A good safe biking distance is the distance that one can enjoy the bike ride to work, get there a few minutes early to clean up or shower and after work enjoy another bike ride home and still spare some time to spend with family/ loved ones/have a life besides work and the commute.

I limit my bike commute to about an hour each way.

It would depend on a lot of things, such as terrain, weather, traffic etc.

If you are not sure, simply ride a few kilometers and you would be in a position to guess.

Safety hazards increase as you get tired, it will affect your judgment and reaction speed.

You can get a guess on that by doing some trial riding.

One thing that is for sure is that the more you ride, the safer you will feel.

Your body will adapt to cycling and you will feel less tired day-by-day, and be more confident about yourself on the streets.

Other answers have touched on this but not explicitly.

The main safety point I would say is how you ride when you're tired.

If you're exhausted and can't keep a straight line up a busy hill, don't think to look over your shoulder in time etc.

, that's bad and getting dangerous.

tiredness can really hit your judgement and reaction times.

Otherwise it depends on your starting level of fitness and facilities in work more than safety.

I started from an occasional leisure ride by riding the 9-10 mile each way commute once a week for a couple of weeks, then twice, but not consecutive days.

Now I'll happily do 4 days in a week if it fits in, and would try every day but haven't had the chance.

I would say that the bike doesn't make that much difference at the scale of your ride or mine - with the obvious caveat that it fits reasonably well and isn't in a terrible condition or something weird.

If it's OK on a cruiser it will be better on a road bike or hybrid (my choice for urban riding given the state of the roads/hills and the need to see over cars), but if you find it horrible on a cruiser, you wouldn't find it a pleasure on an unfamiliar road bike.

Of course, if you're at risk of heart attacks, recovering from an injury or whatever it's a different matter.

Traffic, weather, and geography would make a world of difference.

On a dry day at 68°F, 10 miles would be great.

If you have to take several pedestrian bridges to cross major arteries in hot, humid weather, even 1 mile could wear on you.

I do 1.55 miles with pretty-much no traffic (crossing one semi-major road to get to work), but this Florida weather does makes it easier for me to make excuses during the summer.

Until recently, I was commuting by car about 53 miles to work one-way.

I once considered doing the commute by bicycle on a Friday, getting up extremely early in the morning and coming home just-about dead.

(We have a shower at work.)

If you already have this job, maybe a one-day tryout would be the way to go, or you could try simulating your commute on a weekend.

Not knowing your other factors, I would guess 5 miles would be no problem.

This is not really a safety issue, but one of practicality and convenience.

I commute a total of 6 miles each way, every day, rain-or-shine in a humid climate.

The most important thing to consider is not the bike, but your clothing and amenities at your destination.

I use a backpack and carry a change of clothes and my laptop (using plastic bags for protection from rain).

There is a shower at my work, but I don't use it unless I am truly soaked with sweat (only needed if I take a long "detour").

Even heavy rain is not a problem if you have a change of clothing.

The distance is really up to the individual.

If this is to be a daily commute, then you'll need to consider the weather at times.

Five miles should be easy to cover with a cruiser type bicycle.

It's just that at times when it's raining or the wind is blowing at 25mph, that five miles will seem like ten miles.

The safety part will be determined by the condition of the roads traveled, the amount of traffic, and how you must dress for your commute.

If the commute will be made only when conditions are acceptable as being "comfortable", then you should have no problem with using the Schwinn cruiser for the ride.

One thing also to consider is a minimum distance.

If you are a sweater (i.e. one who sweats) a shower is a necessary part of bike commuting.

If you are going to take the time to get all your gear together, pack a change of clothes, and ride your bike, 5 miles is too short.

I sweat in 5 miles.

My minimum distance is 10 miles, and max is 15.

Anything more than that I can't sustain on a daily basis.

Question: I'm curious about what is the maximum distance you can live from work so that it's a reasonable biking distance.  I am interested in biking about 30 minutes to work. It would be about 5 miles away. I have a heavy cruiser bicycle (Schwinn). It would be a leisurely ride.

What is considered a good "safe biking distance" to bike to work?

Five miles is considered by most people to be a safe distance for cycling to work. However, a number of things need to be taken into consideration, including how fit you are, what type of bike you are using, how you react when you are tired and what the route is like. Finally, you need to consider the facilities for getting cleaned up and changed when you arrive at work.

This question depends on the your fitness, weather, road conditions and other factors. It is important not to be tired enough to impair safety, but experience will increase the distance that you can ride comfortably. Try riding on a day off to gauge your comfortable distance. You should consider the extra time involved with getting ready and showering, but 5 miles will not be too long with a cruiser.


