Better Braking?

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 11:31:24 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/5/2020 1:00 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:06:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/4/2020 10:24 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:13:30 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 16:11:42 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 07:12:47 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:17:00 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 20:15:06 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/2/2020 7:11 PM, jbeattie wrote:

The OE direct mount brakes on my Trek stop well enough but have a slightly different feel than Ultegra dual pivot. Their reason for being is aerodynamics and light weight.

And everyone knows how critical aerodynamics are. Why, just look at how
Shimano AX absolutely transformed everyone's riding experience!

And light weight? Yep, pedaling your 180 pound bike+rider weight up a
hill is a completely different experience than pedaling your 179.9 pound
total bike+rider weight. That extra tenth of a pound absolutely sucks!
Thank God for 0.06% improvements!

But Frank! It's NEW! and everyone knows that NEW is BETTER.....
O.K., it might cost a tiny bit more but just think, everyone will be
looking at you with envy (Pssst, he's got one of them there new
things...) and think of the bragging rights... "See, I was riding
along on my $3,000 bike there with the new thing on it..."

You have this weird fascination with price. Nobody I ride with buys anything as a status symbol -- and nobody pays OTC price. My Trek was pro-deal because I do work for the company, and most of my friends are in the industry. And even if I did pay full price for my bike, who cares? Why not have a bike that is fun to ride?

-- Jay Beattie.

Given that I am retired I think that some pre-occupation with prices
might be wise, but more important is the seeming allegation that one
must have an expensive bike to enjoy riding. You ask, "Why not have a
bike that is fun to ride?" and I might reply, "Why not have fun riding
a bike?"
--

Cheers,

John B.

I'm not saying you have to have an expensive bike to have fun. I'm saying that a stiff 16lb racing bike is a hoot when your racing friends up a climb or to a city limits sign -- or actually racing. You can love your beach-bomber or whatever, but having a bike that takes off when you hit the gas is fun. The price I paid for my Emonda was a blip on the financial radar. I ride with guys who have way more expensive bikes, although none of them paid full price either.

It's also fun having a bike that will bomb down a trail or carry luggage or that you can dump in the racks at work without worry (except for whacking the dyno light). I have a bunch of bikes and all are loved and used. I'm not trying to pry anyone's bike out of their cold dead hands. People can love whatever bike they want, but some bikes are more fun than others. Just like some cars, skis, monkey wrenches and frying pans are more fun than others. I even have a favorite pair of ski poles -- and a favorite dental floss.

-- Jay Beattie.

Strange. I have been using tools since I was a sub-teen and I can't
say that I ever had a favorite wrench, other than saying that the
proper size wrench (to fit the nut) was much to be admired. And while
I was a member of the high school ski team I can't remember having a
favorite pair of skis, or ski poles, other than having one pair for
downhill and another for cross country.

I asked my wife about favorite fry pans and she tells me that one uses
the correct pan for what one is doing and she has been cooking for
something like 60 years...

But perhaps we are disadvantaged in being able to enjoy skiing without
multiple sets of ski poles, or repairing things without a favorite
wrench or my wife without a favorite frying pan - I shall not tell her
that she is disadvantaged though as she already has a room full of
pots and pans and might want to buy even more :-)

O.K., just to get a base-line here, how about gas versus electric cook top? Straight razor versus triple-blade disposable? Flush toilet versus pit toilet? Do you have a favorite version of anything?

And why do you always frame things in a pejorative way, like "you can't enjoy skiing unless you have (gasp) multiple pairs of skis?" I enjoy cycling and skiing, but I enjoy them more when I'm on a certain bike (depending on terrain) or pair of skis (depending on snow). Don't you enjoy sitting in a more comfortable chair -- or is it presumptuous sitting on anything other than a three-leg milking stool? Do the restaurants in Thailand have only one menu item?

I have a favorite Crescent wrench with a nice padded handle that I found on the ground while riding. I have a favorite set of ski poles that are stiff with low swing weight and a generous strap (that broke, waaaah). I was skiing on Sunday, dodging all the dopes trying to get in a few runs before the Superbowl, and totally digging my favorite set of Portlund Ory-gun hand-made skis. https://shop.on3pskis.com/products/2020-jeffrey-108 Don't worry, I didn't pay that much -- but even if I did, so what? I got them at the "factory" years ago when it was about the size of a garage. I would have had fun on my other skis, too, but not as much fun. Some things just work better than others, or they're more fun to use than others. That doesn't mean that life is miserable without them.

But many people _think_ many things work better; or they _think_ they
are better quality. And indeed, they actually enjoy them more because
they _think_ they're better. It's so heartwarming!

But it gets weird when the item in question (like a "fine" wine, or a
"historic" violin, or an "immensely valuable" painting) is in fact quite
ordinary. And yes, that happens all the time.

https://corbettbarr.com/cheap-vs-exp...he-difference/

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...nd-sound-check

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...nd-taste-tests

Of course, there are massive amounts of money spent to influence people
to think this way.

And as we see here, skepticism is not treated kindly!

While I can't argue with the expensive versus cheap wine tasting I can
say with all honesty that some wines tastes much better than other
wines. I made home made wine for a number of years and I can assure
you that some of the batches were so awful that I poured them down the
drain and others I was quite proud of :-)

I certainly agree that some tastes better than others. And I, too, have
made wine, and I too have had to dump some of it. But it's been proven
beyond (reasonable) doubt that quality in wine doesn't correlate with
price, as many believe. Interestingly, there was at least one test where
they examined activity in test subjects' brains as they drank different
wines. Tasters brains lit up with more pleasure when they were _told_
the wine they drank was pricey, even though it was the same cheap wine
they'd had before.

