as a specialty tool (for bearings), in a pinch, you can

Use a flat head screwdriver and tap the bearing out side by side
Press the bearing in with the correct sized socket from a socket kit

The press you would need can either be borrowed from an Auto Parts store, or use a long bolt, and a nut with a washer to make a "homemade" press.

See this video

The actual tool looks like this

For bushing replacement, unfortunately you do need a specific tool to get those guys out.

Bushes are great at spreading the load across the width of the bush and for suspension parts that rotate only a portion of a quadrant. Roller bearings were designed for high RPM rotation with little friction. Each ball has minimal contact with the race, therefore friction is low. However, small contact area and limited rotation leads to premature ball bearing wear along a tiny portion of the race, often leading to bearings seizing.  Bushes are cheaper and have no moving parts.


How to select a good quality frame? I have asked a lot of questions here, and most of times, the answers that I get is related with having a good quality frame. But, in my nation, store owner (or mechanics) hardly give any detail regarding any frame, they just see the price and judge a frame as good or not so good.

How exactly to select a good quality frame?

I ride a typical MTB, for commuting, offroad riding, road or touring as well.

I am expecting in terms of material, weight, welds and other relevant areas (which is obviously dont know of).

I think most any frame is going to suit you just fine -- consider size, riding position, cost, and weight. Outside of that, one generally doesn't have to worry about frame failures or anything of that sort, with the exception of crazy carbon racing frames.

I think this is the point where you go to a local bike shop and try a few of them out -- look at what's available, and choose one you like (that is, that you feel comfortable riding with).

As far as things like welds, you really don't have to worry about the frame failing on you. Better welds are lighter, but that's really the extent of it.

Let's narrow this down a bit...

A typical MTB for general purpose use: that means aluminium, rather than carbon fibre or beautiful chro-mo steel.

Now let's see who actually makes their own bikes. Trek? They ask some people in Taiwan to give them a quote for their specifications and they then outsource the job to a.n.other factory. That is pretty much the same story with all of the leading 'brands' - they badge engineer, outsource and do anything but make their own stuff.

Meanwhile, in the Taiwanese corner you have Giant. They make the stuff for the other people and make a fair few bikes of their own. They are the ones that have invested in how to hydroform aluminium into beautiful shapes so as to get maximum strength for given quantity of materials. Do you really think they save their better stuff for other people, e.g. the 'Treks and Colnagos' of this world?

If a Giant suits you then get one. And no I do not work for them.


Railroad Power lines interfering with Heart rate Monitor I have two heart rate monitor chest straps from Sigma and one from Garmin. Everytime I pass close by a trainline the numbers on my HR-Display go bananas. I'm about to go insane because of this, is there anything to do against this? Buy something new? Or throw it all in the bin..

Hmmm... I smell a science project!  If the field is really strong be aware that optical may not work either because the chips/wireless probably aren't shielded anyway. Assuming you don't need laps for training, you could try hitting your lap button so at least you know when the event happens. I suppose you could try an experiment by taping aluminum foil to your chest covering the monitor pickups but not the wireless unit. That might tell you if the shielding issue is in the leads as I suspect or in the main unit that picks up the wireless. Ask yourself if the speed/cadence monitors wireless signals are being received to indicate whether an optical monitor might work.


105 Shimano 10 speed shifters - compatibility with 11 speed rear derailleur I am building a bike and I am using 10 speed Shimano 105 shifters.
On the back I am using a 11 speed 105 rear derailluer (because is the only one I have at the moment).
The cassette I am using is a standard SHIMANO TIAGRA CS-HG500-10 10 SPEED CASSETTE 11-25T.

Unfortunately, I am having some problems: when in biggest cog or second one, the chain moves out of the tension pulley and gets stuck (by the way the chain is a 11 speed chain, so width should not be an issue).

Does it seem like there could be something wrong with the chain line?

Any of you knows why it happens?
Did it happen to you?

Thanks already for your input!

This is to do with the different pull ratios employed by the different systems.
In your case 10 vs 11 speed Shimano.

http://blog.artscyclery.com/science-behind-the-magic/science-behind-the-magic-drivetrain-compatibility/

If you look at the table in the link - it says the 10 speed levers pull less than the 11 speed levers but the rear derailleur ratios are also vastly different.

In my humble opinion it should work if you use a 10 speed chain instead of a 11spd chian.... The chain width is determined more by the cassette than the RD...The RD does only what the shifters tell it to do.....The spacing between the sprockets on a 11 spd cassette are narrower than those on a 10 speed cassette....Since you are using a 10 speed cassette....try using a 10 speed chain..... I am fairly confident that it should work......Good luck


My bike got stolen a second time (in Amsterdam) - what should I do? I've moved to Amsterdam a few months ago, and have started using bicycles; I mostly cycle from home to work.

I've been using typical old(ish) used bikes, black-color omafiets of some obscure make, with a front basket mounted. It had a (simple?) ring lock and a 20-25 EUR chain lock.

My first bike was stolen from near work. Never mind the circumstances, but I bought another one and made sure to always keep it in my workplace's locked bike shed where I feel it's pretty safe.

However, just last week, my second bike was stolen from near my home. I had parked it at a main intersection - assuming the visibility numbers would make this a safer choice. Both locks were on, and the chain affixed the bike to a metal bike-stand. Still, it got stolen overnight.

I'm wondering what to do...

Should I plan for my bike occasionally getting stolen and repeatedly buy cheap ones?
Should I buy a more sturdy, more expensive lock for my new bike?
Should I spend money on customizing the bike so as to make it more theft-repellent?
Perhaps I should just change my assumptions and park my bike someplace less conspicuous to begin with? It would make the bike less visible to bike thieves, but would allow them to operate more safely, since few people would notice and if someone noticed they could just run off.

Advice would be highly appreciated.

Notes:

Amsterdam-specific (and Amsterdam-popular-bike-model specific) answers are welcome; and that fact, specifically since the city is very prone to opportunist bike theft, makes this question a non-dupe in my view.
I can't keep my bike indoors overnight - I'm living in an apartment building with a narrow staircase and not much room, this is not a relevant solution (for me at least). Obviously if I could keep indoors it would be a whole different issue since bike thieves don't break into people's houses (that makes them burglars).
I'm not going to find my bike, so I'm only asking about next time.

