Creeping brake pad drag

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:15:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:49:45 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 5:34:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:

In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

If I am going to talk like this will you shoot me please because that is the moment you give up to learn and experiencing something new. I'm a mechanical engineer that started with a simple drawing board and those awful ink pens and no PC's. Then we got 2D cad, then 3D cad and then 3D cad with integrated simulation and calculation modules and databases. It got complicated everytime but is was nevertheless progress.

Requiring computers is different from being able to use computers.

I was and still am quite skilled as a paper draftsman. When it became available,
I learned and used 2-d computer drafting. I learned 3-d solid modeling. (Hell,
the last piece of furniture I built was designed using 3-d solid modeling.) I
learned and used Finite Element Analysis. I can do that sort of stuff.

But I don't want equipment on my bike that requires interfacing to a computer to
adjust or fix. To me, that's the opposite of "appropriate technology." I have
done plumbing and can still do plumbing, but I don't like it and I don't want
plumbing on my bike. And so on. I think bikes should be simple. YMMV.

- Frank Krygowski

What makes you believe that electronic shifting needs interfacing to computer to adjust or fix? That is not true and it is one of your misconceptions that hold you back from looking at it with an open mind. You just push a button instead of turning on a adjusting barrel. What is the difference? For most people this is more intuitive. In my kind of work a mechatronic approach leads in most cases to the best design/solution for a problem, so a combination of mechanics, electronics and software. In my opinion shifting on a bicycle is an example of a problem that will benifit from a mechatronic approach. The weak point of the current pure mechanical solution are the cables and the complicated mechanical components in the shifter in the environment were they are used. Shifting by wire solves the issue of the cables and make the internals of the shifter immensely simple. The electronics are simple for today standards and the same apply for the firmware. In the beginning you have to have
vision and see the potential of such a system: a low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system. As a benifit it will also be lighter. As you repeately showed you only see the potential problems which after a while don't exist anymore.
If you wonder how your books are printed today look at this:

But, but, but; my manual (down tube) shifters are reliable. They've
worked for probably 15 years with minimal adjustments, typically a
partial turn of a screw. And I've never had the battery fail. I'll go
even further and say there is no possibility that the battery will
fail.

As for simplicity, I had a look at electric derailers and lo and
behold they work the same as a manual derailer, with the addition of
some sort of electric actuator. So in reality they are more complex
than manual derailers.

As for "low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system" I
heard that same argument about hydraulic disk brakes when they first
came out and the site has had repeated "help me" posts saying, my
brakes squeak, the pads won't go in, why are my brake pads all greasy
an oily, why does my bike drip on the floor, and, and, and.







https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psm5e0lXFHw

on a machine I helped to develop. I think Amazon has 5 of these engines to print your books on demand overnight.

have a nice weekend,

Lou
--
cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 12:05:05 PM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:15:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:49:45 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 5:34:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:

In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

If I am going to talk like this will you shoot me please because that is the moment you give up to learn and experiencing something new. I'm a mechanical engineer that started with a simple drawing board and those awful ink pens and no PC's. Then we got 2D cad, then 3D cad and then 3D cad with integrated simulation and calculation modules and databases. It got complicated everytime but is was nevertheless progress.

Requiring computers is different from being able to use computers.

I was and still am quite skilled as a paper draftsman. When it became available,
I learned and used 2-d computer drafting. I learned 3-d solid modeling.. (Hell,
the last piece of furniture I built was designed using 3-d solid modeling.) I
learned and used Finite Element Analysis. I can do that sort of stuff.

But I don't want equipment on my bike that requires interfacing to a computer to
adjust or fix. To me, that's the opposite of "appropriate technology." I have
done plumbing and can still do plumbing, but I don't like it and I don't want
plumbing on my bike. And so on. I think bikes should be simple. YMMV.