Frank, price does not necessarily equate to quality in anything (even
peanut butter) and applying it to only wine is a very one sided
argument as if, for example, you were to taste that stuff that they
used to sell for a dollar, in gallon jugs, with almost any brand sold
in bottles I believe that you would pick the bottles every time :-)
Even though they cost $1.50 :-)

And, I am reasonably sure that your test, mentioned above, was
conducted with people who were nephrites at wine tasting as I read
tests conducted at wine making get together's that show quite the
opposite. Where wines are tasted from unmarked glasses.


I think the best advice I heard regarding wine was to sample many
different wines (irrespective of price) and write down precisely what
you liked or did not like about each - i.e. whether you did or did not
like that a wine was sweet, dry, semi-sweet, smoky, oakey, fruity,
whatever. Then after a while, examine what you wrote. You'd be able to
discern your favorite characteristics, and ask your sommelier (or
grocery stock boy) for wines with those characteristics.

I certainly can't speak for all wine drinkers but my friends, and
myself, do exactly that. One samples various wines and when one finds
one that they like they buy it. And, I can't speak for all wineries,
but the ones here in Thailand all offer the opportunity of sampling
their vintages with the expectation that you will buy what tastes best
to you.

The second best advice I heard was to just buy the wine with the most
interesting graphics on the label, because that was probably as valuable
as an expert's opinion.

I believe that is a very foolish comment as certainly anyone who
drinks wine at all can tell the differences between a "decent" vintage
and a horrible vintage.
--

Cheers,

John B.

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 3:05:53 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 11:31:24 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/5/2020 1:00 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:06:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/4/2020 10:24 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:13:30 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 16:11:42 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 07:12:47 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:17:00 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 20:15:06 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/2/2020 7:11 PM, jbeattie wrote:

The OE direct mount brakes on my Trek stop well enough but have a slightly different feel than Ultegra dual pivot. Their reason for being is aerodynamics and light weight.

And everyone knows how critical aerodynamics are. Why, just look at how
Shimano AX absolutely transformed everyone's riding experience!

And light weight? Yep, pedaling your 180 pound bike+rider weight up a
hill is a completely different experience than pedaling your 179.9 pound
total bike+rider weight. That extra tenth of a pound absolutely sucks!
Thank God for 0.06% improvements!

But Frank! It's NEW! and everyone knows that NEW is BETTER.....
O.K., it might cost a tiny bit more but just think, everyone will be
looking at you with envy (Pssst, he's got one of them there new
things...) and think of the bragging rights... "See, I was riding
along on my $3,000 bike there with the new thing on it..."

You have this weird fascination with price. Nobody I ride with buys anything as a status symbol -- and nobody pays OTC price. My Trek was pro-deal because I do work for the company, and most of my friends are in the industry. And even if I did pay full price for my bike, who cares? Why not have a bike that is fun to ride?

-- Jay Beattie.

Given that I am retired I think that some pre-occupation with prices
might be wise, but more important is the seeming allegation that one
must have an expensive bike to enjoy riding. You ask, "Why not have a
bike that is fun to ride?" and I might reply, "Why not have fun riding
a bike?"
--

Cheers,

John B.

I'm not saying you have to have an expensive bike to have fun. I'm saying that a stiff 16lb racing bike is a hoot when your racing friends up a climb or to a city limits sign -- or actually racing. You can love your beach-bomber or whatever, but having a bike that takes off when you hit the gas is fun. The price I paid for my Emonda was a blip on the financial radar. I ride with guys who have way more expensive bikes, although none of them paid full price either.

It's also fun having a bike that will bomb down a trail or carry luggage or that you can dump in the racks at work without worry (except for whacking the dyno light). I have a bunch of bikes and all are loved and used. I'm not trying to pry anyone's bike out of their cold dead hands. People can love whatever bike they want, but some bikes are more fun than others. Just like some cars, skis, monkey wrenches and frying pans are more fun than others. I even have a favorite pair of ski poles -- and a favorite dental floss.

-- Jay Beattie.

Strange. I have been using tools since I was a sub-teen and I can't
say that I ever had a favorite wrench, other than saying that the
proper size wrench (to fit the nut) was much to be admired. And while
I was a member of the high school ski team I can't remember having a
favorite pair of skis, or ski poles, other than having one pair for
downhill and another for cross country.

I asked my wife about favorite fry pans and she tells me that one uses
the correct pan for what one is doing and she has been cooking for
something like 60 years...

But perhaps we are disadvantaged in being able to enjoy skiing without
multiple sets of ski poles, or repairing things without a favorite
wrench or my wife without a favorite frying pan - I shall not tell her
that she is disadvantaged though as she already has a room full of
pots and pans and might want to buy even more :-)

O.K., just to get a base-line here, how about gas versus electric cook top? Straight razor versus triple-blade disposable? Flush toilet versus pit toilet? Do you have a favorite version of anything?

And why do you always frame things in a pejorative way, like "you can't enjoy skiing unless you have (gasp) multiple pairs of skis?" I enjoy cycling and skiing, but I enjoy them more when I'm on a certain bike (depending on terrain) or pair of skis (depending on snow). Don't you enjoy sitting in a more comfortable chair -- or is it presumptuous sitting on anything other than a three-leg milking stool? Do the restaurants in Thailand have only one menu item?

I have a favorite Crescent wrench with a nice padded handle that I found on the ground while riding. I have a favorite set of ski poles that are stiff with low swing weight and a generous strap (that broke, waaaah). I was skiing on Sunday, dodging all the dopes trying to get in a few runs before the Superbowl, and totally digging my favorite set of Portlund Ory-gun hand-made skis. https://shop.on3pskis.com/products/2020-jeffrey-108 Don't worry, I didn't pay that much -- but even if I did, so what? I got them at the "factory" years ago when it was about the size of a garage. I would have had fun on my other skis, too, but not as much fun. Some things just work better than others, or they're more fun to use than others. That doesn't mean that life is miserable without them.

