Improving shifting on my burley limbo?

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:

...
There are only handful of us here on ARBR who even know what the "-- " is
for. You yourself did not know what it was for until I had it explained
to me by another poster here on ARBR....

Mr. Ed,

I was the person who explained to you what the "-- " was for. Proof at
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7d49e514.0403212144.79821d77%40posting .google.com&output=gplain.


Someone is losing his memory, methinks.

Without looking any of this up, I still think it was the other poster who
told me exactly how to do it. Your post, which you give above, was merely a
confirmation of it. Just goes to show that we all of us concentrate more on
what we say than on what anyone else says.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 01:09:25 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote in message :

A signature that includes some bromides is not objectionable, but a
signature that includes a political statement most definitely is.

In your opinion. On the other hand since you've admitted to getting
your retaliation in first when you sense that some liberal comment
might be forthcoming in the near future, thus making you probably the
worst offender in off-topic political diversion of originally on-topic
threads, I don't think yours is an opinion to be trusted on this.

We are only talking about what is appropriate to include in a signature when
on-topic. As you know better than most, anything goes when we are off-topic.
Try to focus on what is being discussed, why don't you?

Anyone who includes a political statement in his signature is inviting
retaliation and the subject thread is likely to go off-topic at that point.

But you are the last person on this group who ought to be discussing
signatures since you have the most screwed up signature of anyone here. I
invite all ARBR readers to have a look at it below.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota


Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...

Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:


...
There are only handful of us here on ARBR who even know what the "-- " is
for. You yourself did not know what it was for until I had it explained
to me by another poster here on ARBR....

Mr. Ed,

I was the person who explained to you what the "-- " was for. Proof at
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7d49e514.0403212144.79821d77%40posting .google.com&output=gplain.


Someone is losing his memory, methinks.


Without looking any of this up, I still think it was the other poster who
told me exactly how to do it. Your post, which you give above, was merely a
confirmation of it. Just goes to show that we all of us concentrate more on
what we say than on what anyone else says.

Mr. Dolan,


Read the thread in context, and you will see that your contention is wrong.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&threadm=7d49e51 4.0403212144.79821d77%40posting.google.com&rnum=16 &prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dsignature%2Bdolan%26start%3D10%26hl%3 Den%26lr%3D%26group%3Dalt.rec.bicycles.recumbent%2 6c2coff%3D1%26safe%3Doff%26scoring%3Dd%26selm%3D7d 49e514.0403212144.79821d77%2540posting.google.com% 26rnum%3D16.

--
Tom Sherman – Greater QCA
"Use your head, Mr. Ed" – Slugger

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...

Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:


...
There are only handful of us here on ARBR who even know what the "-- "
is for. You yourself did not know what it was for until I had it
explained to me by another poster here on ARBR....

Mr. Ed,

I was the person who explained to you what the "-- " was for. Proof at
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7d49e514.0403212144.79821d77%40posting .google.com&output=gplain.


Someone is losing his memory, methinks.


Without looking any of this up, I still think it was the other poster who
told me exactly how to do it. Your post, which you give above, was merely
a confirmation of it. Just goes to show that we all of us concentrate
more on what we say than on what anyone else says.

Mr. Dolan,


Read the thread in context, and you will see that your contention is
wrong.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&threadm=7d49e51 4.0403212144.79821d77%40posting.google.com&rnum=16 &prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dsignature%2Bdolan%26start%3D10%26hl%3 Den%26lr%3D%26group%3Dalt.rec.bicycles.recumbent%2 6c2coff%3D1%26safe%3Doff%26scoring%3Dd%26selm%3D7d 49e514.0403212144.79821d77%2540posting.google.com% 26rnum%3D16.

As I peruse that particular thread from long ago my brain fogs over. I will
give it to you that you told me exactly how to do it, but I am still not
altogether convinced. But I can't spend time looking at old threads when I
am presently so busy developing new threads.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Steve Knight Wrote:
knew I could not afford a higher end bent. You have to spend quite a bit
more
for better bent parts. So upgrades are cheap with good deals.
So far I found the top avid single digit 7 brakes for only 50.00 that
include
the levers. But now the shifting issues. Back shifting is ok but pretty
stiff.
The front really sucks. It’s hard to trip with the grip shifters.
So I want to know. Are better grip shifters (higher rated models) will
they give
a smoother easier shift? Or replacing the rear derailleur or both? I
want to put
better brake and cable housing on too.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering
instructions.


I find the ease of shifting with grip shifters varies with the
position of the shifter relative to the hand. My mountain bike and
recumbent both have grip shifters, but the bent, having under seat
steering with the handlebars laterally vertical with a slight forward
tilt means the shifters are manipulated with the outside of the hand as
opposed to the thumb side on a flat bar. I find this to be a very
natural position for the hand and arm, and while I haven't tried other
styles of shifters with USS, I cant imagine they would be any better.
As for ease of shifting with higher end grip shifters, I have found
that if anything the high end jobs are even stiffer. It helps to keep
the cables lubed, and the shifter internals lubed with Sram Jonnysnot.
Dan


--
Dan Burkhart

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:10:18 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote in message :

A signature that includes some bromides is not objectionable, but a
signature that includes a political statement most definitely is.

In your opinion. On the other hand since you've admitted to getting
your retaliation in first when you sense that some liberal comment
might be forthcoming in the near future, thus making you probably the
worst offender in off-topic political diversion of originally on-topic
threads, I don't think yours is an opinion to be trusted on this.

