View Single Post
  #23  
Old January 20th 18, 04:30 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default not enough standards

On 2018-01-19 16:20, sms wrote:
On 1/19/2018 3:45 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-01-19 14:55, sms wrote:
On 1/19/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/knolly-...axle-standard/



Hell, I can remember way back when a guy could swap wheels between two
different bicycles.

I SPIT on the whole 1x movement.



+1

I also spat on the 2x movement. My road bike has 2x (42/52) but
because it is 35 years old and back then that's all you could get. I
suffer on steep hills for that but as the drill sergeant always said,
anything that doesn't instantly kill you makes you tough.


In my area, if you want to ride up into the Santa Cruz mountains and
you're older than a millenial, it's really nice to have a triple on a
road bike. In the early 1980's, triples weren't that common then around
1983 most of the road bikes sold around hear suddenly were coming with
triples, like my Specialized Sirrus, which had a dual and a triple
option, with the triple at an extra $100. Touring bikes of course had
triples for a long time.

Last year I did a benefit ride, which I normally avoid but my little
group of troublemakers had a team, and those without a triple were
suffering.



I wonder why that is. Just our increasing weight? General weakening of
whatever? My leg muscles are definitely larger and more powerful than in
my 20's. However, while back then I could scale anything with 42/21 I
now need 42/32. Trying to wean myself back to 42/28 though.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home