- Frank Krygowski

What makes you believe that electronic shifting needs interfacing to computer to adjust or fix? That is not true and it is one of your misconceptions that hold you back from looking at it with an open mind. You just push a button instead of turning on a adjusting barrel. What is the difference? For most people this is more intuitive. In my kind of work a mechatronic approach leads in most cases to the best design/solution for a problem, so a combination of mechanics, electronics and software. In my opinion shifting on a bicycle is an example of a problem that will benifit from a mechatronic approach. The weak point of the current pure mechanical solution are the cables and the complicated mechanical components in the shifter in the environment were they are used. Shifting by wire solves the issue of the cables and make the internals of the shifter immensely simple. The electronics are simple for today standards and the same apply for the firmware. In the beginning you have to have
vision and see the potential of such a system: a low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system. As a benifit it will also be lighter. As you repeately showed you only see the potential problems which after a while don't exist anymore.
If you wonder how your books are printed today look at this:

But, but, but; my manual (down tube) shifters are reliable. They've
worked for probably 15 years with minimal adjustments, typically a
partial turn of a screw. And I've never had the battery fail. I'll go
even further and say there is no possibility that the battery will
fail.

You also see potentional problems which practically don't exist. For the record I had more issues with downtube shifters than I ever had with brifters.. Sure problems were easy to diagnose and fix but I had to do the frequently. And in case you didn't noticed you can shift with brifters without taking your hand of the handlebar, an feature the vast majority appreciates.

As for simplicity, I had a look at electric derailers and lo and
behold they work the same as a manual derailer, with the addition of
some sort of electric actuator. So in reality they are more complex
than manual derailers.

As a said you get rid of outer and inner cables the main cause of problems with current systems. You also don't need complex (expensive and difficult to assemble) inner parts of mechanical brifters.


As for "low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system" I
heard that same argument about hydraulic disk brakes when they first
came out and the site has had repeated "help me" posts saying, my
brakes squeak, the pads won't go in, why are my brake pads all greasy
an oily, why does my bike drip on the floor, and, and, and.

I have my Di2 cross bike with hydraulic disk brakes for almost 6 years now and I never had to adjust/replace/bleed anything, something I never achieved with cable operated derailleurs and brakes. That is the potential I'm talking about.

Like Jay already said:

'The good old days weren't perfect, except in our memories.'

Lou

On 11/22/2019 5:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/22/2019 3:31 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, 22 November 2019 15:40:24 UTC-5, jbeattieÂ* wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 11/22/2019 9:50 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 6:01:59 AM UTC-8, Andrew Chaplin
wrote:

I took it to the bike shop where I had the brake work done. They
may have
damaged the seals as, after working on it and taking it for a test
ride, front
braking faded quickly and there was oil leaking.

You need a different shop!

Â* From where is the oil leaking? You can have piston seal issues as
well as other issues that are relatively easy to fix, like a
leaking hose connection.Â* Other leaks can be: (1) bad internal
o-ring and leaking from the seam between the two caliper halves.
This was a known problem on certain RS785s, the predecessor of your
caliper.Â* I replaced the internal o-ring seal on one caliper (and
now have a bag of redundant little o-rings), and that caliper woks
like a charm.Â* (2) You can also get leaking from the fill port
because the stopper screw is not seating.Â* You just pull that out,
make sure the o-ring on the screw is seated properly and that the
screw-seat is clean and clear. And (3) you can have a piston seal
leak, which could repair itself when the piston is pushed back in.
You could even have a cracked piston.Â* Anyway, those things are
reparable, although I have never replaced a piston or seal. Youtube
has videos. It's probably easier buying a new caliper, which are
not ho
rribly expensive. BTW, if you have oil on the pad, it will never work
right again regardless of cleaning, sanding, etc., etc.Â* At least that's
been my experience.Â* The pad will work marginally O.K., but I'd just buy
a new set.

In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that
require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.