Since cycling doesn't put your abs through a large range of motion, you're not likely to develop your abs by only biking to work.

However, depending on how in shape you are, you will probably notice that your overall fitness level increases.

Cycling up hill will do this.

Although it's not too intense a work out.

Ride standing up and you'll use the required muscle group for balance (as a person standing is harder to balance than one sitting, and thus uses more muscles).

Since you're sitting symmetrically this will also give you an 'even' work out.

So just modify your route to take in a couple of small hills.

Fartlek is best (basically - alternating intensity during exercise to stress your body), so flat then hill then flat then hill.

As others have pointed out cycling is an inefficient way to exercise the muscles in your core.

Cycling will utilize those muscles and your cycling performance will likely benefit from strengthening them - but cycling specifically won't really build strength in those muscles, you have to work them off the bike.

This article from Bicycling covers the topic pretty nicely and has links to some great core workouts for cyclists.

Personally, I've used the exercises described on here

and they're pretty good.

You could always opt for a rowing bike .

That would probably work your abs more than a regular bike.

What most people mean by developing their abs is that they want their abdominal muscles to show through their skin, commonly referred to as a six pack.

While you probably wont engage your abdominals in cycling very much, cycling as an endurance activity will increase your caloric needs and make it easier for you to reduce the amount of body fat covering your abs.

The common misconception that you will lose fat in the trained area is a myth .

Of course you still need at least some abdominal muscle mass for it to show, but losing the fat that covers them is harder than training the core.

And while I think that cycling is a good idea to get rid of some fat, a healthy diet can have an even bigger effect on your overall body fat percentage.

Adding to that there is a debate in the fitness community if specific training (aka isolation exercises) for the abs - such as crunches - is a good idea at all.

The current trend prefers exercises that engage the whole core, reducing the negative effects of muscle imbalances.

For example: My main exercise for the abdominal area currently are chin-ups and pull-ups.

While the movement doesn't seems to have a lot of core-engagement in the first place, I am not the only one who is convinced that they are a good core exercise.

On T-Nation is an article comparing different ab exercises , chin-ups were one of the top exercises.

Probably the most shocking result of this entire experiment was the level of rectus abdominis activity elicited by a bodyweight chin-up!

It beat out any other abdominal exercise, weighted exercises and all, in mean and peak rectus abdominis activity.

[…] If you're aiming to get a great core workout via chin ups, I recommend performing slow, controlled repetitions while focusing on keeping the hips and spine perfectly neutral throughout the set.

I would suggest a two fold approach!

Firstly ride your bike in a fat burning zone.

Your going to need to have a relatively low body fat percentage if you want to have decent muscle definition.

So I'd take the long route into work!

The second phase is once you arrive at work jump off your bike and do some sit-ups, once your strong enough you could use your bike as additional weight whilst performing some crunches..

Alternatively a structured weight routine in the gym would work.

Your not going develop a killer six pack by just riding a bike though I'm afraid!

Question: I have a mountain bike, and I wonder if I can develop my abs if I take my bike to work everyday.

How can I develop my abs while I ride my bicycle?

Cycling does not provide a great core workout. Although if you ride standing up and cycle up hills, you use the abdominals and core muscles more. However, cycling is an endurance activity that uses calories and thus should reduce the fat covering the abdominals.

Cycling is unlikely to develop your abs and upper body, although it may help to reduce body fat in the area and make them more visible. Upperbody strength developed elsewhere can also help cycling. Hill riding, standing up and interval training are good ways to develop core muscles on a bike.


Have you tried holding your tool like this:

I have just discovered it (instead of the classical "one tool per hand" technique) and it helped a lot.

I used a domestic hairdryer for 2/3 minutes , applied the extension and it finally gave.

Would also advise against using a blowtorch as may damage components.

Did you yourself grease the threads before installing?

This is especially important when the lock ring is aluminum.

I'll assume your free hub body is either steel or titanium and there's no grease.

If force alone won't move it, it's time to try leverage or impact or both.

In the shop they'll ask you the above question before putting the wheel on the ground with the right (or cassette holding) chain whip in a position where it cannot move (under a table or something solid and heavy).

The lock ring tool or wrench can have a longer lever attached to it and push straight down.

If that doesn't work, get a plastic hammer and try impact.

Good luck, and always grease your threads..

Try engaging the chain whip on different cogs of the cassette.

Overlap the chain on the chain whip so that it binds itself in place if necessary.

I'm an engineer and encountered many stuck bolts, nuts and threads in my time.

I just tried to remove my rear shimaneo cassette off a 3 year old bike.