Buy more secure lock(s) for your bike - I have a Kryptonite New York Standard and a Kryptoflex cable that I leave in work for my commute. I also have a New York Fahgettaboudit Mini for using about town on my single speed (no quick release installed on this bike).
Utilise new/better lock from above to secure your bike in a more productive fashion. Personally I will place the u-lock through the rear wheel and seat tube like the image below

You also have to consider that thieves want a quick and easy job. If your bike is secured like the picture above with a strong lock, they'll probably just move on to an easier target unless it's a very valuable bike which you've locked in public, something I'd advise against.

Yes I voted to close as it is multiple questions

I think a better question is bicycle security and risk management
You want to minimize theft and minimize impact in the event it is stolen

Cheapest bike that does the job

This not only makes the bike less attractive to thieves but also less
costly for you to replace
A used bike is going to be less expensive.
Amsterdam is fairly flat.  A single speed (SS) is probably
sufficient.  A SS is going to be the cheapest bike.  And there are
less components to steal.  I have SS for commuting that is actually a nice bike to ride and I have about $400 into it.

High end locks(s)
Put $100+ lock on a $300 bike
Make sure the frame and both wheels are locked
Make sure you are locked to something secure
There are tricks of stop signs that can be lifted out of the ground
best bike lock
Secure components
Cheap components is a deterrent
Definitely want a ratty seat and ratty pedals
Kind of need to risk decent wheels and tires or the bike is just not very ride-able
Can get security bolts and security skewers
Cheap trick is bearing in hex bolts held with grease or wax
Never leave lights or bags on the bike - you can get quick release seat bags
Location
High visibility and high traffic
Record and register the serial number
Not only gives you a chance of getting the bike back but is can shut down criminals.  If the police go into a garage and see 10 bikes of various sizes they are pretty sure they are stolen but cannot prove it.  A registered bike lets them prove the bike is stolen.
Another extreme is a folding bike that you can take into you apt and
work.  But a decent folding bike expensive.


New inner tube bulges near the valve when inflated I've installed a new inner tube in my wheel. I checked the tube doesn't make a knot. When I inflate the tube, it bulges near the valve, and this rubs against  the brakes.

REF tube: 32/47 609/642

REF tyre: 42-622 700 x 40C

What could be the cause of this (wrong size of inner tube?) and how can I fix it?

PS: I'm not sure if it's a dup of Uneven inner tube when inflated inside the tyre?

Thanks.

Unless the tire bead (the re-enforcing wire around the edges) is damaged your tire is simply not seated on the rim properly near the valve and has popped off as the tube was inflated.

Tube size seems OK. 32/47  possibly means it's compatible with 32-47mm tires. If it's about the same as your old tube that it's OK.

Deflate the tube and re-seat the tire. It's probably a good idea to get one side of the tire off the rim and make sure the tube is installed correctly too.

There are many good videos on YouTube that show correct procedure (try this one). but some key points:

Make sure the tube is not pinched between the tire and rim.
Make sure the reenforced valve area of the tube is pushed up into the tire
Make sure the tire is evenly seated on the bead all the way around. There is often a line moulded into the tire around the bead that lines up with the rim you can use a a reference.

Check that the rim tape hasn't stretch or bulged. Try to cut off the edge of the tape if it's extended beyond the flat part of the rim. Might need to replace the tape if it is interfering with the tyre bead seating into the rim's hook.


Identify tandem frame with no LK99040060 Looking to identify my tandem frame
It was bought without decals and buyer claimed it to be a Gary Fisher but I want to know for sure before I have it refinished.
It has eccentric bottom bracket shell and v-brake mounts
Frame number stamped underneath the shell is LK99040060
Any help gladly appreciated

IS that the only number listed?  I looked on a bike registry and found nothing, but it may not include tandems, or there is another number stamped on the frame somewhere.  This site: https://bikeindex.org/serials  give pictures and descriptions of different locations for that stamp to be.  But I have not found a registry for tandems or that just says it includes tandems.

I am sorry that I could not help more!  Good luck :)


What's wrong with my rear wheel? Wheel moves about 1/4" front to back when brake is fully applied, cassette seems a bit wobbly, some rubbing noise I first started inspecting my wheel because I noticed when I applied my brake while not riding, I could push my rear end and the wheel would turn forward and back about 1/4"-1/2" each way (but the brake is still locked tight) . I took my wheel off and saw that my DT Swiss center lock was loose, so I bought a Park BB tool and tightened it up, but I still have the problem but less now. I see that the wheel is moving @ the center lock just a bit.

Then as I was messing around with the bike upside down, I noticed that my cassette is wobbling ever so slightly.. Is it possible/probable that this is related? There is also some rubbing noise that is not coming from the brake that is difficult to locate.

Is this likely my axle? Hub? Cassette? Thanks!!

I've seen this issue in the past and the culprit was the axle (not the skewer) in the hub had snapped.

Fortunately, the bike was still rideable to a certain extent, as the QR skewer was holding the two broken sections of axle in place. Note that even when the wheel was removed from the frame, it still wasn't immediately obvious that the axle had snapped, until the skewer was removed from the hub. However the whole wheel was replaced ASAP for safety reasons.

Due to the age of the wheel (15-20 years), it was more economically viable to replace the wheel than to rebuild the old wheel with a new hub.

You could also be getting some play in the fork (assuming you have a suspension fork).  To verify this, put your finger where the stanchion meets the lowers of the fork, lock the front brake and rock the bike back and forth.  Every fork I've had has just a little play there.

It's not likely that the play in your cassette is related to your front wheel.  That play could be from the cassette ring being a little loose, or the fit of the cassette on the freehub (likely) or just a bit of play in the hub itself.  If the cassette ring isn't loose I wouldn't worry about the cassette play...unless you think it's affecting your shifting.


How to measure the correct belt drive tension? I own a 2010 Trek District with a belt drive. I'm fairly happy with the setup, since after months of standing outside I just picked up the bike again and started riding without the usual chain maintenance.

However, the problem I currently have is that under large torque, so e.g. accelerating out of traffic lights makes the belt either slip or jump off the rear cog. Riding in traffic with cars close-by makes this a somewhat dangerous mishap, so I'm hoping I could fix this. Even when pedaling with high cadence the belt seems to be moving outwards all the time, and can be fixed by pedaling backwards one round or so.

