What gauge of spoke do I have?

Andrew Muzi wrote:
!Jones wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 05:50:31 -0700 (PDT), in rec.bicycles.tech
semi-ambivalent wrote:

On Jul 31, 6:34 am, !Jones wrote:
BTW, in case anyone doesn't know, the term "gauge" usually refers to a
fraction of a known mass of lead. For example, a "16 gauge shotgun"
is 1/16 of a pound of lead (OK, that's not mass, of course.) As the
number gets smaller, the diameter grows as a function of N cubed. So
people talk about a .410 "gauge" and number drills the same way.

Jones
The number of spheres, their diameter matching the bore of the barrel,
that can be cast out of one pound of lead. That's how it was explained
to me when my grandfather gave me his Model 12. (Didn't know about the
drills though, thanks for that.)

I think that numbered drills work similarly; however, I haven't a clue
on what their initial (drill #1: diameter .228) is based. I assume
that, if you take one weight of lead and drop it from a shot tower,
you get a sphere of that diameter... but I'm clueless as to what the
initial mass is supposed to be. I suspect that it may go back to
archaic apothecary masses of "drams" (in which we still measure
gunpowder,) but I dunno... I just use the chart. After we settle
*that*, we can tackle letter drills which go in the opposite
direction; i.e., 'B' is larger than 'A'.


"drams" ?? On what planet?
We reload to a value in grains.

I just looked that up, 27.34 grains = 1 dram, kinda coarse unit for powder.

Get a real gun:
http://www.peachmountain.com/5star/images/AberdeenProvingGrounds/20060509_2099_NSengupta_AberdeenProvingGroundss.jp g.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Celebrity culture is an opposite of community, informing us
that these few nonsense-heads matter but that the rest of
us do not. - Jay Griffiths

Still Just Me - wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:22:52 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:07:34 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
"drams" ?? On what planet?
We reload to a value in grains.
I just looked that up, 27.34 grains = 1 dram, kinda coarse
unit for powder.
Still Just Me - wrote:
Grains? You must use small weapons. We load by the pound.
That was my mistake, thinking pistols. I don't know all that
many artillery hobbyists.
--
There's nothing like a mortar barrage to let the pesky friggin white
tailed deer know whose forest it really is.


Conventional explosives - bah!

This will take out those pesky deer:
http://www.strategic-air-command.com/weapons/images/mark28nuclearbomb.jpg.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Celebrity culture is an opposite of community, informing us
that these few nonsense-heads matter but that the rest of
us do not. - Jay Griffiths

!Jones wrote:

wrote:

Having incompatible spoke threads would resolve that problem...

Maybe; however, I *have* seen people screw a bottom bracket race into
the wrong side. *They must have had a heck of a wrench, but I've seen
it.

About 20 years ago, I installed a 24tpi BSC threaded BB in a 26tpi
Raleigh frame by force.

I have never once considered using a Raleigh threaded frame again
since that time.

Chalo

On 1 Aug, 01:38, !Jones wrote:
On 31 Jul 2009 21:11:08 GMT, in rec.bicycles.tech

wrote:
Having incompatible spoke threads would resolve that problem...

Maybe; however, I *have* seen people screw a bottom bracket race into
the wrong side. *They must have had a heck of a wrench, but I've seen
it.

I suppose that my question becomes: What size nipple do I need? *It
would seem to me that the thread is the critical part in that it's
usually larger than the shaft.

The one that fits. Seriously, a manufacturer may use the same
threading for two spoke gauges. Another may not.

Probably the largest anomaly is the use of the nipple body for 15swg
being forced onto 14swg spokes. That was contributary to nipple heads
snapping off and splitting in the threaded portion. Accurate
construction and larger radius in the transition from the shank to the
head means the 15/14 nipple is a working reality, although this seems
to have created the poor selection of 14swg spokes where 15swg is the
correct maximum choice.

On 01 Aug 2009 02:58:46 GMT, in rec.bicycles.tech
wrote:

So what's your point.

Oh, I didn't have a real important one. I agree that a part that
obviously doesn't fit is better than one that looks like it *might*
fit if you force it a little.

Just a little, mind you!

Jones... who has a great big hammer.