But many people _think_ many things work better; or they _think_ they
are better quality. And indeed, they actually enjoy them more because
they _think_ they're better. It's so heartwarming!

But it gets weird when the item in question (like a "fine" wine, or a
"historic" violin, or an "immensely valuable" painting) is in fact quite
ordinary. And yes, that happens all the time.

https://corbettbarr.com/cheap-vs-exp...he-difference/

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...nd-sound-check

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...nd-taste-tests

Of course, there are massive amounts of money spent to influence people
to think this way.

And as we see here, skepticism is not treated kindly!

While I can't argue with the expensive versus cheap wine tasting I can
say with all honesty that some wines tastes much better than other
wines. I made home made wine for a number of years and I can assure
you that some of the batches were so awful that I poured them down the
drain and others I was quite proud of :-)

I certainly agree that some tastes better than others. And I, too, have
made wine, and I too have had to dump some of it. But it's been proven
beyond (reasonable) doubt that quality in wine doesn't correlate with
price, as many believe. Interestingly, there was at least one test where
they examined activity in test subjects' brains as they drank different
wines. Tasters brains lit up with more pleasure when they were _told_
the wine they drank was pricey, even though it was the same cheap wine
they'd had before.

Frank, price does not necessarily equate to quality in anything (even
peanut butter) and applying it to only wine is a very one sided
argument as if, for example, you were to taste that stuff that they
used to sell for a dollar, in gallon jugs, with almost any brand sold
in bottles I believe that you would pick the bottles every time :-)
Even though they cost $1.50 :-)

And, I am reasonably sure that your test, mentioned above, was
conducted with people who were nephrites at wine tasting as I read
tests conducted at wine making get together's that show quite the
opposite. Where wines are tasted from unmarked glasses.


I think the best advice I heard regarding wine was to sample many
different wines (irrespective of price) and write down precisely what
you liked or did not like about each - i.e. whether you did or did not
like that a wine was sweet, dry, semi-sweet, smoky, oakey, fruity,
whatever. Then after a while, examine what you wrote. You'd be able to
discern your favorite characteristics, and ask your sommelier (or
grocery stock boy) for wines with those characteristics.

I certainly can't speak for all wine drinkers but my friends, and
myself, do exactly that. One samples various wines and when one finds
one that they like they buy it. And, I can't speak for all wineries,
but the ones here in Thailand all offer the opportunity of sampling
their vintages with the expectation that you will buy what tastes best
to you.

The second best advice I heard was to just buy the wine with the most
interesting graphics on the label, because that was probably as valuable
as an expert's opinion.

I believe that is a very foolish comment as certainly anyone who
drinks wine at all can tell the differences between a "decent" vintage
and a horrible vintage.

John B., write this down. Wine is grapes. That's it. Grapes. If everyone buys the same grapes -- which they do since vineyards sell grapes to anyone who wants them -- then how is it that wine from those grapes will taste different from one winery or another. It wont. And even among grapes from different vineyards grown at different times, the difference is infinitesimal.. Basically all grapes are the same and thus all wine is the same, and any perceived difference is just because of marketing -- fancy labels, bottles, commercials produced by Big Grape. You think it tastes "different" or "better," but it doesn't. Stop writing.

-- Jay Beattie.



-- Jay Beattie.

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 10:16:38 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/5/2020 12:22 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 7:06:53 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:

But many people _think_ many things work better; or they _think_ they
are better quality. And indeed, they actually enjoy them more because
they _think_ they're better. It's so heartwarming!

Yes, you Frank, are the only person who sees things clearly -- and not the people who actually use modern equipment on a daily basis.

Take discs for example. I've owned five or six brands of cantis. Cantis with STI levers on my old T100 barely stopped the bike in wet weather hauling a Burley trailer with my young son in it. They screamed to high heaven and ate rims. Wow, that's a total plus! I get to rebuild my wheels every two years. I got a different brand to work O.K. on the tandem with steel straddle rods. https://tinyurl.com/svgfzdl. But on long descents (which we actually have around here), I'd overheat the rims and blow front tires. I never did get around to installing a drag brake. If you live in some place that is not dead flat, you have to buy extra equipment to stop your tandem. Another canti plus.

Meanwhile, riding to work this morning in a rain storm -- at least it wasn't ice like yesterday -- my tried and true hydro discs were dead quiet, stopped as well as dual pivots in dry weather and didn't eat my rims. And going down a massively broken up 16-20% wet descent, having brakes that actually worked was a huge plus, assuming I wanted to stop at the bottom. Cable and hydro discs have worked far better for me for over the last 15 years than cantis ever did -- yet you would dismiss them as a marketing fad.

Jay, please write this down so I can stop repeating it:

I'm not saying that disc brakes are not better for YOU. You're over in
the 0.1 percentile, an American who lives in a very rainy climate with
very hilly terrain who rides his bike to work damned near every day.
Surely you understand that is nowhere close to the norm!

Got that written down?

No, it's already written down. I'm reading it right off the screen. Doesn't it show-up on your end? Why would I write it down again?

Is it too late to drop this course? I want a professor who is not a dick-head.

But: Disc brakes are not being marketed to just that cohort. (If they
were, they wouldn't be worth marketing.) They are not being marketed
just to mountain bikers. They are being promoted as THE best brake for
_everyone_, including people riding "comfort bikes" with tractor saddles
on MUPs. Do you really think that's not bull****?

