Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - RussSeaton

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 28
Gear Talk / Re: Front rack
« on: August 10, 2011, 04:24:14 pm »
Can I add a rack question? my old cannondale mt. bike only has the eyelets at the dropout in front with no braze ons up the fork for securing the rack. I know it had a front rack back in 86 but cannot remember how it was set up. Anyone know of a rack for this type of front fork? thanks.
As you can see from this picture, the Blackburn lowrider rack comes with the hardware for clamping the rack to a fork without the braze on in the middle of the fork leg.  U clamp would be a better description of what is needed.

This one is a bit big, but its the style you want.

Gear Talk / Re: Front rack
« on: August 03, 2011, 10:41:57 pm »
Based on pictures I found online, it looks like the T800 has a regular steel touring fork.  Braze ons in the middle of the fork for the racks.  Eyelet down at the dropout for the racks.  So it will take any and all low rider racks.  I use an aluminum Nashbar low rider.  Works fine.  No longer offered.  Its similar to the Blackburn.

Gear Talk / Re: Novara Randonee Bike - 2011???
« on: August 02, 2011, 01:18:29 am »
It's to bad Novarro changing the specs and "commuterizing" their bikes. I'm curious about where the Gunnar Grand Tour fits in all of this. I hear a lot about the LHT and it seems to be a really solid bike; what about the Gunnar?

The Gunnar Grand Tour is almost certainly a very nice steel touring frame.  I have a Waterford 1200.  Waterford also makes a touring bike and I suspect the dimensions are similar between the Waterford and Gunnar touring frames.  Made by the same people making the Gunnar frames.  In Wisconsin.  Gunnar frames are TIG welded instead of lugs.  Frame/fork price is $1025.  So compared to the Surly LHT or Trek 520 or some of the other bikes mentioned in this thread, its frame/fork costs about the same as the complete bike for the others.  Of course they are made in different continents.  Over the years I have succumbed to the lure of cheap Asian frames instead of American frames.  So I'm kind of torn whether one should spend the extra money for American/European frames or go the cheap route with Asian bikes.

Routes / Re: January routes abroad
« on: July 27, 2011, 01:54:59 pm »
I toured southern Portugal and a bit of southern Spain in November years ago.  Warm weather.  November isn't January.  But I suspect the weather would still be comfortable for bicycling in January too.  Cooler than November would still be nice.

Routes / Re: Lincoln,Ne heading east through Iowa
« on: July 16, 2011, 01:26:38 pm »
Actually I'm heading towards Pittsburgh, any advice or recommended routes would be much appreciated. I'm kind of stuttering in an eastward direction taking in local advice as I go.
Currently at Knoxville,Ia.

Not sure why you rode Hwy 92 since several people in this forum, including me, recommended NOT riding 92.

Anyway, head north out of Knoxville on Hwy 14.  Go north to Monroe, go north of Monroe about 3 miles.  14 is a bit busy and hilly.  You will find county road F62 going east to Reasnor and Montezuma.  Stay on that road to Iowa City.  It changes from F62 to F57, Hwy 85, F52.  But its the same road.  You will hit Sully, Lynnville, Searsboro, Montezuma, Deep River, Millersburg, Parnell, Holbrook, then go south to Frytown.  There will be a road north to Cosgrove and a road south to Frytown.  Go south.  In Frytown get on F62 again and go east to Hills, West Liberty, Atalissa, Moscow, Wilton, Durant, Stockton, Walcott and finally the Quad Cities (Bettendorf and Davenport on the Iowa side of the river).  There are some hills on this route.  Parts of Iowa are flat, part are not.

Routes / Re: Lincoln,Ne heading east through Iowa
« on: July 12, 2011, 06:01:05 pm »
Hwy 92 across Iowa is not a bike friendly road.  34 and 30 are not good either.  As mentioned, Hwy 6 is not too bad.  I've ridden it between Iowa City and Des Moines.  Hwy 2 is not bad either.  Its a main road, but it does not have lots of traffic.  Hills on 2 are not bad.  I've ridden it from Leon to Farmington.  Getting to 2 from Lincoln will mean heading south quite a ways.  But if coming out in the middle of Illinois is OK, then you might as well head south at the beginning.  There are lots and lots of county roads in Iowa.  A free map from the state will show them.  Iowa has a bicycling specific map.  You could easily piece together a good route using county roads from the Missouri to the Mississippii.