I used the correct tools and really put all my weight and force into it, but it wouldn't budge.

So i decided to apply a little heat from a blow torch.

Being careful not to overheat the whole wheel hub, i gently heated it up

and then i tried the sprocket socket, and it turned without even needing a spanner.

I should have tried that before i applied all my weight and what might have happened, if it suddenly gave way.

Even though I've done this before, i was amazed what a difference it made, much safer than jumping up and down on a 5ft scaffold tube!

Wow...

I pretty much gave it everything that I could find in my garage tonight, but like most...

I have no vice.

I even tried a pry-bar between the whip and the wrench, but the whip (Park Tool) is not real rigid and it started to bend.

Before I shamefully gave up to go into the LBS, as a last resort, I clamped the chain whip to my workbench table thinking that maybe I can get enough clamping force to simulate a vice before it slips.

Voila.

I couldn't believe how easy it was by comparison.

While I still needed a breaker bar, this was the most effective thing to do.

You should secure the cassette lockring removal tool with the quick release skewer or axle bolt, just enough to hold it in place (although some removal tools don't have a hole in the middle for you to do this).

This means you can use more force without fear of the tool slipping.

Then use a long handled wrench (spanner) and chain whip.

A box-end wrench (ring spanner) will give you more purchase.

Otherwise use a vice in place of the wrench (spanner) and just turn the chain whip counterclockwise when looking from the side of the wheel not fixed in the vice.

When using the wrench and chain whip, if you can't push the two tools toward each other to remove the cassette, you can inflate the tire fully, and go for the most mechanical advantage by having the spanner and whip handles forming a v with angles of about 120-150 degrees.

Then push down on both handles.

This does run some risk of damaging your wheel though, so only try this as a last resort.

You can also try putting the chain whip on the larger sprockets for more purchase.

Question: I've been trying in vain to remove a rear cassette that I myself installed about a year ago.  I may have over-tightened the lock ring and now I can't remove it no matter what position I hold the wheel-chain whip-wrench combination.  Any advice on what to do to get this cassette off (short of going to my LBS)?  The wheel is relatively new and the cassette is very new, and the reason I want to remove the cassette is to replace a broken spoke.

How can I remove a stuck rear cassette?

If force alone won't move a stuck rear cassette, it's time to try leverage or impact or both. You should secure the cassette lockring removal tool with the quick release skewer or axle bolt, just enough to hold it in place (although some removal tools don't have a hole in the middle for you to do this). Otherwise use a vice in place of the wrench (spanner) and just turn the chain whip counterclockwise when looking from the side of the wheel not fixed in the vice. You can also try putting the chain whip on the larger sprockets for more purchase. Alternative solutions include using a domestic hairdryer for 2/3 minutes, followed by force.  Finally, using a blowtorch is not recommended.

A hairdryer can loosen the cassette, but avoid anything too hot. Greasing the threads can make subsequent removal easier. more leverage using the larger cog or a longer bar can help.


I wouldn't consider it to be bad etiquette

IF: You're not breaking the posted road speed limit.

Watch not only for cars backing out but for kids.

Watch for dogs.

In small neighborhoods like this

it's also not a bad idea to stay out in the lane and not hug the curb.

This gives you much more time if a car or child comes hurtling out into the road and you're not going to be slowing down a following car very much.

Edit: include the warning to watch for dogs.

This is pretty important.

No.

Absolutely not.

And why would it be?

Should you run a race through there without getting the residents onboard first?

Of course not.

(And who would?)

But taking a bike ride through residential areas?

Why would anyone object?

And if they do, how could it possibly be labeled unreasonable for a cyclist to come down the street at 10-20 mph when cars come down it all the time at 20-40 mph?

Pretend you live there and ask yourself which one you want coming down your street at their maximum speed and recklessness.

I'd take a peloton of drunken idiots on bikes over a single car.

The former could be merely entertaining, but the latter rather lethal.

I'm assuming you're in the US.

If that's true, a bicyclist has the same rights (and obligations) as a motor vehicle, so etiquette doesn't come into it.

You have the right to use the public roads (and the obligation to stop at stop signs).

Unless there's something odd about your bike riding (you ride with a boom box cranked up to 11?)

, I would think you'd be welcome to cut through a residential area, as you make no noise, emit no pollution and are arguably less impactful than a car.

Be polite, wave at folks who yield to you at intersections and enjoy the ride!

I has a sad that you even felt like you had to ask this question, no matter what kind of bike you have.

Out of curiosity, where do you live?

I would just try to be a considerate and careful cyclist.

If you're used to riding, then you are used to being aware of crazy stuff that could happen around you.