The instruction manual and googled resources [broken link - try this trekdistrict discussion or this bike-manual link) claim that setting the correct tension and alignment to be easy, but I've found it to be quite a hard task. So, could someone with more bike mechanics skills and experience tell me how to do this or point me to a good resource?

The main questions are:

Is there an easy way to set the tension, without having a special tool for measuring the tension?

How accurate does the tension have to be in order not to slip under pressure?

How can I (easily) align the belt correctly for it not to travel right on the rear cog?

Thanks in advance for any answers! I could probably take it to the local shop, but I've been trying to handle all and any maintenance myself, since this is a hobby after all.

==== Edit ====

I don't have a picture of my own, but the rear dropouts look like the ones on this picture:

I've tried to adjust the tension and managed to get rid of the slippage, so the original problem is more or less solved. I've also tried and managed to tighten the belt too much, since it started to have a funny noise and the freewheel didn't seem to work correctly anymore. Now the tension seems about correct, but the belt still "travels right" (as in the image) and jumps off the cog, when accelerating.

I'm starting to think that the rear hub is not perfectly straight with regards to the belt, but I would think one would notice this when riding.

=== Edit 2 (2011-08-10) ===

After nearly getting hit by a bus, caused by the belt jumping off the rear cog, I decided to bite the bullet and take the bike back to the shop. Turns out I have strong fingers, since the problem was too much tension on the belt. The high tension made the rear wheel not fit perfectly in the rear dropouts. This made the wheel just the slightest bit misaligned (what's the opposite of straight?), which in combination with the tension made the belt to travel outwards when applying enough torque.

I got the thing fixed, and it now works as a charm. I'm unable to tell the difference between the earlier too tight belt from the correctly tensioned one, since the difference is very subtle. Thus, the moral of the story has to be that one should use the correct tools for the task at hand. And also that my mechanics skills are not quite as good as I was hoping :)

Anyway, thanks for all the suggestions here, but from now on I suggest all the belt-drive people like me either get the real tools, or support the local bike dealer for the no or low maintenance of the belt drive.

As to measuring belt tension, the tool is your best option. If you own the bike, then you should own the tool.

Without it, however, place an S-bent spoke or similar wire in a hook over the center of the top of the belt. Add weight to the bottom hook. 10 pounds is the spec. Yes, this is a lot of weight for a bent spoke. Be creative. Or buy the tool.

Place a ruler next to the belt, at the point of the weight's pull. Write down the measurement.

Remove the weight. Measure again, in the same place. Subtract the first measurement from the second measurement. The difference should be between 5 and 12 millimeters. 10 millimeters is ideal.

The alignment is dependent on the type of dropout.

EDIT 1: The image below is a new tool from Gates, called the Eco Tension Tester, which does exactly as described above, in a more professional manner. Perhaps it will help describe the intent of the method I described.

With the dropout style you posted in your image, the alignment is actually set with two things.

Wheel centering - the wheel needs to be equally centered between the chainstays. This is a do it by eye and feel job, although you can gauge your success by measuring from the rim's brake surface to the inside surface of your chainstay, assuming your wheel is properly dished over your hub.
The second thing which affects the belt alignment on the pulley is your "chain" line. With the District, this alignment is set with the length of the bottom bracket spindle. The more perfect the chainline, the less likely you will have issues with the belt rolling off the cogs. Most bike shops have a tool like the Park Tool CLG-2 for measuring chainline accurately, although it is designed to work with a toothed cog.

If you have consistent issues with the belt rolling off the cog, and your dropouts are evenly set up in the frame, and your wheel is centered, find an LBS to check your chainline.

You may need to swap the bottom bracket axle to get more perfect chainline, in order to solve this issue. Assuming the bike has not had the BB replaced by you, it may be wise to ask the shop where it was purchased whether it is the original BB, and whether they will help with any chain line issues under warranty status.

EDIT 2: It actually appears that belt "alignment" issues are directly related to belt tension with the Gates Carbon Drive belts. If the tension is correct, they track well. If it is too low, they will track toward the frame. Too high tracks away from the frame.

I hope that is helpful.

When a belt doesn't stay on a pulley it's either because the pulley are misaligned or the belt is damaged.  You should check the wheel/axle alignment by checking the space between the tire and the seat and chain (er, belt) stays -- make sure the tire's centered between the stays.  If not that then likely the belt has become damaged.

(When a belt is damaged, with the cords along one edge broken, it doesn't stay straight under tension but curls outward on the damaged side, and tends to creep off the pulley towards the damaged side.)


What are my options for a bike trailer? I took my car off the road to save money but sometimes I need to transport large heavy items like a 60 pound flooded lead acid golf cart battery.  Is there anything I can attach to my bike that can handle weight like that such as a cargo trailer?  What about 2 batteries (120 pounds total)?  What (if any) requirements are there to make this work?  It is mostly flat where I live and my lowest gear is about 22 gear inches and I have 3x7 gears (21 speed).  Thanks.

There are several options, you could make your own if you are the handy type. Or there are many ready to purchase from a local shop or online. Most of the ones that I see have a 120lb limit. So you would be close but probably fine as the max weight is generally higher than that listed for liabilities sake.

As for store bought option there are a lot of different companies that make trailers for bicycles both for hauling cargo, and touring applications as well as child carriers of course.

Here is one design just to give you an idea. The last time I saw a similar one in a shop I think it was about 200 bucks.

http://www.jbi.bike/web/checking_product_description.php?part_number=98014

The type shown above attaches to the rear axle by way of that long arm at the front. Building one could be tricky if you don't have the proper tools and I imagine you would need to buy an axle intended for it.

If you want to go the DIY route, I found this write up that looked interesting and could be helpful.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Bicycle-cargo-trailer--200-lb-capacity,-$30-for-pa/

The Burley Travoy looks like a great tool and one that I will personally be buying in the near future. you can see several videos of this product on You Tube , it looks very well made and practical in use as well as being quick to hook/un hook from your bike. Good luck with finding one that will suit, hope this helps.


Is commuting 10 km on an empty stomach harmful? I recently moved to a new place and I started taking my bike to work. It is a ride of 10-15km, depending on how fancy I feel about taking detours. I wake up at 7:45, and 15 minutes later I am already on the bike. I eat breakfast at work, after 30-40 minutes of biking. My question is: does it have health ramifications if I do it every day? I did some looking around on the internet, but everything I find relates to high-intensity sports cycling, not a leisurely commute.