Here is the bicycle map for Iowa.

Gear Talk / Re: Kona Jake vs Trek 520
« on: June 30, 2011, 06:53:40 pm »
The Jake the Snake cyclocross bike is a low end American cyclocross bike.  So it does not have European racing cyclocross geometry.  It has touring bike geometry.  Its not quick handling.  Frame geometry wise it would work fine as a touring bike.  But the fork probably does not allow braze on low rider racks.  If its an aluminum fork you can probably clamp a low rider rack onto it.  It will probably have one eyelet at the fork tips.  Rear should be able to accomodate a rack and has eyelets.  Big problem will probably be the crankset.  If it does not come with a triple crankset, then you will have to install one.  And then you may have problems with the left STI shifter being a double and not working with a triple.  And you will probably need a bigger cassette than comes standard with the Jake Snake bike.  And new chain for the bigger cogs.  By the time you convert the Jake Snake bike over to a capable touring bike, you are pretty close to what the Trek 520 costs.  If you pull a trailer you will still need the triple crankset, maybe new shifter, cassette, and chain.

Gear Talk / Re: Ipad, Tablets vs. Netbooks
« on: June 30, 2011, 06:40:40 pm »
When riding with the Shimano 72 or the 80, did you notice any drag? Also thanks for the resource, Starbike.

No.  I have used the 70 Shimano generator hub on several 1200k and 1000k brevets and many shorter ones.  I never noticed any drag whether the light is on or off.

Rear Derailleur Chorus Ultegra 6500, long cage
Shifters Chorus Ultegra 6500
Brakes Chorus Ultegra 6500
Seatpost Chorus Ritchey
Hubs Chorus Ultegra 6500

I'm guessing the other person thinks fraud because the above descriptions make no sense.  Chorus is a Campagnolo group.  Ultegra is Shimano group.  You cannot have a Chorus Ultegra rear derailleur, shifters, or hubs.  As for the seatpost, you can't have a Chorus Ritchey seatpost either.  Campagnolo and Ritchey are two separate companies.  The person who wrote this advertisement is clueless about bike parts.  I would not trust anything about this bike.  Someone may be selling a mythical bike and just grabbed words off the internet they thought would appeal to a broad range of people.  Not realizing the names they combined made the description nonsensical.

Gear Talk / Re: Classic Randonneur Build
« on: June 17, 2011, 02:09:17 pm »
This approach has a couple of problems.  First, if you narrow the hub, the axle will probably stick out past the dropout faces and the qr skewer will not tighten properly.  You will have to shorten the axle by the amount of the spacer you remove.  Second, narrowing the hub will require redishing the rim and will increase tha amount of dish.

If the frame has 126 mm dropouts and you want to use a 130 mm hub, just squeeze it in or cold set the frame.  If the frame has 120 mm dropouts, find another bike to use.

I've converted a 135mm Deore hub down to 130mm spacing.  Took out a few washers.  Redished the wheel.  Easy to do.  Wheel isn't enough weaker to worry about.  The dropouts on my frame were more than wide enough to take up the extra axle sticking out.  You have to be careful when putting the hub back together to get the right amount of axle sticking out each side.  But the axle easily fit in the dropouts.

I'd agree if its 126mm, you can probably make it work.  If its 120, get another frame.

Gear Talk / Re: Classic Randonneur Build
« on: June 06, 2011, 12:32:46 pm »
The bike itself is a steel frame with Reynolds 531 and with Campy dropouts. Its a 1984. I have no idea about widening the rear end but it sounds kind of risky and so i think i will most likely use contemporary parts.

How can i tell the right sizes for wheels. hubs, cassettes?

If its a touring frame, it probably has cantilever posts on the fork and seatstays.  If so, then trying to fit 700C wheels into a 27" wheel frame will be problematic.  The posts will be too high for the brakes to correctly squeeze the rims.