Yes, manufacturers believe they are better brakes and sell them as such, and they are better on top end bikes because they allow the use of CF wheels without any of the usual braking issues, and on low-end bikes, they produce an all-weather bike with room for fenders and big tires with a light brake feel for the weak of hand.

As to your experience with the T1000: Of course, I have cantis on my
earlier version of that same bike. Occasionally they have squealed and I
have had to adjust them, but it's at worst an annual chore. And I've
never replaced a rim because of that. Why? Probably because I don't ride
in rain as much as you, and I don't do as many steep hills. But again, I
suspect my riding is much more typical than yours.

Typical of what? I'm out there every day with about a zillion other non-typical people. I was behind a guy today in shorts. WTF? It's raining and near freezing, and the guy is in shorts.

Is your bike earlier than '88? Look at the crappy tire/fender clearance: https://vintagecannondale.com/year/1988/1988.pdf I gave that bike to the Community Cycling Center.

Regarding the tandem: It's noteworthy that cantilevers were standard on
tandems for decades, and still are. Even back when Phil Wood came out
with his tandem disc brake, there was no rush to dispense with
cantilevers on tandems. Santana until recently had a web page explaining
why discs were _not_ better for tandems! Until, that is, they saw the
bandwagon getting crowded and decided to jump on with their own monster
disc design. They still use rim brakes as the default.

And a drag brake.

Are discs better for some uses? Yes. Are discs better for everybody? Not
even close; because "better" in ways that don't matter is not really
"better."

BTW, a lot of the fairer sex prefers discs because of the light hand pressure necessary to get good braking and, also the newer Shimano levers with adjustable travel. It's a package that sells -- much more so than cantis and poorly matched STI/Ergo levers. You don't have to buy discs -- nobody does, but a lot of people do like them.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2/5/2020 8:12 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 10:16:38 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/5/2020 12:22 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 7:06:53 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:

But many people _think_ many things work better; or they _think_ they
are better quality. And indeed, they actually enjoy them more because
they _think_ they're better. It's so heartwarming!

Yes, you Frank, are the only person who sees things clearly -- and not the people who actually use modern equipment on a daily basis.

Take discs for example. I've owned five or six brands of cantis. Cantis with STI levers on my old T100 barely stopped the bike in wet weather hauling a Burley trailer with my young son in it. They screamed to high heaven and ate rims. Wow, that's a total plus! I get to rebuild my wheels every two years. I got a different brand to work O.K. on the tandem with steel straddle rods. https://tinyurl.com/svgfzdl. But on long descents (which we actually have around here), I'd overheat the rims and blow front tires. I never did get around to installing a drag brake. If you live in some place that is not dead flat, you have to buy extra equipment to stop your tandem. Another canti plus.

Meanwhile, riding to work this morning in a rain storm -- at least it wasn't ice like yesterday -- my tried and true hydro discs were dead quiet, stopped as well as dual pivots in dry weather and didn't eat my rims. And going down a massively broken up 16-20% wet descent, having brakes that actually worked was a huge plus, assuming I wanted to stop at the bottom. Cable and hydro discs have worked far better for me for over the last 15 years than cantis ever did -- yet you would dismiss them as a marketing fad.

Jay, please write this down so I can stop repeating it:

I'm not saying that disc brakes are not better for YOU. You're over in
the 0.1 percentile, an American who lives in a very rainy climate with
very hilly terrain who rides his bike to work damned near every day.
Surely you understand that is nowhere close to the norm!

Got that written down?

No, it's already written down. I'm reading it right off the screen. Doesn't it show-up on your end? Why would I write it down again?

Write it on a Post-It note so you can stop pretending I'm saying nobody
should ever use discs! I've never said that, but you keep returning to
the fact that they work better for you, personally, as if that trumps
every other factor.

But: Disc brakes are not being marketed to just that cohort. (If they
were, they wouldn't be worth marketing.) They are not being marketed
just to mountain bikers. They are being promoted as THE best brake for
_everyone_, including people riding "comfort bikes" with tractor saddles
on MUPs. Do you really think that's not bull****?

Yes, manufacturers believe they are better brakes and sell them as such, and they are better on top end bikes because they allow the use of CF wheels without any of the usual braking issues, and on low-end bikes, they produce an all-weather bike with room for fenders and big tires with a light brake feel for the weak of hand.

You mean like V-brakes?

As to your experience with the T1000: Of course, I have cantis on my
earlier version of that same bike. Occasionally they have squealed and I
have had to adjust them, but it's at worst an annual chore. And I've
never replaced a rim because of that. Why? Probably because I don't ride
in rain as much as you, and I don't do as many steep hills. But again, I
suspect my riding is much more typical than yours.

Typical of what? I'm out there every day with about a zillion other non-typical people. I was behind a guy today in shorts. WTF? It's raining and near freezing, and the guy is in shorts.

Perhaps we should have a show of hands. Everyone who commutes every day
in a climate with some of the rainiest weather in North America plus
large elevation gains including super-steep uphills and downhills on
forest paths, please raise your hand. Everyone? Um... anyone?

Jay, your commuting is unusual even for Portland. (Many times, you've
described your joy at not dealing with crowds of fair weather
commuters.) Don't downplay your uniqueness! Take pride in it!

Is your bike earlier than '88? Look at the crappy tire/fender clearance: https://vintagecannondale.com/year/1988/1988.pdf I gave that bike to the Community Cycling Center.

I've toured with 37mm tires plus fenders on my Cannondale touring bike.
I don't call that crappy tire/fender clearance. (And not long ago,
people here were defending bikes that wouldn't accept a 28mm tire
without fenders. What the heck??)

