Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
OP, *anything* will be better
OP, *anything* will be better than the OEM wheels. I tested the Ride 5k last year, and liked it so much I purchased the bike. But at circa 2.3kg with cheese for bearings, the wheels have to go.
Into a skip, ideally.
I rode the Kinesis Discs last year too, during the Kinesis GF Ti Disc review. Really liked them.
Step 1: Make sure your brake
Step 1: Make sure your brake mounts are correctly faced. If they are out, you will *never* have correct caliper alignment and therefore braking. You will also eat through pads much quicker than is normal.
2. Make sure the system is correctly bled, the pistons are pushed all the way back, pads inserted correctly etc. – https://www.trpbrakes.com/userfiles/file/HYRD_Final.pdf
3. Make sure the rotor is perfectly true – it sounds like they may not be. Invest in a rotor truing tool if you don’t have one.
4. Make sure the caliper is centered over the rotor (note 3 & 4 are a bit chicken & egg, you may have to get the caliper so-so, then true the rotor, then re-centre the caliper)
When setting up the cable housing/cable, make sure you read this:
https://www.trpbrakes.com/userfiles/file/TRP%20HYRD%20Technical%20Bulletin%20English%20Rev%20B.pdf
NOTE: The stock TRP rotors are a ‘wavy’ design where 50% of the rotor material effectively disappears from the pad contact area six times per revolution. My experience was that at low speeds this caused horrific brake judder on the front, as effectively the brakes were half releasing and re-grabbing the rotor 6 tmes per revolution. Replacing with some standard full-profile rotors fixed this immediately. Wavy rotors apparently clear mud, but having raced MTB for 20 years on non-wavy rotors I call BS on this.
Re compressionless housing: My Jagwire KEB-SL (Kevlar ‘compressionless’) HyRd setup doesn’t leave me wanting for power – Even with 28mm Tubeless (i.e. super-grippy) I can run out of friction betwixt tyre and road long before brake power becomes an issue. On my Ultegra levers, for the rear, lever throw isn’t an issue.
Schadenfreude time! I’m still using rim brakes and am having none of the abovementioned problems.People who understand disc brakes wouldn’t dream of relishing in your abject terror, upon discovering that white line on the T-intersection of that A-road is just a bit too close to let your rims dry off in time to stop.
I’ve used an Uncommon Designs
I’ve used an Uncommon Designs Safety Case for the last two years – can’t really fault it.
http://www.getuncommon.com/products/iphone/iphone5/safety/
And stuck to the back of it is a Quadlock Universal Mount – http://www.quadlockcase.co.uk/products/universal-adapter
The case comes with a headphone adapter, and is the slimmest, easiest-entry/exit waterproof case I’ve found. Sound quality can be a bit muffled, but hey – it’s waterproof. Can’t compare with the audio using the Nuud ones, but they are harder to get in/out.
Going back to the original topic – I can’t see why you are singling out ‘Eco bike cleaning products’ as being a particular rip-off. In terms of price the Green Oil bike cleaner that has you in such a lather is pretty much on a par with most other bike cleaners eco or otherwise. List price on a litre of Muc-off is £9 not that you’re likely to have to pay full list for it online, but chances are you won’t pay full list for the Green Oil one either.Missed this Tony. I agree, it’s ‘Bike Cleaners In General’ that are a rip-off. The ‘Eco’ label is to me just a further layer of cynical Marketing BS bandwagon-riding.
I don’t think it’s possible to get higher eco-cred than Ecover dishwashing liquid, and also that product has to deal with seriously nasty baked-on shite (well, in our house anyway. kids burning milk on to the bottom of cast-iron pans etc)
Again I posit that the solution that Muc-Off sell you for $9/L is absolutely no more effective at getting a bike clean than a few pence worth of Ecover/Fairy in a half-bucket of hot water.
As above, I’d LOVE to see an independent test of this. I doubt very much that the manufacturers would.
I know of one manufacturer who decided not to productise their developed world-beating degreaser, after the chemical patent search showed that they had just spent a considerable sum to re-invent Fairy liquid.
Kinda related question seeing as we have some chemists on the topic, is cycle specific wet lube (~£8 for 100ml) is any better than a bottle of 3in1 (£2)?A basic oil will attract dirt and keep it stuck. After an hour your drivetrain will be black with it, held in suspension as a grinding paste for all those lovely metal-metal interactions. And cleaning it off requires a properly-aggressive degreaser.
I’m liking the Wickens & Soderstrom No.5 lube a lot – review published soon.
