|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 8:57:43 PM UTC-5, Ralph Barone wrote: Joy Beeson wrote: On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 13:27:21 +0700, John B. wrote: Well, unless, of course, the computerized equipment made the bike lighter. Or faster. Or climbed hills quicker :-) Or your primary interest is fiddling with the equipment. It’s not bicycle related, but I spent WAY more time fiddling with cars before the computers took over. Idle speed, idle mixture, choke adjustments, timing, dwell, vacuum advance, plug gap. Now I just pour gas and drive. I could imagine Di2 to be that way if you wanted it to be. My point here is not that we should eschew everything controlled by electronics. My main point is that we should rationally evaluate benefits vs. detriments; and that in my view, the benefits of electronic shifting are minimal and too costly. Cars have increased greatly in reliability and performance, often because of electronics, and that's good. But Di2 has not improved bike shifting or shifting reliability to anything like the same degree. - Frank Krygowski And on that point, I agree with you. I currently wouldn’t buy a bike with electronic shifting because I believe the performance increment costs too much, but I understand that every person has their own idea of where the value per dollar curve peaks out. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
Tosspot wrote:
On 23/11/2019 23:30, wrote: snip There is another attempt to ridicule things Frank. Lets do the same. If you are scared by simple hardware and software that poll 4 simple switches and when it detects that a switch is actuated it sends a predetermined amount of pulses and a direction signal to the right stepper motor maybe you should consider a bike with a wheel you can flip to get the other gear like in the very old days. Why risk a failure of a cable or a complex mechanical device such as a derailleur with multiple pivots and a springs that can fail. Then of course you only have two gears and you have to stop and get off the bike first but hey you are not racing so it shouldn't matter. Your toaster, oven and dishwasher is more complicated than Di2. Oooh! OOOH! Sir! SIR! https://www.amazon.com/Toaster-Proje.../dp/1568989970 Recommended for one of those Friday night down the pub ideas that gets out of hand.... That sounds like a very interesting book. Thanks for the link. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
On Sunday, November 24, 2019 at 5:50:31 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 5:36:09 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 10:58:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 3:01:51 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 9:37:21 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: In my view, putting immense complexity into a sealed black box does not make a system "simple." From a user standpoint, Di2 is very simple -- more simple than cables. No tension adjustment or lubrication, and no sticking after riding in muck. You have to charge it now and then -- and you can get fussy with programming (on bike, no computer necessary for certain settings). Electronic shifting is not an imperative, and it's expensive, but its a reasonable choice. Well, sure, everything is a reasonable choice for someone in some situations. But "no tension adjustment or lubrication"? I can't remember the last time I did a so-called tension adjustment on anything but the folding bike; and for whatever reason, that one seemed to settle down early this year. I think all my shift cables are lined with plastic, but for whatever reason, I don't ever seem to have to lubricate them. Well, except for where they pass through that open plastic channel under the bottom bracket of one bike, and that's only very rarely. Other lubrication? A Di2 derailleur still has mechanical pivoting joints, doesn't it? It's OK if someone wants to buy e-shifting. And given basic early adopter psychology, plus normal pride of ownership, it's a given that most who spend many hundreds of dollars for its tiny benefits will say it's worth it.. But it seems obvious that 99.9999% of the world's cyclists - and even cycling enthusiasts - get along just fine with mechanical systems. This choice proves that, at best, bike technology is now way, way deep into diminishing returns. And I really do think there's an important difference between "simple to use because of incredible complexity built into a tiny box" and just plain "simple." That difference shows up when something goes wrong. - Frank Krygowski What incredible complexity? Lou Upthread, I described the workings of a friction shifter in maybe 50 words or so. Except for the design of the derailleur's mechanics (which is essentially the same for both friction shifting and Di2) my description is very nearly enough for a competent machinist to make a working system. It's that simple. Can you do the same now for Di2? Don't omit