Regarding the tandem: It's noteworthy that cantilevers were standard on
tandems for decades, and still are. Even back when Phil Wood came out
with his tandem disc brake, there was no rush to dispense with
cantilevers on tandems. Santana until recently had a web page explaining
why discs were _not_ better for tandems! Until, that is, they saw the
bandwagon getting crowded and decided to jump on with their own monster
disc design. They still use rim brakes as the default.

And a drag brake.

On most, not all models. But a drag brake is a different animal, not
intended for normal stopping duty. Thousands of tandems have been sold
with Arai drum brakes for drag duty, but nobody seems to be saying that
those drum brakes are the bees' knees for all cyclists. (BTW, our tandem
doesn't have a drag brake. It's never needed one.)


Are discs better for some uses? Yes. Are discs better for everybody? Not
even close; because "better" in ways that don't matter is not really
"better."

BTW, a lot of the fairer sex prefers discs because of the light hand pressure necessary to get good braking and, also the newer Shimano levers with adjustable travel. It's a package that sells -- much more so than cantis and poorly matched STI/Ergo levers. You don't have to buy discs -- nobody does, but a lot of people do like them.

That's fine, despite the usual vagueness. (How "light" is the hand
pressure for how "good" braking?) But are you saying those levers
wouldn't work with V-brakes?

V-brakes have such light hand pressure that Shimano kludged a spring
gizmo into their front brake cables so comfort bike riders would be less
likely to pitch over the bars. It's hard to believe the levers need
lighter action than that.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 15:51:36 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 3:05:53 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 11:31:24 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/5/2020 1:00 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:06:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/4/2020 10:24 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:13:30 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 16:11:42 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 07:12:47 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:17:00 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 20:15:06 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/2/2020 7:11 PM, jbeattie wrote:

The OE direct mount brakes on my Trek stop well enough but have a slightly different feel than Ultegra dual pivot. Their reason for being is aerodynamics and light weight.

And everyone knows how critical aerodynamics are. Why, just look at how
Shimano AX absolutely transformed everyone's riding experience!

And light weight? Yep, pedaling your 180 pound bike+rider weight up a
hill is a completely different experience than pedaling your 179.9 pound
total bike+rider weight. That extra tenth of a pound absolutely sucks!
Thank God for 0.06% improvements!

But Frank! It's NEW! and everyone knows that NEW is BETTER.....
O.K., it might cost a tiny bit more but just think, everyone will be
looking at you with envy (Pssst, he's got one of them there new
things...) and think of the bragging rights... "See, I was riding
along on my $3,000 bike there with the new thing on it..."

You have this weird fascination with price. Nobody I ride with buys anything as a status symbol -- and nobody pays OTC price. My Trek was pro-deal because I do work for the company, and most of my friends are in the industry. And even if I did pay full price for my bike, who cares? Why not have a bike that is fun to ride?

-- Jay Beattie.

Given that I am retired I think that some pre-occupation with prices
might be wise, but more important is the seeming allegation that one
must have an expensive bike to enjoy riding. You ask, "Why not have a
bike that is fun to ride?" and I might reply, "Why not have fun riding
a bike?"
--

Cheers,

John B.

I'm not saying you have to have an expensive bike to have fun. I'm saying that a stiff 16lb racing bike is a hoot when your racing friends up a climb or to a city limits sign -- or actually racing. You can love your beach-bomber or whatever, but having a bike that takes off when you hit the gas is fun. The price I paid for my Emonda was a blip on the financial radar. I ride with guys who have way more expensive bikes, although none of them paid full price either.

It's also fun having a bike that will bomb down a trail or carry luggage or that you can dump in the racks at work without worry (except for whacking the dyno light). I have a bunch of bikes and all are loved and used. I'm not trying to pry anyone's bike out of their cold dead hands. People can love whatever bike they want, but some bikes are more fun than others. Just like some cars, skis, monkey wrenches and frying pans are more fun than others. I even have a favorite pair of ski poles -- and a favorite dental floss.

-- Jay Beattie.

Strange. I have been using tools since I was a sub-teen and I can't
say that I ever had a favorite wrench, other than saying that the
proper size wrench (to fit the nut) was much to be admired. And while
I was a member of the high school ski team I can't remember having a
favorite pair of skis, or ski poles, other than having one pair for
downhill and another for cross country.

I asked my wife about favorite fry pans and she tells me that one uses
the correct pan for what one is doing and she has been cooking for
something like 60 years...

But perhaps we are disadvantaged in being able to enjoy skiing without
multiple sets of ski poles, or repairing things without a favorite
wrench or my wife without a favorite frying pan - I shall not tell her
that she is disadvantaged though as she already has a room full of
pots and pans and might want to buy even more :-)

O.K., just to get a base-line here, how about gas versus electric cook top? Straight razor versus triple-blade disposable? Flush toilet versus pit toilet? Do you have a favorite version of anything?

And why do you always frame things in a pejorative way, like "you can't enjoy skiing unless you have (gasp) multiple pairs of skis?" I enjoy cycling and skiing, but I enjoy them more when I'm on a certain bike (depending on terrain) or pair of skis (depending on snow). Don't you enjoy sitting in a more comfortable chair -- or is it presumptuous sitting on anything other than a three-leg milking stool? Do the restaurants in Thailand have only one menu item?

I have a favorite Crescent wrench with a nice padded handle that I found on the ground while riding. I have a favorite set of ski poles that are stiff with low swing weight and a generous strap (that broke, waaaah). I was skiing on Sunday, dodging all the dopes trying to get in a few runs before the Superbowl, and totally digging my favorite set of Portlund Ory-gun hand-made skis. https://shop.on3pskis.com/products/2020-jeffrey-108 Don't worry, I didn't pay that much -- but even if I did, so what? I got them at the "factory" years ago when it was about the size of a garage. I would have had fun on my other skis, too, but not as much fun. Some things just work better than others, or they're more fun to use than others. That doesn't mean that life is miserable without them.