Hydraulic discs are surprisingly simple mechanical devices, but they
are plumbing -- really minor plumbing. I think there is about 50ml of
oil in my front brake. It's not like fixing a live water main. There
is no need to adjust pad angle, straddle cable length, etc., etc. No
whacking the return spring to center the brake or dealing with
sticking cables (sort of a problem of the past, but if you want to
reach way back to classic equipment). Nothing is as bad as a stuck or
cross-threaded freewheel. The good old days weren't perfect, except
in our memories.

-- Jay Beattie.

I have two old Suntour freewheels here that stick. I can put some oil
in them, turn them until movement is nice and smooth and the the next
day they are really stiff again. In fact one gets so stiff the next
day that it won;'t turn.

Cheers


Two of Suntour's most successful products, Original Winner and New
Winner, have adjustable freewheel bearings. If you have either of those,
a solution is straightforward. Tedious yes, but less tedious than
traditional 'cover plate with shims' freewheels.

I have some bikes with those freewheels. But it seems the adjustment
requires a really, really obscure tool. The one time I wanted to do that
adjustment, I ended up fabricating my own tool.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 21-11-19 22:58, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, November 20, 2019 at 11:07:59 AM UTC-8, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
I have been riding a gravel bike (Kona Rove NRB DLhttps://www.konaworld.com/rove_nrb_dl.cfm) for a year now. It has developed a tendency to drag the pads of the front brakes against the disc. I recently had the pads and rotor, front and rear, replaced (about 5,000 Km of use). As I ride, a noise comes from the front brake that suggests that the pads are touching the rotor, and it increases in volume until I "blip" the lever, which makes it go away for maybe another Km or so--or less.

Has anyone encountered this before? if yes, how did you solve it?
Yikes, you must do a lot of braking. 3K miles for a rotor doesn't seem like much.

Anyway, you may just need to reset your pistons.https://www.epicbleedsolutions.com/r...liper-pistons/ If that doesn't work, then the next thing is checking to make sure the caliper is centered. Like Andrew says, just follow the instructions for installation/alignment.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk_nC9anQcM&t=13s

If that doesn't do it, check to make sure that both pistons are retracting. I have a piston that will drag occasionally, and I need to clean it. Follow this routine:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQXF...&feature=youtu

I looked at the youtube video linked above on how to clean brake
pistons. The video is from Park Tools people, so I assume reliable.
However, I was surprised to see that they squeezed the brake lever to
get the piston to move out, and so that also the seal could be cleaned.
The first time I ever tried cleaning brake pistons, before seeing this
video, I also squeezed the brake levers. Not a good idea: One piston
flew completely out of the cylinder and oil started to leak out. So why
didn't this happen in the video? Squeeze only with a very light touch?
Maybe my Shimano brakes are different from what was shown in the video?

When I later watched how the mechanic at my LBS cleaned a brake for me,
he didn't touch the brake levers at all. That worked and their hasn't
been any brake scraping for months. This leaves me wondering even more
about the video.

Ned

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 5:44:05 PM UTC+1, Ned Mantei wrote:
On 21-11-19 22:58, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, November 20, 2019 at 11:07:59 AM UTC-8, Andrew Chaplin wrote:
I have been riding a gravel bike (Kona Rove NRB DLhttps://www.konaworld.com/rove_nrb_dl.cfm) for a year now. It has developed a tendency to drag the pads of the front brakes against the disc. I recently had the pads and rotor, front and rear, replaced (about 5,000 Km of use). As I ride, a noise comes from the front brake that suggests that the pads are touching the rotor, and it increases in volume until I "blip" the lever, which makes it go away for maybe another Km or so--or less.

Has anyone encountered this before? if yes, how did you solve it?
Yikes, you must do a lot of braking. 3K miles for a rotor doesn't seem like much.