a sufficiently thorough explanation of the micro code and a description of the actuator in the derailleur. Describe it well enough that someone can make one, plus program the code. Why does anyone have to make one for their own. Shimano/Sram/Campagnolo did that for me. Similarly, if you like we can compare descriptions of what to check if each shifting system stops moving the derailleur. I know what to do if my rear derailleur cable breaks and my bike is stuck in the smallest cog. Two times (in 50+ years) I've fixed that on the road, far from home. I don't make choices which if it went wrong isn't the end of the world or life threatening based on something that may happen once in 25 years. When it happens I deal with it. Probably I ride home or nearest bike shop in a not optimal gear like you wil do if a cable snapped and you don't carry a spare and/or the tools to replace it. Nobody carries a spare cable for their normal rides. Of coarse in this sort of discussions people are always far from home and in de middle of nowhere which they almost never do. Tell us what you should do if your Di2 gets stuck in the smallest cog. Like I said I deal with it like you have to deal with it. But I'm still waiting for 6 years now for that to happen with my Di2 system. The comparison should show which is complex and which is not. Why do all mechanical people get nervous when electronics are involved? In my line of work the mechanical parts are the least reliable not the circuit boards or the software once tested and debugged. Electronic shifting is not a complex system and not inherently unreliable. Don't compare a downtube friction shifter with Di2 shifting a 11-12 speed gear systems. That is another discussion. A simple motor and some switches replace all the mechanical parts within a STI shifter and a cable. Can you shift a 11 speed reliable with a downtube friction shifter by the way? Lou |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
On Sunday, November 24, 2019 at 6:04:58 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 8:57:43 PM UTC-5, Ralph Barone wrote: Joy Beeson wrote: On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 13:27:21 +0700, John B. wrote: Well, unless, of course, the computerized equipment made the bike lighter. Or faster. Or climbed hills quicker :-) Or your primary interest is fiddling with the equipment. It’s not bicycle related, but I spent WAY more time fiddling with cars before the computers took over. Idle speed, idle mixture, choke adjustments, timing, dwell, vacuum advance, plug gap. Now I just pour gas and drive. I could imagine Di2 to be that way if you wanted it to be. My point here is not that we should eschew everything controlled by electronics. My main point is that we should rationally evaluate benefits vs. detriments; and that in my view, the benefits of electronic shifting are minimal and too costly. Cars have increased greatly in reliability and performance, often because of electronics, and that's good. But Di2 has not improved bike shifting or shifting reliability to anything like the same degree. - Frank Krygowski Says who? You have again a strong opinion about the reliability of something you never used. I haven't touched my Di2 system in 6 years now using my cross bike in brutal conditions and undergoing a brutal cleaning regime at the carwash. It has been a boring system regarding maintenance. Is it worth the extra cost? That should even decide for their own. I'm not plugging electronic shifting I just oppose to the idea that it is complex and therefor unreliable. I'm done. Lou |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
|
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
Frank Krygowski writes:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 5:36:09 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 10:58:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 3:01:51 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 9:37:21 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: In my view, putting immense complexity into a sealed black box does not make a system "simple." From a user standpoint, Di2 is very simple -- more simple than cables. No tension adjustment or lubrication, and no sticking after riding in muck. You have to charge it now and then -- and you can get fussy with programming (on bike, no computer necessary for certain settings). Electronic shifting is not an imperative, and it's expensive, but its a reasonable choice. Well, sure, everything is a reasonable choice for someone in some situations. But "no tension adjustment or lubrication"? I can't remember the last time I did a so-called tension adjustment on anything but the folding bike; and for whatever reason, that one seemed to settle down early this year. I think all my shift cables are lined with plastic, but for whatever reason, I don't ever seem to have to lubricate them. Well, except for where they pass through that open plastic channel under