Given a £14 bottle of decent lube can last a year, it’s a much less volatile value-for-money equation than £8 for a litre of bikewash that’s gone after a few weeks.
Do you doubt it because you know what they are, or because they have chemically-sounding names and so must therefore be evil?…
Using that to clean your bike will have a much less profound impact on the environment than your daily shower.
You, Sir, are my new hero. And this is why I love Road.CC – the forums have lurking industrial chemists with a high ability to string together a coherently devastating counter-argument.
with Green Oil you are getting *genuinely* environmentally friendly products from a *genuinely* environmentally friendly business.I’m not doubting they are nice people. Just that like-for-like, paying 25 to 500 times the odds for a product with basically the same claims (biodegradeable, non-hazardous) just doesn’t make sense to me. I could take the hundreds of pounds saved and purchase a block of rainforest, thereby making a real difference without feeling greenmailed.
From the Swarfega MSDS you linked to:TETRAPOTASSIUM PYROPHOSPHATE, 2-AMINOETHANOL, BENZENE SULPHONIC ACID, SODIUM XYLENE SULPHONATE, ISOTRIDECANOL
You think these things are good for the environment and your skin? I doubt it.
It’s listed as both non-hazardous and biodegradable. I didn’t say you would want to eat it, slather it on your eyeballs, or raise fish in it. Unless you’re accusing the lab that did the testing and the manufacturer/retailers of criminal conspiracy, I’ll go with their verdict, thanks.
If you want to have a bitch about ripoff pricing then look at brands like Muc-Off, who are charging a lot more for poncy crap – £9 for a brush, FFS! I’m sure Wilko will have something similar for £1.99.Why not let people spend their money on what they want?
Many people are selling ‘eco-friendly’ products targeted at affluent cyclists. This is just one example – and at least this one apparently works. Many don’t.
People can spend money on what they like. I’m not stopping anyone spending anything, just calling bullshit on what seems to be questionable extra eco-smugness.
FWIW, I purchased a brush set from Finish Line maybe 10 years ago. It still works, many, many hundreds of washes later. Would the Wilko brush last as long? dunno.
I was told ages ago not to use washing up liquid for bikes and cars because it has too many corrosive salts. Can anyone confirm or deny that? (I do know you’re meant to rinse it off). You can get 5L of car shampoo pretty cheap abyway.I’m with you on generic degreaser though.
Urban myth. The amount of ‘salt’ is tiny. Certainly a hell of a lot less than what you happily plaster your bike with for hundreds of hours a year, if you ride in the UK.
Been using dishwashing liquid for many years. Never seen a hint of corrosion. Like anything, rinse well – dishwashing liquid is designed to rinse away completely.
I always thought Swarfega was for cleaning your hands, not degreasing your bike or anything else.You do know Swarfega make more than one product, right?
If you are using ‘wavy’
If you are using ‘wavy’ rotors – ditch ’em. You don’t need mud shedding on a roadbike, and the wavy cutouts just create noise and weaken the feel. Fitting Hayes continuous rotors over the standard TRP wavy ones made a huge difference.And yes, both were set up correctly and burnt in.
IN_SPADES it did, thanks.
IN_SPADES it did, thanks. Look for forthcoming review of some very trick shoeage.
Fish_n_Chips wrote:I think
I think you’ve given a warning to all of us who want to help out.Let us know what it was in the end!
Will do – and yup, if the chain’s gone beyond 0.4-0.5% wear then the likely bill in time/materials is going be ‘large’.
Thanks all for the advice –
Thanks all for the advice – I’m clearly not going mad (well, in this respect anyway).She’s now taken it to a ‘proper shop’ where (I hope) they will find the same as I have.
One thing is sure as hell: next time someone brings me a bike with a chain that knackered, my opening gambit is ‘ This will cost you £115 in parts’ and go from there, not to do things bit-by-bit to hopefully save them some cash and end up being blamed for someone else’s malfeasance.
CXR94Di2 wrote:If you have
If you have changed the chain, cassette, and free hub for new parts, then its either there isn’t enough chain tension(look at chain length then derailleur tension) or the front crank teeth are worn. Need to work out if its front or rear jumping. Why don’t you ride the bike and see if you can provoke the condition.Chain length is correct (both big-big full-link overlap outside of mech, and 12T-50T with pulleys 90º to chainstays. Mech moves freely across range – it’s a new 105. Skipping happens even in largest cog, so I’m pretty sure that rules out tension as the culprit.