But many people _think_ many things work better; or they _think_ they
are better quality. And indeed, they actually enjoy them more because
they _think_ they're better. It's so heartwarming!

But it gets weird when the item in question (like a "fine" wine, or a
"historic" violin, or an "immensely valuable" painting) is in fact quite
ordinary. And yes, that happens all the time.

https://corbettbarr.com/cheap-vs-exp...he-difference/

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...nd-sound-check

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...nd-taste-tests

Of course, there are massive amounts of money spent to influence people
to think this way.

And as we see here, skepticism is not treated kindly!

While I can't argue with the expensive versus cheap wine tasting I can
say with all honesty that some wines tastes much better than other
wines. I made home made wine for a number of years and I can assure
you that some of the batches were so awful that I poured them down the
drain and others I was quite proud of :-)

I certainly agree that some tastes better than others. And I, too, have
made wine, and I too have had to dump some of it. But it's been proven
beyond (reasonable) doubt that quality in wine doesn't correlate with
price, as many believe. Interestingly, there was at least one test where
they examined activity in test subjects' brains as they drank different
wines. Tasters brains lit up with more pleasure when they were _told_
the wine they drank was pricey, even though it was the same cheap wine
they'd had before.

Frank, price does not necessarily equate to quality in anything (even
peanut butter) and applying it to only wine is a very one sided
argument as if, for example, you were to taste that stuff that they
used to sell for a dollar, in gallon jugs, with almost any brand sold
in bottles I believe that you would pick the bottles every time :-)
Even though they cost $1.50 :-)

And, I am reasonably sure that your test, mentioned above, was
conducted with people who were nephrites at wine tasting as I read
tests conducted at wine making get together's that show quite the
opposite. Where wines are tasted from unmarked glasses.


I think the best advice I heard regarding wine was to sample many
different wines (irrespective of price) and write down precisely what
you liked or did not like about each - i.e. whether you did or did not
like that a wine was sweet, dry, semi-sweet, smoky, oakey, fruity,
whatever. Then after a while, examine what you wrote. You'd be able to
discern your favorite characteristics, and ask your sommelier (or
grocery stock boy) for wines with those characteristics.

I certainly can't speak for all wine drinkers but my friends, and
myself, do exactly that. One samples various wines and when one finds
one that they like they buy it. And, I can't speak for all wineries,
but the ones here in Thailand all offer the opportunity of sampling
their vintages with the expectation that you will buy what tastes best
to you.

The second best advice I heard was to just buy the wine with the most
interesting graphics on the label, because that was probably as valuable
as an expert's opinion.

I believe that is a very foolish comment as certainly anyone who
drinks wine at all can tell the differences between a "decent" vintage
and a horrible vintage.

John B., write this down. Wine is grapes. That's it. Grapes. If everyone buys the same grapes -- which they do since vineyards sell grapes to anyone who wants them -- then how is it that wine from those grapes will taste different from one winery or another. It wont. And even among grapes from different vineyards grown at different times, the difference is infinitesimal. Basically all grapes are the same and thus all wine is the same, and any perceived difference is just because of marketing -- fancy labels, bottles, commercials produced by Big Grape. You think it tastes "different" or "better," but it doesn't. Stop writing.

-- Jay Beattie.

Unfortunately you don't know what you are talking about!.
https://oureverydaylife.com/types-of...-12210772.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne

There are at least 5,000 varieties of wine grapes (some writers claim
10,000) and all of the major varsities of grapes make wine that tastes
differently. Not to mention that even the yeast used to make the wine
can affect the flavor. In additions many wines - champagne comes to
mind here - are made from a mix of grapes.

Yes some Vineyards sell grapes, but others, and I can think of two
here in Thailand, do not and I suspect that there are many others as
quite simply they have a market for all the wine that they can
produce.

You better stick to bicycles and ski poles as your explanation of the
wine subject is reminiscent of Tom's explanation of the U.S. economy.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 17:30:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/5/2020 4:53 PM, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/5/2020 12:16 PM, sms wrote:
On 2/5/2020 12:03 PM, Mark J. wrote:

snip

Santana has a long history of explaining why technology X is
unsuitable for tandems, then shortly thereafter promoting technology
X as the greatest thing for tandems, the difference being, Santana
started selling a tandem with technology X.

Examples include aluminum frames, carbon fiber, and discs as you note.

Do they then also claim that prior to Santana employing that
technology that everyone else did it wrong? Not that we would know of
any other company that does that sort of thing.

Change "Do" to "Did" and I believe the answer is yes.* Moving forward,
their ad copy largely seemed to ignore/erase their prior statements
about the inadequacy of the "technology X" in question.

To specifically address the issue of Santana and tandem disc brakes, see
https://santanatandem.com/brake-tech/

Whether you agree or disagree with that info, you'll note that the
discussion of brakes is quite detailed in terms of braking torque, heat
dissipation, temperature rise, effect of temperature on brake components
and on carbon forks, effect on wheel geometry, tire clearance, etc. It
goes far beyond "Discs are just better" and "There are no downsides"
that we tend to get here.

Those who disagree with Santana's points would do well to address those
points specifically. IOW, avoid ad hominem insults claiming Santana
designers are just old fuddy-duddies, like we also tend to get here.

Disclaimer: Our tandem is not a Santana, but I have friends who ride
those bikes and love them.