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:07:34 -0500, in rec.bicycles.tech AMuzi
wrote:

I just looked that up, 27.34 grains = 1 dram

Just off the top of my head, I think that a grain is 50 mg and a dram
is 1/16 oz... I'm too lazy to look it up. If that's so, then a grain
is a unit of mass and a dram is a unit of force. This only becomes
important when we leave Earth... and you did ask: "On what planet?"
right?

Jones

AMuzi wrote:
"drams" ?? On what planet?
We reload to a value in grains.
I just looked that up, 27.34 grains = 1 dram, kinda coarse unit for
powder.

Still Just Me - wrote:
Grains? You must use small weapons. We load by the pound.

AMuzi wrote:

That was my mistake, thinking pistols. I don't know all that many
artillery hobbyists.

Still Just Me - wrote:
There's nothing like a mortar barrage to let the pesky friggin white
tailed deer know whose forest it really is.

Tom Sherman °_° wrote:
Conventional explosives - bah!
This will take out those pesky deer:
http://www.strategic-air-command.com/weapons/images/mark28nuclearbomb.jpg.

Cool, but I didn't see one on ebay today

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1 Aug, 13:26, !Jones wrote:
On 01 Aug 2009 02:58:46 GMT, in rec.bicycles.tech

wrote:
So what's your point.

Oh, I didn't have a real important one. *I agree that a part that
obviously doesn't fit is better than one that looks like it *might*
fit if you force it a little.

Just a little, mind you!

Jones... who has a great big hammer.

and a tub of lard?

someone wrote:
On 1 Aug, 01:38, !Jones wrote:
On 31 Jul 2009 21:11:08 GMT, in rec.bicycles.tech

wrote:
Having incompatible spoke threads would resolve that problem...
Maybe; however, I *have* seen people screw a bottom bracket race into
the wrong side. They must have had a heck of a wrench, but I've seen
it.

I suppose that my question becomes: What size nipple do I need? It
would seem to me that the thread is the critical part in that it's
usually larger than the shaft.

The one that fits. Seriously, a manufacturer may use the same
threading for two spoke gauges. Another may not.

Probably the largest anomaly is the use of the nipple body for 15swg
being forced onto 14swg spokes. That was contributary to nipple heads
snapping off and splitting in the threaded portion. Accurate
construction and larger radius in the transition from the shank to the
head means the 15/14 nipple is a working reality, although this seems
to have created the poor selection of 14swg spokes where 15swg is the
correct maximum choice.


"Seriously, a manufacturer may use the same threading for
two spoke gauges. Another may not"

Name any current spoke which is not 56 threads per inch.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Le 8/1/2009 18:43, AMuzi a bien réfléchi et puis a déclaré:
someone wrote:
On 1 Aug, 01:38, !Jones wrote:
On 31 Jul 2009 21:11:08 GMT, in rec.bicycles.tech

wrote:
Having incompatible spoke threads would resolve that problem...
Maybe; however, I *have* seen people screw a bottom bracket race into
the wrong side. They must have had a heck of a wrench, but I've seen
it.

I suppose that my question becomes: What size nipple do I need? It
would seem to me that the thread is the critical part in that it's
usually larger than the shaft.

The one that fits. Seriously, a manufacturer may use the same
threading for two spoke gauges. Another may not.

Probably the largest anomaly is the use of the nipple body for 15swg
being forced onto 14swg spokes. That was contributary to nipple heads
snapping off and splitting in the threaded portion. Accurate
construction and larger radius in the transition from the shank to the
head means the 15/14 nipple is a working reality, although this seems
to have created the poor selection of 14swg spokes where 15swg is the
correct maximum choice.


"Seriously, a manufacturer may use the same threading for two spoke
gauges. Another may not"

Name any current spoke which is not 56 threads per inch.

Have you thought of adding to the FAQ a list of contributors who are to
be completely distrusted? I guess I'm glad you write to set things
straight, so that others may not be misled, and I wouldn't know of this
moron's postings unless someone else is responding. We all have time we
can waste reading here, but it's limited, and I don't care to have some
writers appear in my program.
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Ce n'est pas que j'ai peur de la mort.
Je veux seulement ne pas être là
quand elle arrivera.