Some facts that might be helpful:

I maintain a steady pace, enough to get sweaty, but this is more from the length of the ride than from the intensity. I stay dry for the first part of the ride.
I feel strong and capable most days. Rarely I will feel worn out on the last kilometer or two, but this is pretty rare and I guess indicative of bad sleep.
The ride is 100% flat. The biggest climbs are speed bumps.

As far as I can tell, no. I've been riding 30 minutes or more every workday before breakfast for more than 10 years with no detectable ill effects. When I was riding an hour to work I'd sometimes have a small snack before riding, but only rarely. When I'm cycle touring I'll often ride for an hour before I have breakfast, as that wakes me up and gets me warm, then I can stop and eat somewhere pleasant (I usually stealth camp so I'm not always sleeping in a nice place to hang round during the day). But an hour isn't an unreasonable ride before breakfast. For me!

What matters is being aware of your body. If you're feeling bad, stop and work out why. If you're hungover... what did you expect? But if you normally feel fine and one day your stomach hurts, or you feel weak, or something else changes, worry. Stop, work out what the problem is. Eat, drink, pee, whatever. It's the same as if your bike feels funny or starts making a weird noise.

Normally I carry breakfast to work, so I have it with me if I need to stop and eat. I also have money, which is surprisingly useful for solving problems :) If I need to I can get a taxi to work, buy food, whatever.

FWIW I was vegetarian for most of that time, of late I've gone back to eating meat every couple of weeks (I'm getting older and meat seems to help me maintain muscle mass). I don't know if being vegetarian helps, but it doesn't seem to hinder the ride before breakfast.

(ok, I've been doing this for more than 15 years, possibly more than 20)

Time pushed here, so haven't read the previous posts.
So with that in mind, short answer, NO!
Unless you are coming off the back of a carb depleting ride, you will be fine.
The question you haven't asked is "what should I consume at the end of a good 10k ride on an empty stomach"?.
That, my friend, is a golden question.
Recovery shake, banana, carbs, proteins? Hell, yes.
Just do your research on this.
Kindest regards,
Gary.


Is climbing easier on a light road bike or one with lower minimum gearing? I am looking to get my first road bike and I am deciding between a 23.2 pound road bike with a minimum gear ratio of 34-32 or a 20.7 pound road bike with a minimum gear ratio of 34-28 and I was wondering which bike would be easier to climb with.

Lower gearing (or gearing in general) is generally more important than the bike weight for climbing (for most riding as well, sans high level racing). Both of the gear choices are pretty low and you'd need a pretty steep hill (or towing a lot of cargo) in order to need the lower gear over the slightly higher lower gear. As Criggie points out, there are other factors to consider other than weight -- ergonomics, build quality, etc. which can have a more profound effect on how you ride.

A difference of 2.5 pounds is easily within the fluctuation range of your weight over the course of a few days, and is likely on the order of a percent or two of the total bike+rider weight anyway so you can basically ignore it.

As the comments say, you can switch your gearing in the back fairly easily, but this may require a new derailleur depending on capacity and cog size limits and a new chain (this is a relatively easy replacement). Note that you have to give something up for a fixed number of cogs and different gearing combinations (such as the spacing between shifts, max or min gear). So, if the largest cog is 32 in one case and 28 in the other and they have the same smallest cogs, you'll likely have bigger spacings between shifts on the larger cog one. Ideally, you'd try them out and see what you like better.

I would recommend single gear bike. When you climb you just stand or walk. But then again I ride bike in area where most roads are flat.

Gears only add complications to bike.


kid's bike rear brake not having stopping power I recently bought a 2nd hand kids bike for my 4yr old. Prev owner replaced rear wheel with one having a freewheel and installed rear brake.
I've noticed the brake does not have any stopping power when my kiddo is riding however the brake stops the wheel when on a bike stand w/out any prob. I replaced the cable, pads, lever with new ones .. problem remains.
I can't install V-Brake at the rear as the frame does not support it.
I can't find a brake (better quality) that would be able to clear the tyre - seems like I need one that would have around 8 to 9cm reach.
Thanks for any suggestions,

Julius

Sadly braking at the rear wheel is relatively poor because of a combination of factors.

Kid's hand strength - your average 4 year old can't squeeze the lever as hard as a larger rider.  This affects braking at both wheels.
The brake lever's pull ratio is also often sized for a full sized brake so it has to move through a certain angle to pull enough cable to actuate the brake.  For a little hand the lever can be scaled down, but it still has to pull enough cable, and the brake calipers are not scaled down.  Notice you didn't have to fit a "kid sized" caliper.
Mass - the rear wheel's brake is never as effective as the front wheel's brake because the system's center of mass is higher than the axles.  As the brake bites, the rear wheel becomes unweighted, so is more likely to skid.
Cable friction and a longer run of outer - You've already addressed these.

You will generally find the small 12" wheel bikes to have a backpedal or coaster brake because kids have better leg power than hand power.
As such, kids can do "mad-skidz" with a coaster brake but not a hand brake.   Part of this is the body motion required to stomp on the rear pedal naturally weights the rear of the bike, while I've never seen a kid consciously do the same while hand braking.

You might try roughing the braking surface of the rim very lightly with sandpaper.
As an adult you should be able lock the wheels easily while wheeling the bike around while you walk beside.
Another test option is for you to try riding the bike and test the brake function.  If its really way small, you can sit over it and keep your feet on the ground rather than pedalling.
Do basic checks, are the brake levers bottoming out on the handgrips?  Are the wheels true ?  Can you take some of the gap out so the brake pad sits closer to the rim, but does not rub.
Good luck !   And remember, they grow up fast and will be on a bigger bike in short order.

This is a single pivot sidepull brake.
They have a flaw in the centering spring that makes the brakes center unevenly. Because of this flaw, single pivot sidepull brakes are made with low mechanical advantage so that the brake pads have enough room to retract, in an uneven manner.
The best fix for your problem would be to find a single pivot sidepull brake that doesn't have the flaw in the centering spring. An optimal centering spring would have the loop not in mid-air but rather around the brake pivot bolt. Presumably such a single pivot sidepull brake would have high enough mechanical advantage that reasonable finger force would stop the bicycle.
Unfortunately, such brakes are not available. The manufacturers of sidepull brakes do not realize the problem and instead came up with a different, poor solution: forced centering. This forced centering is present in dual pivot sidepull brakes. They have several problems:

They cannot track a wobbly wheel
The brake pad on the offset pivot arm goes up as the pad wears, eventually touching the tyre and destroying it, unless the pad is very thin it wears away before this happens, or unless the pad position is adjusted all the time

However, dual pivot sidepulls have reasonable mechanical advantage so they can stop the bicycle just fine.
Your brake looks like a very long reach brake so I'm not sure if dual pivot sidepulls are available with such a huge reach. You may be stuck with the poor brakes unless you replace the entire bicycle. If selecting a bicycle that has room for large tires, you should prefer V brakes and cantilever brakes over sidepulls as V brakes and cantilever brakes don't have the flaw in the centering springs so they can have high mechanical advantage and reliable centering at the same time.