Anyway, you may just need to reset your pistons.https://www.epicbleedsolutions.com/r...liper-pistons/ If that doesn't work, then the next thing is checking to make sure the caliper is centered. Like Andrew says, just follow the instructions for installation/alignment.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk_nC9anQcM&t=13s

If that doesn't do it, check to make sure that both pistons are retracting. I have a piston that will drag occasionally, and I need to clean it. Follow this routine:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQXF...&feature=youtu

I looked at the youtube video linked above on how to clean brake
pistons. The video is from Park Tools people, so I assume reliable.
However, I was surprised to see that they squeezed the brake lever to
get the piston to move out, and so that also the seal could be cleaned.
The first time I ever tried cleaning brake pistons, before seeing this
video, I also squeezed the brake levers. Not a good idea: One piston
flew completely out of the cylinder and oil started to leak out. So why
didn't this happen in the video? Squeeze only with a very light touch?
Maybe my Shimano brakes are different from what was shown in the video?

When I later watched how the mechanic at my LBS cleaned a brake for me,
he didn't touch the brake levers at all. That worked and their hasn't
been any brake scraping for months. This leaves me wondering even more
about the video.

Ned

You have to squeeze the brake levers very gently and watch the pistons move outwards and stop moved out 1 mm. You likely see that only one piston wil move out just like in the video. Clean that one and push that one back, the other one will come out and can be cleaned.

Lou

On 11/22/2019 8:43 PM, jbeattie wrote:


And to be clear, I was talking about mechanically stuck freewheels and trying to remove them with some notch-eating remover -- and then having to dismantle the freewheel and get it off with a pipe wrench or something. Hey, whad'ya know -- a historical reenactment on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQKG8F7NL5Q Exactly as I remember, except I didn't own a 3' F-wrench. I said "F" a lot, but didn't own the big wrench.

I've got a mountain bike with the short-lived SunTour 7 speed index
system, maybe one of the last freewheel systems sold for mainstream
production bikes.

The bike is ridden very, very rarely. But I noticed the rear wheel
bearings are a bit loose, and I needed to pull the freewheel to adjust
them. I removed the wheel, held the freewheel remover in place with a
quick release, clamped it into my bench vise and tried to twist the
wheel, to unscrew it. No good. I tried penetrating oil. I tried grunting
and groaning. Still no good.

I got a long wooden bar and lashed it to the wheel to get more leverage.
I added more grunting and groaning. Still no good.

Finally, with maximum grunting and groaning, something gave. It was my
bench vise. I managed to bend it so its jaws are now slightly out of
parallel; but the freewheel was still tight.

I probably should have commenced overnight soaking with penetrating oil,
but I gave up and put the bike back together. Again, it's ridden only
very rarely.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 11/23/2019 5:15 AM, wrote:

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:49:45 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 5:34:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:


In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

If I am going to talk like this will you shoot me please because that is the moment you give up to learn and experiencing something new. I'm a mechanical engineer that started with a simple drawing board and those awful ink pens and no PC's. Then we got 2D cad, then 3D cad and then 3D cad with integrated simulation and calculation modules and databases. It got complicated everytime but is was nevertheless progress.


Requiring computers is different from being able to use computers.

I was and still am quite skilled as a paper draftsman. When it became available,
I learned and used 2-d computer drafting. I learned 3-d solid modeling. (Hell,
the last piece of furniture I built was designed using 3-d solid modeling.) I
learned and used Finite Element Analysis. I can do that sort of stuff.

But I don't want equipment on my bike that requires interfacing to a computer to
adjust or fix. To me, that's the opposite of "appropriate technology." I have
done plumbing and can still do plumbing, but I don't like it and I don't want
plumbing on my bike. And so on. I think bikes should be simple. YMMV.

- Frank Krygowski


What makes you believe that electronic shifting needs interfacing to computer to adjust or fix?


Well, the first clue I got was in forums such as these, where some
people posted questions about how to use the computer interface for
adjusting some feature or another. Then I came across online
instructions (and maybe videos?) telling or showing how to do it.

I'll admit, I don't know how necessary those procedures really are. I
could learn that only by installing the system, and I don't have a
reason to do that.