An interesting article. What I found particularly interesting is that
Santana apparently has been installing disc brakes on bicycles for
some years now but the road bike riders are all clapping their hands
and shouting about this "NEW" (40 year old) innovation :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On 2/5/2020 3:51 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Basically all grapes are the same and thus all wine is the same, and any perceived difference is just because of marketing

snip

Trader Joe's has lowered the price of Charles Shaw back to $2. Enjoy.

On 2/6/2020 2:23 AM, John B. wrote:

snip

An interesting article. What I found particularly interesting is that
Santana apparently has been installing disc brakes on bicycles for
some years now but the road bike riders are all clapping their hands
and shouting about this "NEW" (40 year old) innovation :-)

Sadly, Arai no longer makes their drum brake for tandems. I have an
extra wheel with an Arai drum brake, for our Trek tandem. Santana also
offered the Arai drum brake.

See:
https://www.bikeforums.net/tandem-cycling/500780-arai-drum-discontinued.html.
"I did a trip to France a few years ago in the Pyrenees and I think the
performance of the disk was marginal. Granted the roads out there
require extreme braking. The disc would fade, often accompanied by noise
and vibrations. I also melted the front rim shoes and had to replace
them a couple times during the trip."

From that post, it appears that disc brake fade and rim brake
over-heating is a problem that the Arai drum was designed to address.

One used one available on eBay https://www.ebay.com/itm/223888673332.

On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 2:11:55 AM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 15:51:36 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 3:05:53 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 11:31:24 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/5/2020 1:00 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:06:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/4/2020 10:24 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:13:30 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 16:11:42 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 07:12:47 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 2:17:00 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 20:15:06 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/2/2020 7:11 PM, jbeattie wrote:

The OE direct mount brakes on my Trek stop well enough but have a slightly different feel than Ultegra dual pivot. Their reason for being is aerodynamics and light weight.

And everyone knows how critical aerodynamics are. Why, just look at how
Shimano AX absolutely transformed everyone's riding experience!

And light weight? Yep, pedaling your 180 pound bike+rider weight up a
hill is a completely different experience than pedaling your 179.9 pound
total bike+rider weight. That extra tenth of a pound absolutely sucks!
Thank God for 0.06% improvements!

But Frank! It's NEW! and everyone knows that NEW is BETTER......
O.K., it might cost a tiny bit more but just think, everyone will be
looking at you with envy (Pssst, he's got one of them there new
things...) and think of the bragging rights... "See, I was riding
along on my $3,000 bike there with the new thing on it..."

You have this weird fascination with price. Nobody I ride with buys anything as a status symbol -- and nobody pays OTC price. My Trek was pro-deal because I do work for the company, and most of my friends are in the industry. And even if I did pay full price for my bike, who cares? Why not have a bike that is fun to ride?

-- Jay Beattie.

Given that I am retired I think that some pre-occupation with prices
might be wise, but more important is the seeming allegation that one
must have an expensive bike to enjoy riding. You ask, "Why not have a
bike that is fun to ride?" and I might reply, "Why not have fun riding
a bike?"
--

Cheers,

John B.

I'm not saying you have to have an expensive bike to have fun. I'm saying that a stiff 16lb racing bike is a hoot when your racing friends up a climb or to a city limits sign -- or actually racing. You can love your beach-bomber or whatever, but having a bike that takes off when you hit the gas is fun. The price I paid for my Emonda was a blip on the financial radar. I ride with guys who have way more expensive bikes, although none of them paid full price either.

It's also fun having a bike that will bomb down a trail or carry luggage or that you can dump in the racks at work without worry (except for whacking the dyno light). I have a bunch of bikes and all are loved and used. I'm not trying to pry anyone's bike out of their cold dead hands. People can love whatever bike they want, but some bikes are more fun than others. Just like some cars, skis, monkey wrenches and frying pans are more fun than others. I even have a favorite pair of ski poles -- and a favorite dental floss.

-- Jay Beattie.

Strange. I have been using tools since I was a sub-teen and I can't
say that I ever had a favorite wrench, other than saying that the
proper size wrench (to fit the nut) was much to be admired. And while
I was a member of the high school ski team I can't remember having a
favorite pair of skis, or ski poles, other than having one pair for
downhill and another for cross country.

I asked my wife about favorite fry pans and she tells me that one uses
the correct pan for what one is doing and she has been cooking for
something like 60 years...

But perhaps we are disadvantaged in being able to enjoy skiing without
multiple sets of ski poles, or repairing things without a favorite
wrench or my wife without a favorite frying pan - I shall not tell her
that she is disadvantaged though as she already has a room full of
pots and pans and might want to buy even more :-)

O.K., just to get a base-line here, how about gas versus electric cook top? Straight razor versus triple-blade disposable? Flush toilet versus pit toilet? Do you have a favorite version of anything?

And why do you always frame things in a pejorative way, like "you can't enjoy skiing unless you have (gasp) multiple pairs of skis?" I enjoy cycling and skiing, but I enjoy them more when I'm on a certain bike (depending on terrain) or pair of skis (depending on snow). Don't you enjoy sitting in a more comfortable chair -- or is it presumptuous sitting on anything other than a three-leg milking stool? Do the restaurants in Thailand have only one menu item?

I have a favorite Crescent wrench with a nice padded handle that I found on the ground while riding. I have a favorite set of ski poles that are stiff with low swing weight and a generous strap (that broke, waaaah).. I was skiing on Sunday, dodging all the dopes trying to get in a few runs before the Superbowl, and totally digging my favorite set of Portlund Ory-gun hand-made skis. https://shop.on3pskis.com/products/2020-jeffrey-108 Don't worry, I didn't pay that much -- but even if I did, so what? I got them at the "factory" years ago when it was about the size of a garage. I would have had fun on my other skis, too, but not as much fun. Some things just work better than others, or they're more fun to use than others. That doesn't mean that life is miserable without them.