Is it OK to leave my bicycle unlubricated for a day after a hose-down? I just cleaned my bike with low pressure water but I don't have any lubricant. I left it to dry in my basement with the window left open.

Is there any chance my bike will malfunction or rust before tomorrow when I buy some lubricant?

No, of course not. Having your bike wet and unlibricated for one day won't damage it in any way. Washing it and letting it unlubricated for long period of time will cause you some issues. But one day is not a problem...

An easy way to get excess water off it is drop it a few times, the height obviously depends on the type of bike it is. Full suspension mountain bike you can give it a good old drop from a couple of feet, but a couple of inches should get most of the excess off.


Buying a bike: Older, used high-quality components or new average-quality components? I realize that fit and personal comfort, etc. are most important, but, I need some advice.
I just got into duathlons and triathlons this year, and started with a very low end bike. I'm now looking to upgrade, but not trying to go crazy.

My question is regarding good versus average components. Are older great components better than new average components?
For an average rider, with some racing goals, etc, does new outweigh better, or does quality always outweigh age?

None of the items are bad, just older or better.

I'm specifically comparing a used 2007 bike with a Shimano 105 groupset and a 2016 bike with a Tiagra groupset.

Trying to remain general - and assuming both bikes are a good fit for you, I'd base the decision on Warranty.

The older bike is a decade out of date and will have a decade of use on it... but that could be anything from 0 km up to 50,000 km of travel.  So it should be in the "couple of hundred dollars" range at most.

The new bike will have a store warranty.  If you feel you will need that support, then a new bike is a reasonable idea.  But the new bike will cost you five to ten times as much as the used bike.

2007 components are pretty old. I really like the newer ones. So many great bikes now. In your price range I'd go Cannondale CAAD12 or Trek ALR aluminum frames. Should be able to find one cheap right now before new models come out.


Weight of wheels vs. weight of tyres On my touring bike, about a year ago, I upgraded my tires from the low-end stock ones to better lighter ones.
The weight gain was 205g per tire so 410g on the whole bike, plus a few grams on the tubes that were smaller ergo lighter since I reduced my section.

This made a huge difference in the reactivity, and the overall velocity of the bike.

Now for my racing bike, I intend to replace the wheels from the heavy stock ones to higher end ones. In addition to features such as stiffness and so, the new wheelset will be 410g lighter and I will gain a few more grams with a cassette change.

So weight-wise, the gain is very similar, will the feel be similar as last year? since this weight gain is also done on moving weight

Depending on your ability level this might be noticeable or it might not. Pro racers are often able to tell when as little as 100g is added somewhere on the bike (or geometry changes by .5 degrees for example).

With switching wheels the weight loss is felt in a couple different ways:

Overall weight On a bike that only weighs, let's say, 28 lbs (12,700g) a loss of .9 lbs (410g) is about 3% savings. If your bike weighed 100lbs it'd only be about 1%, so the impact of general weight savings is dependent on light the bike is already.
Rotational weight Heavier wheels are harder to spin up and slow down faster. Reducing that weight will reduce these effects. However, this comes mostly from the weight at the edge of the wheel (tires, tubes, rims), so if the weight savings are coming from a lighter hub, it will be less noticeable.

As usual, these all depend on the specifics of the wheel, the bike, and the rider and how all three interact. If your looking at dropping whole pounds by switching equipment I'd do it, but if it's just to save 50g, then it's probably not worth it.

Dropping wheel weight is the most significant place to gain performance. When upgrading my bicycles, I always purchase lighter/stronger wheels before upgrading any of the drivetrain components.

I do this because it requires a substantially greater amount of force to overcome the mass spread through the crossection of your rim/tire.

In fact, the governing equation for an infinitely thin ring (incredible approximation here) moment of inertia is

I = mr^2

where m is the mass of the ring and r is the radius.

To compute the energy, it can be substituted into the energy equation:

E = 1/2 m r^2 omega^2 where

omega is the d(theta)/d(t) term (angular velocity).

Since the mass of the wheel has a moment arm represented as the square of the radius, it has an exponential effect on the amount of energy required to change it's momentum, whereas static weight (frame/component weight) has a much less significant effect on the amount of force required to accelerate it.

So, yes, you will notice a big improvement in acceleration if you upgrade the wheels, same as your commuter bicycle.


"Clacking" noise coming from drivetrain I have a 2005 Specialized S-Works Tarmac with Dura-Ace components and Mavic Ksyrium SL wheelset.

I get a "clacking" noise coming from the drivetrain area only when pedaling forward.  I say "clacking" because it's not a click or creak noise.  It reminds me of the noise those acrylic Clacker toys from the 70s made when they hit, but obviously not that loud.

If I backpedal the noise will go away temporarily.  I do notice if I backpedal, then pedal normally, the noise goes away; it will not typically return until I freewheel then pedal forward again.  The noise has been around for about 2 years on this bike and I have changed the following:  Cassette from 7800 to 7900 series, chain, 53T chainring and pedals from 7800 to 7900 series.  The issue is still there.  It happens in the small or large chainrings regardless.

The "clacking" noise does not happen freewheeling at all only pedaling.  It does not correspond with wheel revolutions or even crank revolutions.  It's more of a loud clack immediately followed by a smaller clack happening about every 3/4 crank revolutions.

Last time I took the bike in for a overhaul I told them about the noise that I thought it was coming from the bottom bracket that I wanted that rebuilt.  Once I got the bike back the clacking was gone for about a week, then returned.

Thanks for any help on what to look for!

Mike

I had a similar problem until recently, initially thought it may be the BB, but after cleaning, greasing, and eventually replacing the problem was still there.