That is not true and it is one of your misconceptions that hold you back from looking at it with an open mind. You just push a button instead of turning on a adjusting barrel. What is the difference? For most people this is more intuitive. In my kind of work a mechatronic approach leads in most cases to the best design/solution for a problem, so a combination of mechanics, electronics and software. In my opinion shifting on a bicycle is an example of a problem that will benifit from a mechatronic approach. The weak point of the current pure mechanical solution are the cables and the complicated mechanical components in the shifter in the environment were they are used. Shifting by wire solves the issue of the cables and make the internals of the shifter immensely simple. The electronics are simple for today standards and the same apply for the firmware. In the beginning you have to have vision and see the potential of such a system: a low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system.


Your definition of "simple" is much different than mine. On one hand, we
have a lever with a cylindrical surface on which a cable is wrapped. The
cable passes through a housing, then pulls on (effectively) a lever
built into the derailleur. A spring makes it return. Everything is
visible and easy to understand, easy to diagnose, and can be fixed with
hand tools that fit in one's pocket.

OTOH, we have a battery, wires, an electric actuator of some kind with
who-knows-what inside it (do you know?), push buttons and unknown
circuits of microelectronic components and probably hundreds of lines of
code. In my view, putting immense complexity into a sealed black box
does not make a system "simple."

One day, I'm sure, Shimano will introduce "thought shifting" triggered
by some bio-electronic technology. I'm sure it will have fans who will
say "I can't believe I used to have to move my fingers to shift." I'm
sure you will be one of those fans; and I'm sure I won't.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 9:37:21 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/23/2019 5:15 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:49:45 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 5:34:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:

In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

If I am going to talk like this will you shoot me please because that is the moment you give up to learn and experiencing something new. I'm a mechanical engineer that started with a simple drawing board and those awful ink pens and no PC's. Then we got 2D cad, then 3D cad and then 3D cad with integrated simulation and calculation modules and databases. It got complicated everytime but is was nevertheless progress.

Requiring computers is different from being able to use computers.

I was and still am quite skilled as a paper draftsman. When it became available,
I learned and used 2-d computer drafting. I learned 3-d solid modeling.. (Hell,
the last piece of furniture I built was designed using 3-d solid modeling.) I
learned and used Finite Element Analysis. I can do that sort of stuff.

But I don't want equipment on my bike that requires interfacing to a computer to
adjust or fix. To me, that's the opposite of "appropriate technology." I have
done plumbing and can still do plumbing, but I don't like it and I don't want
plumbing on my bike. And so on. I think bikes should be simple. YMMV.

- Frank Krygowski

What makes you believe that electronic shifting needs interfacing to computer to adjust or fix?

Well, the first clue I got was in forums such as these, where some
people posted questions about how to use the computer interface for
adjusting some feature or another. Then I came across online
instructions (and maybe videos?) telling or showing how to do it.

I'll admit, I don't know how necessary those procedures really are. I
could learn that only by installing the system, and I don't have a
reason to do that.

That is not true and it is one of your misconceptions that hold you back from looking at it with an open mind. You just push a button instead of turning on a adjusting barrel. What is the difference? For most people this is more intuitive. In my kind of work a mechatronic approach leads in most cases to the best design/solution for a problem, so a combination of mechanics, electronics and software. In my opinion shifting on a bicycle is an example of a problem that will benifit from a mechatronic approach. The weak point of the current pure mechanical solution are the cables and the complicated mechanical components in the shifter in the environment were they are used. Shifting by wire solves the issue of the cables and make the internals of the shifter immensely simple. The electronics are simple for today standards and the same apply for the firmware. In the beginning you have to have vision and see the potential of such a system: a low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system.

Your definition of "simple" is much different than mine. On one hand, we
have a lever with a cylindrical surface on which a cable is wrapped. The
cable passes through a housing, then pulls on (effectively) a lever
built into the derailleur. A spring makes it return. Everything is
visible and easy to understand, easy to diagnose, and can be fixed with
hand tools that fit in one's pocket.