But many people _think_ many things work better; or they _think_ they
are better quality. And indeed, they actually enjoy them more because
they _think_ they're better. It's so heartwarming!

But it gets weird when the item in question (like a "fine" wine, or a
"historic" violin, or an "immensely valuable" painting) is in fact quite
ordinary. And yes, that happens all the time.

https://corbettbarr.com/cheap-vs-exp...he-difference/

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017...nd-sound-check

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...nd-taste-tests

Of course, there are massive amounts of money spent to influence people
to think this way.

And as we see here, skepticism is not treated kindly!

While I can't argue with the expensive versus cheap wine tasting I can
say with all honesty that some wines tastes much better than other
wines. I made home made wine for a number of years and I can assure
you that some of the batches were so awful that I poured them down the
drain and others I was quite proud of :-)

I certainly agree that some tastes better than others. And I, too, have
made wine, and I too have had to dump some of it. But it's been proven
beyond (reasonable) doubt that quality in wine doesn't correlate with
price, as many believe. Interestingly, there was at least one test where
they examined activity in test subjects' brains as they drank different
wines. Tasters brains lit up with more pleasure when they were _told_
the wine they drank was pricey, even though it was the same cheap wine
they'd had before.

Frank, price does not necessarily equate to quality in anything (even
peanut butter) and applying it to only wine is a very one sided
argument as if, for example, you were to taste that stuff that they
used to sell for a dollar, in gallon jugs, with almost any brand sold
in bottles I believe that you would pick the bottles every time :-)
Even though they cost $1.50 :-)

And, I am reasonably sure that your test, mentioned above, was
conducted with people who were nephrites at wine tasting as I read
tests conducted at wine making get together's that show quite the
opposite. Where wines are tasted from unmarked glasses.


I think the best advice I heard regarding wine was to sample many
different wines (irrespective of price) and write down precisely what
you liked or did not like about each - i.e. whether you did or did not
like that a wine was sweet, dry, semi-sweet, smoky, oakey, fruity,
whatever. Then after a while, examine what you wrote. You'd be able to
discern your favorite characteristics, and ask your sommelier (or
grocery stock boy) for wines with those characteristics.

I certainly can't speak for all wine drinkers but my friends, and
myself, do exactly that. One samples various wines and when one finds
one that they like they buy it. And, I can't speak for all wineries,
but the ones here in Thailand all offer the opportunity of sampling
their vintages with the expectation that you will buy what tastes best
to you.

The second best advice I heard was to just buy the wine with the most
interesting graphics on the label, because that was probably as valuable
as an expert's opinion.

I believe that is a very foolish comment as certainly anyone who
drinks wine at all can tell the differences between a "decent" vintage
and a horrible vintage.

John B., write this down. Wine is grapes. That's it. Grapes. If everyone buys the same grapes -- which they do since vineyards sell grapes to anyone who wants them -- then how is it that wine from those grapes will taste different from one winery or another. It wont. And even among grapes from different vineyards grown at different times, the difference is infinitesimal. Basically all grapes are the same and thus all wine is the same, and any perceived difference is just because of marketing -- fancy labels, bottles, commercials produced by Big Grape. You think it tastes "different" or "better," but it doesn't. Stop writing.

-- Jay Beattie.

Unfortunately you don't know what you are talking about!.
https://oureverydaylife.com/types-of...-12210772.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne

There are at least 5,000 varieties of wine grapes (some writers claim
10,000) and all of the major varsities of grapes make wine that tastes
differently. Not to mention that even the yeast used to make the wine
can affect the flavor. In additions many wines - champagne comes to
mind here - are made from a mix of grapes.

Yes some Vineyards sell grapes, but others, and I can think of two
here in Thailand, do not and I suspect that there are many others as
quite simply they have a market for all the wine that they can
produce.

You better stick to bicycles and ski poles as your explanation of the
wine subject is reminiscent of Tom's explanation of the U.S. economy.

Dang John B. You need a humor transplant. You're making my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 11:51:38 PM UTC, jbeattie wrote:

John B., write this down. Wine is grapes. That's it. Grapes. If everyone buys the same grapes -- which they do since vineyards sell grapes to anyone who wants them -- then how is it that wine from those grapes will taste different from one winery or another. It wont. And even among grapes from different vineyards grown at different times, the difference is infinitesimal. Basically all grapes are the same and thus all wine is the same, and any perceived difference is just because of marketing -- fancy labels, bottles, commercials produced by Big Grape. You think it tastes "different" or "better," but it doesn't. Stop writing.

-- Jay Beattie.

Nonsense. I can tell the difference between estate-made wines from grapes grown on different sides of the same hill. Admittedly, I grew up to it, as many of the grape farmers in my family were teetotallers and I made myself the designated taster. (We're talking about wines for the elite here. Some of my family have vineyards you can drive through for miles; those grapes go into still-upmarket but definitely mixed wines at the vinicultists' co-op.)

Other things I can easily tell apart that cynics tell us are fundamentally indistinguishable, include hi-fi setups with valves (what Americans call thermionic tubes) with zero negative feedback or operating in Class A, and silicon amps with oodles of negative feedback. Amps silenced by negative feedback sound nervous, as if they expect me momentarily to kick them to smithereens; every feedback cycle more higher order odd harmonics a.k.a. nasty artifacts, noise, are added. See http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/...dre%20Jute.htm for more.

Good taste is a matter of discriminating the best from the merely good, which is the enemy of the best.

Andre Jute
The best is an exciting lifelong search