Turns out it was the freewheel hub on the wheel, and fairly quick to fix, if that is your problem, open up the freewheel hub, I needed 2 5mm allen keys for this, but various wheels have different methods of opening up.  Don't force anything, these are easy to destroy, and expensive to replace.

Once you have the freewheel open, make sure that the little pins stay in place, most new hubs will have springs keeping them in place.

Apply grease, I used the Park Tool one (personal preference), and close everything up again.

Thanks guys!  I was able to put the bike on a trainer to at least give it some loading while I rotated the drivetrain.  The clacking noise, while faint in this set-up, was definitely coming from the rear cassette, freewheel, hub area.  I could even feel a slight vibration on the seatstay and chainstay as I pedaled by hand.  I did tighten the hardware associated with the hanger and derailleur figuring that may help.

After reading the responses, I think I will take Baldy's advice above and take a closer look at the freewheel assembly.  There is either some lubrication or wear issues that may be causing this.


How often should I lube my chain? I ride less than 200 miles a week, and I'm at about the 200 mile mark on my new road bike.  Most of my riding is done on the road in an urban city, so there is a lot of odd, unnatural debris.  My LBS told me to lube my chain every 150 miles, but I've read conflicting opinions.

How often should I be lubing my chain?

Lubricate when needed.  I don't think it's possible to put a mile marker on when to lube.  I think most people add chain lube too often.  Too much can cause debris to build up on the chain.  Too little lube can cause unnecessary friction; but you'll know pretty quickly by the looks (and possibly sound) of it if you have too little lube.

Hints:

Wipe your chain off before you add
more lube.[*]
Is the color black?
Is it greasy?
Wipe all that schmutz off until it's
looking dry.
Add lube while rotating cranks.

Tips:

Lube the night before you ride: this
gives the lube a chance to 'spread'.
Wipe the excess off immediately
before you ride - but not until dry
as above.

^ [*]. Wiping off the chain is best done in a work stand or while the bike is in a position where you can rotate the crankarm such that you can hold a rag to the chain while the chain is moving.

I have done thousands of miles on chains that I just cleaned with a liberal squirt of WD40 every 300-400 miles.


51cm top tube too small for someone who normally cycles frame with 55cm top tube? I'm looking to buy a second bike and have found a really nice frame. The bike I cycle at the moment, which fits me perfectly (I am 5'11" (180cm)), has a 55cm top tube. The frame I'm looking at has a 51cm top tube. Is this difference too much?

There are two lenghts on a bike that are crucial for bike fit:

Seat tube length, which tells you how much of your seatpost will be outside the frame;
Effective top tube length, which is the horizontal distance between the centerlines of seat tube and head tube. This tells about your reach to the handlebars, how much the bike will feel "long" or "short" to you.

Some time ago, almost all the bikes had an horizontal top-tube, and due to manufacturing constraints (lugged frames using lugs with fixed angles) they tended to have a certain proportion between frame "height" and "length" in order to fit the average rider with a certain height.

Today we have a widespread adoption of welded frames, sloped top-tubes, mirabolant geometry designs, and we should always consider variations in leg-torso proportion for people with the same height.

That's why I think is safer not to consider the relation between  one of length/height of two frames to have a correspondent variation of the other measure. In other words, is perfectly plausible to have two frames with same seat tube lenght and significantly different effective top tube length, and vice versa.

So, to answer your question: Yes, you can ride a frame with a 51cm seat tube lenght, achieving a similar fit, IF the effective top tube length of the frame is similar to the corresponding measure of the former 54cm frame.

EDIT: Unfortunately, since the frame you are looking at is a 51cm top tube, it is unlikely to be a good fit.

(EDIT: I thank Zenbike for editing my question, because I had mistaken top tube for seat tube and didn't even notice. Usually only the seat tube length is informed, and end up being considered as "THE" frame size).

It's within the range where you can adjust the fit to work with things like longer stems and seatposts and have a comfortable ride, but it will handle differently. You should probably install a fork with longer rake than what you currently have to avoid overlap.


What are the side effects of blood doping? It has been in the news that endurance athletes such as cyclists sometimes increase their red blood cell count by blood doping. I don't understand how you can just pump more blood into yourself, there must be some bad side effects to doing this, right?

Basically, the intended effect is to increase the number of red blood cells in your system, which in turn gives you increased oxygen carrying capacity to the working muscles. This extra oxygen allows your muscles to work longer and harder.

In the early days of "blood packing", circa the 70's and 80's, it was basically taking a couple of pints of blood out of the body, storing it and letting the body naturally replace it, then transfusing it back into the athlete before their events.

Erythropoietin has actually been around since the early 1900's, and in the 60's, they found that it stimulated blood marrow to produce extra red blood cells. In the late 80's, a synthetic EPO agent was created, and this is what led to the EPO use as an athletic enhancing agent, other than its legitimate medical uses (Anemia, and other diseases).

The biggest effect from extra blood cells (Other than the risk factors of homologous blood {Blood from an outside donor}) is that the blood becomes thicker and more viscous. This can lead to blood clots, strokes, heart attacks and pulmonary embolism. This becomes more likely at rest/sleep, as the heart rate slows quite a bit.

infection with hepatitis or aids. Allergica reaction if incorrect blood type is use. Blood clots. Kidney damage.Strain circulatory system


what is the ideal presta tube valve stem length I have noticed that presta tube valve stems come in various lengths. I always assumed the longer valve stems were to allow the use of deeper aero wheels. Why is it that many wheels in print ads seem to have what I would consider an excessive amount of stem exposed? Is there an advantage or disadvantage to usng a stem that is just long enough?

I think the valve should be as short as possible while still allowing comfortable inflation of the tire.

On the other hand, a longer valve usually "won't hurt", specially if you have more than one bike or your group of fellows use to lend spare tubes to one another during rides (happens a lot to me, but in shcraeder-equiped mountainbikes).

Hope this helps!

I have the same question.

In my case: A friend is about to buy a road-bike that comes with "semi-aerodynamic" (I don't know what else to call them) carbon "clincher"-type--tire rims. (The rims themselves are for rim-brakes, by the way). And as far as I can tell, from the specs that I had read online, the depth of the rims is 42mm.

My friend's local-bike-shop stocks inner-rubes that come in 42mm length, 45mm length, 60mm length, 65mm length, 80mm length, and 82mm length. I was wondering: Which would be the correct size of length to get for his spare inner-tubes, for his 42mm-depth bicycle-rims ?