the bottom bracket of one bike, and that's only very rarely. Other lubrication? A Di2 derailleur still has mechanical pivoting joints, doesn't it? It's OK if someone wants to buy e-shifting. And given basic early adopter psychology, plus normal pride of ownership, it's a given that most who spend many hundreds of dollars for its tiny benefits will say it's worth it. But it seems obvious that 99.9999% of the world's cyclists - and even cycling enthusiasts - get along just fine with mechanical systems. This choice proves that, at best, bike technology is now way, way deep into diminishing returns. And I really do think there's an important difference between "simple to use because of incredible complexity built into a tiny box" and just plain "simple." That difference shows up when something goes wrong. - Frank Krygowski What incredible complexity? Lou Upthread, I described the workings of a friction shifter in maybe 50 words or so. Except for the design of the derailleur's mechanics (which is essentially the same for both friction shifting and Di2) my description is very nearly enough for a competent machinist to make a working system. It's that simple. Can you do the same now for Di2? Don't omit a sufficiently thorough explanation of the micro code and a description of the actuator in the derailleur. Describe it well enough that someone can make one, plus program the code. Given a well-equipped machine shop, could you make a serviceable bicycle chain? How many competent machinists could? How long would it take, and how much would it cost? If I were starting a business making bicycle parts, I suspect that finding a competent electronics designer and programmer, quite possibly the same person, would be /much/ easier than finding a mechanical designer ready to reinvent something like a modern brifter. Similarly, if you like we can compare descriptions of what to check if each shifting system stops moving the derailleur. I know what to do if my rear derailleur cable breaks and my bike is stuck in the smallest cog. Two times (in 50+ years) I've fixed that on the road, far from home. Tell us what you should do if your Di2 gets stuck in the smallest cog. The comparison should show which is complex and which is not. - Frank Krygowski -- |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
Frank Krygowski writes:
On 11/24/2019 11:25 AM, wrote: On Sunday, November 24, 2019 at 5:50:31 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 5:36:09 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 10:58:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 3:01:51 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 9:37:21 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: In my view, putting immense complexity into a sealed black box does not make a system "simple." From a user standpoint, Di2 is very simple -- more simple than cables. No tension adjustment or lubrication, and no sticking after riding in muck. You have to charge it now and then -- and you can get fussy with programming (on bike, no computer necessary for certain settings). Electronic shifting is not an imperative, and it's expensive, but its a reasonable choice. Well, sure, everything is a reasonable choice for someone in some situations. But "no tension adjustment or lubrication"? I can't remember the last time I did a so-called tension adjustment on anything but the folding bike; and for whatever reason, that one seemed to settle down early this year. I think all my shift cables are lined with plastic, but for whatever reason, I don't ever seem to have to lubricate them. Well, except for where they pass through that open plastic channel under the bottom bracket of one bike, and that's only very rarely. Other lubrication? A Di2 derailleur still has mechanical pivoting joints, doesn't it? It's OK if someone wants to buy e-shifting. And given basic early adopter psychology, plus normal pride of ownership, it's a given that most who spend many hundreds of dollars for its tiny benefits will say it's worth it. But it seems obvious that 99.9999% of the world's cyclists - and even cycling enthusiasts - get along just fine with mechanical systems. This choice proves that, at best, bike technology is now way, way deep into diminishing returns. And I really do think there's an important difference between "simple to use because of incredible complexity built into a tiny box" and just plain "simple." That difference shows up when something goes wrong. - Frank Krygowski What incredible complexity? Lou Upthread, I described the workings of a friction shifter in maybe 50 words or so. Except for the design of the derailleur's mechanics (which is essentially the same for both friction shifting and Di2) my description is very nearly enough for a competent machinist to make a working system. It's that simple. Can you do the same now for Di2? Don't omit a sufficiently thorough explanation of the micro code and a description of the actuator in the