But if its centerpull, sidepull brakes, then just put some wheels into the frame.  700C if you have some around.  See how far the brake mounting hole is from the rim.  Check the front wheel.  Front wheels are 100mm spacing since forever.  Modern short reach sidepull brakes have about 37-47mm reach.  You can buy modern sidepull calipers with up to about 60mm reach.  Check Tektro brand.  See if the distance from the mounting hole to the center of the rim sides is about 2 inches or less.  If so then your bike is 700C probably.  And you can buy modern brakes to fit the bike.  If the distance is around 3 inches, then its a 27" wheel frame and you will have a hard time getting brakes to fit if you put on 700C wheels.  Remember you are putting a small 700C wheel into the frame to measure with.  I'm pretty sure you can buy 27" rims and tires today.  So you could build up a set of wheels to fit the frame if you want.

Hubs are easy.  Just put a tape measure between the rear dropouts.  Measure inside face to inside face.  If its 126mm then you need hubs from long ago that measure 126mm.  Freewheel, won't be cassette.  As mentioned, you can put modern 130mm wheels/hubs into your 126mm frame.  If you go 126mm hubs, then you are talking freewheel.  Freewheels are available in 5-6-7-8 speeds.  If you go 130mm hubs, then 7-8-9-10 cassetes are available.    May be some problems fitting 7 speed cassettes onto 8-9-10 hubs though.  Your rear cogs will be determined by what shifters you go with.  If friction, then you could go anything with number of cogs.  If indexed, then the rear cogs is determined by how many clicks you have on the shifters.  Get your shifters first, that will determine what you do with the rear wheel.

Gear Talk / Re: Classic Randonneur Build
« on: June 05, 2011, 04:02:22 pm »
Early 1980s means 120mm frame spacing at the rear hub.  Maybe 126mm, but I doubt it.  If its 120mm, then I would not want to spread that to 130mm to fit modern 8-9-10 speed cassettes/wheels.  That is too much spreading.  If its 126mm, then it can be spread to 130mm by a shop that knows what it is doing.  Or you can just squeeze the rear wheel in each time.  May be very difficult to find a shop that knows how to correctly spread a bike frame.  Road frames have been 130mm for 20 plus years now.  The spreading knowledge is gone.  I have no interest in modernizing an old frame.

If you go classic as you state, then it means running 5 or 6 speed freewheels in the frame.  And downtube shifters.  If you can find them.  Friction since indexed shifters did not come along until 7 speed and 126mm I think.  Headsets and stems can still be bought for this frame.  Bottom brackets and cranks won't be any problem.  Brakes?  Maybe need long reach sidepull calipers.

Gear Talk / Re: Rohloff hub
« on: May 26, 2011, 02:42:01 pm »
Since maintenance of the chain is the reason you are considering a belt, I'm going to suggest a full chain case.  Europeans, Netherlands, use them on commuting bikes.  These cases enclose the chain, chainring, sprocket and don't allow any water/dust to get onto the chain.  It would reduce oiling a chain to a minimum.  I presume some European websites would be selling these chain cases.  Maybe St. John Street Cycles deals in them like they deal with the Rohloff hub.

Gear Talk / Re: Help/Advice for New Bike
« on: May 21, 2011, 06:54:29 pm »
Don't have any suggestions for a specific bike.  But the two you mentioned go for $1850 and $2000.  Frame/fork.  So you could very easily find a somewhat local custom frame maker and have him build you a custom touring frame/fork for the same money.  Might be worth your trouble to find out who is close to you and talk to him.

Gear Talk / Re: Gear Chainring
« on: May 15, 2011, 03:30:13 pm »
I have a Co-Motion Mocha Tandem with 26” wheels. How does this effect gearing? Assuming the same gear combination how would it differ from a 700 wheel while climbing up hill? BTW mine has 52-39-30 front and 11-28 rear.

Smaller wheels make the gears easier.  Circumference of the tire.  So with a 26" wheel, the 30x28 low gear will be a little bit easier than a 700C wheel with 30x28.  Small amount easier.  10% easier between 26"x1.0" tire and 700Cx23mm wheel.  Diameter is roughly 24" for the 26" tire and 26.3" diameter for the 700C wheel.  At the high end, the 52x11, the 10% difference would be noticable.  At the low end, the 30x28, the difference may not be noticable.  At the low end you are talking 2 gear inch difference.  That is not much at all.  At the high end the difference is 10 gear inches.  Noticable.

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 28