Why are higher-end freewheels so much louder when coasting? I tend to ride relatively modest gear (Tiagra/Ultegra), but when I'm riding near higher-end bikes, I sometimes notice that the clicking sound that comes from their cassette/free-wheel while coasting seems to be much louder and more distinct than on my bike.  Why is this?  Intuitively, one would expect that a quieter drive-train would be an indicator of greater efficiency, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.  Is it something to do with different construction, or materials?  Can you get 'quiet' high-end cassettes, or is being noisy while coasting the price you must pay for being efficient while pedaling?

Most of the noise comes from pawls on the freewheel hitting against the splines on the engagment surfaces which makes up the racheting unit.

Some reasons for the noise between freewheels?
Tension on pawls could be higher causing more noise as they glide over the engagment surfaces

High end freewheels have more pawls and engagement points than lower end freewheels, so there are more ridges in the engagement surface and more pawls hitting the splines on the engagement surface. The reason this is desirable is that more pawls and engagement points means faster engagement when you start pedaling.

Different grease (or less grease) could also be used inside higher end freewheels that is less viscous and provides less resistance, allowing the spring action of the pawls to cause more noise as they float over the the splines on the engagement surface since they are less restricted by the grease.

Of course there are exceptions to these.  Some hubs don't use your standard racheting mechanism and use a 'roller clutch' instead. The roller clutches tend to be very quiet, but are more prone to failure.Here's a good description of how those work.  http://pardo.net/bike/pic/mobi/d.winners-hub/index.html

High end road bikes have a louder free hub so that riders in a peloton can have an audible clue that those ahead of them are coasting or braking.


Is it possible to upgrade a 6 speed mountain bike to 7 or 8 speed? I ride a Hero Sprint, MTB, with 6 gears in rear and 3 in the front. I am thinking about upgrading my 6 gears to something like 7 or 8. Is it possible, if yes, how much does it cost, and what are the plus and minus points i might face if i did that?

Yes, you can upgrade your mountain bike.  However its a slippery slope of knock-on upgrades that can cost more than a nice, lightly-used bike.

For starters, you can't generally slap on a cassette or freewheel with more gears, because they're wider.

So the first thing to do is measure the "Over-Locknut Dimension", or OLD.  This is the horizontal distance between the locknuts on the hub, and is equal to the gap between the inside surfaces of the rear dropouts.

  This is measuring a rear hub that has no axle in the way.  This is 130mm

 This is measuring the rear dropouts using a ruler.  Lower tech but just as good.  This one is 126mm

If you have a steel bike frame, is slightly more options than an aluminium or carbon frame, because it can be cold-set (aka slightly widened at the rear dropouts) to fit a wider hub.  Can't do that with aluminium or carbon frames,

If you have a steel bike you can increase about one size, so 126mm to 130mm or 130mm to 135mm.  Then you have to align the rear dropouts again, using alignment tools like these half-axles showing minor tweak required.

If you don't realign the dropouts, the wheel will wander easily, even hard pedal presses can pull the wheel out of alignment.

Once you have a wider hub, you can fit a wider cassette (don't bother buying a hub that takes a freewheel - that way lies bent axles and wallet-tears)

So you need a cassette, which will require a new chain.  Generally speaking 6/7/8 speed chains all use close to the same width, but you want an unworn chain to help prolong the life of your cassette.

Then check out the front chainrings for wear.  They wear slower than the cassette, but if the chain is making bad contact it could be time for new chainrings.

You will very likely need a new right-hand shifter too.  Your six-speed unit will have 6 indents/positions, and it won't handle the extra gears.  If you have a friction shifter it might work, or it might not.

While changing all this stuff you may as well install new cable inner wires and outer tubes too.  A cheap set costs about a happy meal.

Once that's all done, you need to reindex your gears, and might find that the 6 speed rear derailleur doesn't have enough range.  First try backing out the limit screws, but if you still can't get the chain to reach the biggest and smallest cogs then you're up for a new rear mech.

SUMMARY

Minimum

Hub
Cassette
Chain
Shifter
Wires

Maximum

Entire wheel
Rear derailleur mech
Chainring(s)

So yes its possible, but can be financially bad idea.  If you have spare parts from another bike, it becomes more cost-effective.

Well, I tell you: you should think before upgrade your gearing. Ask yourself: Do much declines and inclines? In my experience, you cannot run out of a 3*6 combination on flats or even the meager gradients of elevated corridors in cities.
As for if it's possible or not, yes it is.
You'll need to change your freewheel, change your derailleur and change your shifters and this will cost you a great deal if you consider how much you actually spent on buying that bike. (Well I did some research, turns out that the upgrades alone will cost you a considerable fraction of the cost of your bike, especially since the country you're living in doesn't have an abundance of upgrade parts.)
Also, you might need to get a new chain along with all the other things but it won't be required if you're lucky and you get a similarly spaced cassette.

---

A generic 7 speed cassette- INR 450
Generic 7-speed cassette on Amazon.in
Shimano's Tourney TZ derailleur- INR 1800
Shimano Tourney TZ on eBay.in
Shimano TX-50 7s shifter set- INR 1000
Shimano Revoshift 7-speed on bikeinn.com
Hero Sprint costs INR 6800
       Hero Sprint on Amazon.in

As can be seen, the upgrade costs make about 47% of the bike's market price, which makes the upgrades highly absurd, also considering that with this money, the person can probably sell this bike and upgrade to a bike of a nicer build and his desired gear set-up.
I hope this updated answer is better.


Public Transportation Bike Rack Size I have TX36 E bike. Had no idea when purchased that the overall length is 6 feet (183 cm)  which is probably 6 inches (15 cm) longer than most bicycles. It does not fit into both front and rear tire slots. I have been using a heavy duty strap to secure front wheel.

It has no been brought to my attention I will no longer be able to put my bike on a rack. My problem is I am a disabled veteran and have no other way to get around. Looking for suggestions. I thought about a smaller wheel I could swap out for transit purposes only but axle widths are not the same. I thought about lengthening my control and brake cables that would let me spin handlebars and wheel 180 degrees. anyone have any ideas?

Trying to spin the front wheel around may help but the stock image shows a light which will get in the way.   Also, I doubt you'll save 15 cm that way - the rake on most bikes is far less than that.