derailleur. Describe it well enough that someone can make one, plus program the code. Why does anyone have to make one for their own. Shimano/Sram/Campagnolo did that for me. My point was not that I would actually make one. My point was that manual (non-STI) shifting is a truly simple system. Despite your claims, Di2 is not a simple system. The complexity is hidden inside an unrepairable box that you replace if it goes bad, but the complexity is there. For either system, equally, most of the complexity is hidden in the design of the chain, and gears. The chain is unrepairable, and all of us replace it when it goes bad. When the zombie apocalypse comes, we'll ride bicycles just as long as the chain supply holds out, and no longer. Similarly, if you like we can compare descriptions of what to check if each shifting system stops moving the derailleur. I know what to do if my rear derailleur cable breaks and my bike is stuck in the smallest cog. Two times (in 50+ years) I've fixed that on the road, far from home. I don't make choices which if it went wrong isn't the end of the world or life threatening based on something that may happen once in 25 years. When it happens I deal with it. Probably I ride home or nearest bike shop in a not optimal gear like you wil do if a cable snapped and you don't carry a spare and/or the tools to replace it. Nobody carries a spare cable for their normal rides. Of coarse in this sort of discussions people are always far from home and in de middle of nowhere which they almost never do. I remember breaking my rear derailleur cable twice, both times at the end "button" at the shift lever. Both times, I was able to form a sort of knot at the broken end to take the place of the button and ride home. I now leave a few extra inches of cable coiled at the derailleur end to make this easier; and on my touring bike, I carry a spare cable. Tell us what you should do if your Di2 gets stuck in the smallest cog. Like I said I deal with it like you have to deal with it. Detail, please? One of my broken cable events was well over 30 very hilly miles from home. Is there a way to manually change the Di2 gears? Or would you ride that in your top gear? I suspect it's most likely that you would call a car. But I'm still waiting for 6 years now for that to happen with my Di2 system. And if you remember to keep it charged, you'll probably be fine. You'll average fewer than one event in 25 years, just like me. BTW, I'm curious how many bikes you own, and how many have electronic shifting. I have five bikes that I ride regularly, so I suspect converting all to electronic shifting would be quite expensive. Have you done that? Why do all mechanical people get nervous when electronics are involved? In my line of work the mechanical parts are the least reliable not the circuit boards or the software once tested and debugged. I worked with industrial robots and PLCs both in industry and in my Robotics lab. With my help, the students designed and constructed operating workcells, doing the fabricating, machining, programming, wiring and interfacing. I also worked with electronically controlled custom systems at a small holography company. I can do electronics. But not everything that _can_ be controlled by electronics _should_ be controlled by electronics. I believe in rationally evaluating benefits vs. detriments. -- |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Creeping brake pad drag
John B. writes:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 17:38:47 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Saturday, 23 November 2019 20:12:07 UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 16:30:21 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Saturday, 23 November 2019 18:43:26 UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 3:01:51 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote: On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 9:37:21 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: In my view, putting immense complexity into a sealed black box does not make a system "simple." From a user standpoint, Di2 is very simple -- more simple than cables. No tension adjustment or lubrication, and no sticking after riding in muck. You have to charge it now and then -- and you can get fussy with programming (on bike, no computer necessary for certain settings). Electronic shifting is not an imperative, and it's expensive, but its a reasonable choice. Well, sure, everything is a reasonable choice for someone in some situations. But "no tension adjustment or lubrication"? I can't remember the last time I did a so-called tension adjustment on anything but the folding bike; and for whatever reason, that one seemed to settle down early this year. I think all my shift cables are lined with plastic, but for whatever reason, I don't ever seem to have to lubricate them. Well, except for where they pass through that open plastic channel under the bottom bracket