OTOH, we have a battery, wires, an electric actuator of some kind with
who-knows-what inside it (do you know?), push buttons and unknown
circuits of microelectronic components and probably hundreds of lines of
code. 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. I like the Di2 on my Synapse. What I don't like is the rapid wear of 11sp on any of my bikes.


One day, I'm sure, Shimano will introduce "thought shifting" triggered
by some bio-electronic technology. I'm sure it will have fans who will
say "I can't believe I used to have to move my fingers to shift." I'm
sure you will be one of those fans; and I'm sure I won't.

Don't worry. You'll be dead. Your kids and grandchildren will have larger problems, like the national debt.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 12:01:51 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 9:37:21 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/23/2019 5:15 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:49:45 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 5:34:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:

In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

If I am going to talk like this will you shoot me please because that is the moment you give up to learn and experiencing something new. I'm a mechanical engineer that started with a simple drawing board and those awful ink pens and no PC's. Then we got 2D cad, then 3D cad and then 3D cad with integrated simulation and calculation modules and databases. It got complicated everytime but is was nevertheless progress.

Requiring computers is different from being able to use computers.

I was and still am quite skilled as a paper draftsman. When it became available,
I learned and used 2-d computer drafting. I learned 3-d solid modeling. (Hell,
the last piece of furniture I built was designed using 3-d solid modeling.) I
learned and used Finite Element Analysis. I can do that sort of stuff.

But I don't want equipment on my bike that requires interfacing to a computer to
adjust or fix. To me, that's the opposite of "appropriate technology.." I have
done plumbing and can still do plumbing, but I don't like it and I don't want
plumbing on my bike. And so on. I think bikes should be simple. YMMV..

- Frank Krygowski

What makes you believe that electronic shifting needs interfacing to computer to adjust or fix?

Well, the first clue I got was in forums such as these, where some
people posted questions about how to use the computer interface for
adjusting some feature or another. Then I came across online
instructions (and maybe videos?) telling or showing how to do it.

I'll admit, I don't know how necessary those procedures really are. I
could learn that only by installing the system, and I don't have a
reason to do that.

That is not true and it is one of your misconceptions that hold you back from looking at it with an open mind. You just push a button instead of turning on a adjusting barrel. What is the difference? For most people this is more intuitive. In my kind of work a mechatronic approach leads in most cases to the best design/solution for a problem, so a combination of mechanics, electronics and software. In my opinion shifting on a bicycle is an example of a problem that will benifit from a mechatronic approach. The weak point of the current pure mechanical solution are the cables and the complicated mechanical components in the shifter in the environment were they are used. Shifting by wire solves the issue of the cables and make the internals of the shifter immensely simple. The electronics are simple for today standards and the same apply for the firmware. In the beginning you have to have vision and see the potential of such a system: a low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system.

Your definition of "simple" is much different than mine. On one hand, we
have a lever with a cylindrical surface on which a cable is wrapped. The
cable passes through a housing, then pulls on (effectively) a lever
built into the derailleur. A spring makes it return. Everything is
visible and easy to understand, easy to diagnose, and can be fixed with
hand tools that fit in one's pocket.

OTOH, we have a battery, wires, an electric actuator of some kind with
who-knows-what inside it (do you know?), push buttons and unknown
circuits of microelectronic components and probably hundreds of lines of
code. 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. I like the Di2 on my Synapse. What I don't like is the rapid wear of 11sp on any of my bikes.


One day, I'm sure, Shimano will introduce "thought shifting" triggered
by some bio-electronic technology. I'm sure it will have fans who will
say "I can't believe I used to have to move my fingers to shift." I'm
sure you will be one of those fans; and I'm sure I won't.

Don't worry. You'll be dead. Your kids and grandchildren will have larger problems, like the national debt.

-- Jay Beattie.

Well, I have to say that I haven't the slightest idea where you're coming from with cables sticking from muck. It really doesn't matter to me if there is asphalt, gravel or mud along the course I'd decided to take and I'm not great for cleaming the bike very often and I have to say that I have never once had any shifting problems because of muck.

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