Changing to smaller wheels is unlikely to help either (though a creative thought) - your pedals will be closer to the ground and you're more likely to strike the pedal on the road surface.    You have disk brakes - if you had rim brakes then this would be impossible.   Ultimately, reducing the wheel size will not help because it does nothing to shrink the wheelbase.  That is - the axles are still in the same relative place.

Positive options

Ride your bike instead of taking the bus.  Perhaps you could buy a second battery to add to your range?
Consider the adage about "throwing good money..."  It could be time to sell this bike and buy one that matches all your needs - ie fits on a bus rack.

As a disabled person, are there any sources of assistance you can tap into to help fund this?  Not familiar with your country.

Good luck!

I do not think shortening of your bike to fit into existing rack would be reasonable or even feasible. Extending your rack, or finding one that is adjustable or large enough would probably easier and cheaper solution.


Creaking from cranks/spindle. How to fix? Recently the cranks on my bike started to creak.
I checked with my usual "bike-bible" Park Tool. They recommended dis-assemble, lubricate, re-assemble.

So I did that.

Remove cranks.
Remove spindle.
Clean.
Lubricate.
Reassemble.

No, the creak is still there.

(To find out the source-area of the sound I had a friend riding the bike slowly while I ran alongside listening. And the sound where coming from the area of the bottom bracket/cranks. I am happy no neighbor saw me...)

For each revelation of the cranks there are two creak-noises.
If I, when on the bike, push down with both feet I hear a noise. Turn 180 degrees without pressure, push down again and there is the noise again.
If I am "too soft", low pressure there are no sound.
Since I have clips I have tried to only work with one foot to keep a constant load during a revelation, there where no detectable sound then.

Anyone have any idea what is wrong on the bike?
And how I should fix it?

/Leif

There are many possible causes of creaking. But Deemar has the most likely reason in this case - the cranks are loose on the axle. Think about how a creak is produced. It's one item sliding over another. But instead of sliding it's repeatedly sticking then jumping. The amount of movement might only be a fraction of a millimetre. The OP would have noticed if the cranks were really loose. But in this case the looseness may be at the microscopic scale.

You can easily test this without having to run alongside the bike. Get on the bike with the brakes on and your shoulder against a wall. Rotate the pedals so the cranks are horizontal and bounce up and down with your weight equally on both pedals. This twists the cranks and axle as far as possible in one direction. Then rotate the pedals to a position 180 degrees from that (the other foot forward) and do the same. This twists the assembly as far as possible the other way. Repeat the procedure listening all the while for creaks. Testing in this way avoids many other sources of noise such as wheels, chain, seat, etc. Take care. If something breaks or your foot slips off the pedal you'll hurt yourself.

When new the cranks have a square tapered hole which fits exactly onto the tapered square on the axle. As Deemar says, if it has been wobbling for a while the hole will be damaged and you may never get a satisfactory fit. On my bike I fixed it (at least for now) by carefully reshaping the inside of the square holes with a file and cleaning the square shaft on the axle. Then I assembled it with grease. To get the parts to bed in together I applied the following procedure repeatedly. Bash the crank a few times with a soft hammer. Bounce up and down on the pedals as above. Retighten the bolt. Eventually the soft aluminium crank took up the shape of the hard axle and the creaking was completely eliminated. You will probably need to do this for both cranks.

Remember that the amount of movement between the crank and axle may be so small it's imperceptible. You may not see it moving. But you will be hear the result when you do the pedal bouncing test. On my bike the noise was really loud and infuriating and now it's completely silent. I will re-tighten the bolt periodically. If it loosens again I may have to replace the cranks and bottom bracket.

I had the same problem for daysss , now i took the bolt out of my crank which connects it with the spindle and used some copper grease on it and it was finally gone


What bike would be right for me? I live in an area with many steep hills which are all about 1000-1300 feet high. My current bike is a Ghost Northshore which is a freerider just slightly under 37 lbs. I bought this bike to ride on my own trail. However I dont do this kind of riding anymore and I am looking for a bike to cruise hills up and down and to do tours under 20 miles regularly. Climbing with my Ghost bike is certainly not the funniest thing to do. Sometimes it is just not possible. The bike is heavy, has only higher gears, the suspension takes all my energy (it is not lockable) and the saddle is very low. Its just not made for this kind of riding.

Now Im looking for a lighter bike which fits my needs a little bit better but I dont want to loose all the characteristics of my freerider. I would love to have bigger brakes and some fork travel. I found this Cube Stereo 140 HPC Race which has the right amount of suspension travel for me (I would like to take smaller jumps under 3 feet or so very rarely); bigger brakes; is light enough and most important: It is in my price range.

I need your advice if this bike is capable for regularly and sometimes serious climbing. The weight seems to be fine but Im especially unsure if the gears are right for my purpose. Are they low enough for serious climbing? Or is this bike meant for riding in a bike park? That is something I almost never do.

There are far too many options and it's far too subjective for someone to give you a straight "get this bike" answer.

You're kind of talking about the "All Mountain" to "Enduro" range of bikes. Ie bikes that can go long distance but can also go downhill.

The all mountain type bikes typically start at 140mm-ish travel. The cube you link is one of these.

The enduro bikes typically start at 160mm travel. Cube do the 160 version of that bike too.

The difference is, less travel, better pedalling efficiency, the more travel, better downhill efficiency.

You just have to decide what is more important to you, having a nicer time going uphill and sacrifise some of the down (get an all mountain). Or just be good enough to go uphill, but the downhill is the main point (get an enduro).

For decent bike, like your cube, the difference between the 140 and the 160 will be marginal in terms of pedalling and downhill.

You just have to decide, on which side of that margin you want to be.

So, I would have just added a comment, but ya boi (me) is only at 33 reputation, not 50, so Im giving you a nice answer instead. So just like a lot of people said, looking at a hardtail is a good choice. Hardtails are lighter and more efficient for peddling, but if there are still bug jumps and all that pizzazz, a full squish might be better. It just depends on what you value more, and sometimes you can get both. A certain company came out with a bike that is a little mix of a full squish and a hardtail. Its called the Supercaliber, and it has a 60 mm rear travel and 100 mm front travel (you can add up to 120mm) Im not saying to buy this bike (see, not a recommendation) but this XC bike does kinda sound like the thing for you. Another option, probably the best, would be going to your LBS. Tell them what you want, and they will find you the right bike (they might even let you take it out for a little to try it). However it works, good luck with your new whip!