of one bike, and that's only very rarely. Other lubrication? A Di2 derailleur still has mechanical pivoting joints, doesn't it? It's OK if someone wants to buy e-shifting. And given basic early adopter psychology, plus normal pride of ownership, it's a given that most who spend many hundreds of dollars for its tiny benefits will say it's worth it. But it seems obvious that 99.9999% of the world's cyclists - and even cycling enthusiasts - get along just fine with mechanical systems. This choice proves that, at best, bike technology is now way, way deep into diminishing returns. And I really do think there's an important difference between "simple to use because of incredible complexity built into a tiny box" and just plain "simple." That difference shows up when something goes wrong. - Frank Krygowski Ah, but Frank. You apparently understand, It is NEW! (and therefore obviously better :-) And USians apparently have an almost unlimited amount of disposable income - I read the other day that "shopping", i.e., going to the Mall, is now considered a form of entertainment. And, of course, one has to "keep up with the Jones" and one way to do it is to have a more expensive bicycle. (we have at least one bloke here who drops the casual mention of his $4,000 bike into the conversation at frequent intervals). What could be more up-market than electrical shifting. It is NEW, it is EXPENSIVE, I got it and you don't. What better reasons could possible be imagined for owning something? -- cheers, John B. Once it's totally perfected, widespread and trickled-down to mid-range groupsets; I can see electronic shifting getting popular with touring bicyclists. There would be no problems with cables. I have bicycles with downtube shifters and I have bicycles with downtube shifters AND tubular tires. MY road touring bicycle has Campagnolo 9-Speed Mirage Ergo levers on it. Ratcheting front shifter lever mechanism. Why? Because I like being able to have two hands on the handlebar when honking up a hill or riding in strong cross winds on my loaded touring bike. Franks and YMMV. I DO KNOW what works best for ME. Cheers Yes, I agree with you. When the price drops there will undoubtedly be a lot of bicycles sold with electric shifting. And, I'm sure that as more and more devices are developed/invented to eliminate any and all requirement for physical activity they will be marketed... and purchased. And yes, I hear you... Oh! I wouldn't have to take my hands off the handle bars. Really? Of course about the first thing that young people do after finally learning to ride a bicycle is practice riding "hands off". And the great improvement of electric shifting over what exists today seems to be that instead of flicking your first finger to shift you now can simply press the tip of your finger on a tiny button.... and for that you get to pay in the neighborhood of $1,500. Ohhh, such a bargain :-) One can only assume that the next step in eliminating any and all requirement for physical activity will be the electric bicycle.And, of course, it is: https://tinyurl.com/urcmt3r Electric bicycles are showing strong year-over-year growth in the U.S., with dollar sales growing by 95 percent in the 12 months ending July 2017, and unit sales up 96 percent, according to global information company The NPD Group. A $64.9 million category today, electric bicycle sales have nearly tripled over the last 36 months. -- cheers, John B. John, sometimes it's hard to tell if you're trying to be funny or obtuse. LOL VBEG Cynical. Here we have a two wheel vehicle that within living memory has largely been a toy for adolescents and the poor who either couldn't get a drivers license or were too poor to afford a "car" which suddenly blossom out into a $12,000 plastic thing, which the great bulk of the modern U.S. public wouldn't take if you paid them to. Mechanically a design that dates back to about 1850, some 170 years ago and a relatively simple designed then, with no major design changes from then to now. 1850? We must have read different histories. 1890 is more like it for a modern-looking safety bicycle, something that could reasonably be used for transportation by people of ordinary ability. Add twenty years or so to include people of ordinary means. The bicycle is, as much as the automobile, or the airplane, a product of the modern industrial age. A usable safety bicycle chain could no more have been manufactured in 1850 than a moon rocket. In other words, you've been alive for well over half the history of the safety bicycle. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
disc brake drag hayes circa 2003 | maceo | Techniques | 12 | April 11th 12 05:04 AM |
Creeping seatpost | Jack Myers | Techniques | 41 | March 9th 10 01:57 PM |
Drag Brake Setup?? | pdc | Unicycling | 2 | March 3rd 06 04:43 PM |
Tire creeping over rim | - | Techniques | 24 | October 4th 04 08:21 AM |
Hydraulic Drag Brake | gbarnes | Unicycling | 6 | August 6th 04 02:54 PM |