We are only talking about what is appropriate to include in a signature when
on-topic. As you know better than most, anything goes when we are off-topic.
Try to focus on what is being discussed, why don't you?

And .sigs tend to apply to all posts, OT or not; they tend to express
some personal comment or viewpoint of the poster, and are generally
acknowledged to form no part of the discussion - although the more
contentious do tend to provoke the whack-nuts, as you've proven enough
times. Learn to live with it, why don't you?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

I find the ease of shifting with grip shifters varies with the
position of the shifter relative to the hand. My mountain bike and
recumbent both have grip shifters, but the bent, having under seat
steering with the handlebars laterally vertical with a slight forward
tilt means the shifters are manipulated with the outside of the hand as
opposed to the thumb side on a flat bar. I find this to be a very

thanks for the info. as soon as I get the stand adaptor I will play with the
cables.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:10:18 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote in message :

A signature that includes some bromides is not objectionable, but a
signature that includes a political statement most definitely is.

In your opinion. On the other hand since you've admitted to getting
your retaliation in first when you sense that some liberal comment
might be forthcoming in the near future, thus making you probably the
worst offender in off-topic political diversion of originally on-topic
threads, I don't think yours is an opinion to be trusted on this.

We are only talking about what is appropriate to include in a signature
when
on-topic. As you know better than most, anything goes when we are
off-topic.
Try to focus on what is being discussed, why don't you?

And .sigs tend to apply to all posts, OT or not; they tend to express
some personal comment or viewpoint of the poster, and are generally
acknowledged to form no part of the discussion - although the more
contentious do tend to provoke the whack-nuts, as you've proven enough
times. Learn to live with it, why don't you?

If someone is crazy enough to make a political statement in his signature,
then he can expect some feed back and none of it is likely to be pleasant.
Why **** off someone for no reason just as an after thought. If you want to
**** someone off, then say it in the body of your message like I do. Saying
it in your signature in underhanded and cowardly and marks you as a
scoundrel.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message ...
"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:10:18 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote in message :

A signature that includes some bromides is not objectionable, but a
signature that includes a political statement most definitely is.

In your opinion. On the other hand since you've admitted to getting
your retaliation in first when you sense that some liberal comment
might be forthcoming in the near future, thus making you probably the
worst offender in off-topic political diversion of originally on-topic
threads, I don't think yours is an opinion to be trusted on this.

We are only talking about what is appropriate to include in a signature
when
on-topic. As you know better than most, anything goes when we are
off-topic.
Try to focus on what is being discussed, why don't you?

And .sigs tend to apply to all posts, OT or not; they tend to express
some personal comment or viewpoint of the poster, and are generally
acknowledged to form no part of the discussion - although the more
contentious do tend to provoke the whack-nuts, as you've proven enough
times. Learn to live with it, why don't you?

If someone is crazy enough to make a political statement in his signature,
then he can expect some feed back and none of it is likely to be pleasant.
Why **** off someone for no reason just as an after thought. If you want to
**** someone off, then say it in the body of your message like I do. Saying
it in your signature in underhanded and cowardly and marks you as a
scoundrel.

I agree with Guy. Sigs aren't going to convince anyone of anything,
nor are they intended to. They just provide a bit of extra information
about the poster; information I welcome, regardless of whether or not
I agree with the message.

John Riley

"john riley" wrote in message
om...
"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
...
"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:10:18 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote in message :

A signature that includes some bromides is not objectionable, but a
signature that includes a political statement most definitely is.

In your opinion. On the other hand since you've admitted to getting
your retaliation in first when you sense that some liberal comment
might be forthcoming in the near future, thus making you probably the
worst offender in off-topic political diversion of originally
on-topic
threads, I don't think yours is an opinion to be trusted on this.

We are only talking about what is appropriate to include in a signature
when
on-topic. As you know better than most, anything goes when we are
off-topic.
Try to focus on what is being discussed, why don't you?

And .sigs tend to apply to all posts, OT or not; they tend to express
some personal comment or viewpoint of the poster, and are generally
acknowledged to form no part of the discussion - although the more
contentious do tend to provoke the whack-nuts, as you've proven enough
times. Learn to live with it, why don't you?

If someone is crazy enough to make a political statement in his
signature,
then he can expect some feed back and none of it is likely to be
pleasant.
Why **** off someone for no reason just as an after thought. If you want
to
**** someone off, then say it in the body of your message like I do.
Saying
it in your signature is underhanded and cowardly and marks you as a
scoundrel.

I agree with Guy. Sigs aren't going to convince anyone of anything,
nor are they intended to. They just provide a bit of extra information
about the poster; information I welcome, regardless of whether or not
I agree with the message.

John Riley

Agreed, but it should not be political in nature, at least not on this
group. Also, the bromides included in a signature should change from time
to time and not forever remain the same. Guy Chapman has kept his the same
like forever and I am fed up with having to look at the stupid thing. What
he is really doing is stuffing an opinion of his down our throats with his
signature when he should be posting it in the body of his message since it
is controversial and not a bromide.

But what apparently doesn't bother you does bother me. That is ever the
trouble with signature wise guys like Guy. They need sweet souls like you in
order to get by with their obscenities and outrages. That is why I am here.
To keep this group honest. I am not a nice guy and I could care less what
this jackass Guy Chapman thinks of me. But as long as he abuses this group
like he does with his ****ed up signature, then he is going to learn what I
think of him.

Please note my signature below which is nothing but a bromide and is OK
provided I don't keep using it forever and a day.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

"If an idiot were to tell you the same story every day for a year, you would
end by believing it."
- Horace Mann