If you live in an area that makes you ask this question, the drivers might not know how to deal with cyclists.

They might not think to look for you, or if they do see you, they could assume they always have the right-of-way.

It's probably the same in your regular commute.

They might have their guards down a little more in the familiarity of their bicycle-free neighbourhood.

But, no, it is not bad etiquette to ride your bike on public streets.

If you do it naked, it will probably be considered bad etiquette.

(Remember Bicycle Race by Queen?)

I guess nobody in your city ever uses a bike?!

In the 1800s people were afraid that trains would scare cows along the rail track, and make milk go sour.

Nowadays we know this is not true.

Biking through urban areas won't make anyone's milk sour! ;-)

Question: Is it considered bad etiquette to ride a road bike through a small residential area? Not talking about a cheap bike and riding on the sidewalk but a nicer road bike at a decent pace. I don't want to upset anyone by cutting through their neighborhood but it would be a lot easier for my commute.

Is it bad etiquette to ride road bike through a small residential area?

It is absolutely not bad etiquette to ride a bike through a residential area. Bikes are allowed on public roads and are less impactful than cars. It is advised to watch out for children and dogs and to be considerate to people in the area.

It is not bad etiquette to use public roads safely and according to the rules. Be polite and aware of the risks associated with your environment.


The parts that Blam refers to are known as the pawls and the ratchet inside the freehub.

Slipping can happen for a number of reasons, including worn ratchet, worn pawls, weak springs, or excessive accumulation of grease & grime within the freehub.

has a thorough explanation of the different freehub types.

Depending on the hub you have, a repair consists of either cleaning, rebuilding or replacing the freehub.

Some freehubs are rebuildable, others are not and must be replaced as a unit.

That said, it's often possible to extend the life of a non-rebuildable freehub by flushing out the old grease & gunk and regreasing.

The mechanic at your local bike shop can almost certainly take care of this for you.

If you're more of the do-it-yourself type, http://www.parktool.com/blog/repair-help/freehub-service has step-by-step instructions for several different freehub types.

Check if chain doesn't slack when coasting.

A similar symptom happened to my bike, the cause was a worn spacer inside the free body had deformed and caused drag between the freewheeling part and the body, causing the cassette to apply forward torque on the chain.

This caused a slack on the upper part of the chain, so when i started pedalling again, i had to first take up the slack.

In this case, lubrication helped only a little and for a short period.

Partial rebuild of the free body resolved the issue (however it was a very old hub an it shortly broke again).

If your bike has a freewheel instead, you can just swap it.

In some cases, dirt and debris can contaminate the lube inside a free body or freewheel, and prevent the pawls from engaging.

In such cases, a rebuild using fresh, clean lube solves the issue.

Some lubricants get sticky with time, forming a goo or paste that also prevents parts from moving freely.

The cure is the same as previous.

Most likely it is not the pedals clicking in but the hub / freewheel

You have little springs on metal that let it click to coast

but when you pedal they catch.

So if the spring is worn or the metal is worn it may not catch on the first and have to travel to the second (or third).

A quarter pedal is a lot of motion.

This is going to get worse as you have fewer points of contact and they are getting banged on.

I know you are not asking about single speed freewheel

but this is a reference freewheel

The trials freewheel has 72 points of engagement for a faster engagement

The coast / engage can be in the free hub or the free wheel - fix hub and freewheel - free hub and cassette SheldonBrown

You might have a freewheel on the bike

BIG.NINE

If so you can just replace the freewheel But most likely you have free hub / cassette

You will see hub used for free hub

so just because the says hub does not mean it is not a freehub

And you will see the term freewheel used for cassette

But if they say cassette they typically mean cassette

I doubt this is chain.

Do you have visual slack in the chain?

A 1/4 turn would be chain drooping half way to the ground and you would have problems with the chain coming off.

Basically, there's 2 mechanism in play so it should be one or the other.

A loose in the chain or a broken freehub.

Check that there is no loose when you cross the chain from smallest platter to smallest cog on the cassette.

If there is, remove chain link to remove loose.

Check that your freehub start pulling the wheel almost as soon as it start turning (forward).

If that's not the case, you should change you rear hub or wheel.

Because you say that this happens when the bike is already in motion , I suspect that what you're experiencing is normal.

In most bicycles, the rear hub has a ratchet mechanism which allows it to freewheel in one direction.

This means that when the bicycle rolls forward under its own momentum (or down hill), the pedals do not move.

Moreover, you can pedal backward even while moving forward.

This also means that in order to feel any resistance, you have to pedal sufficiently fast for the speed at which you are going and the gear that you are in.

If you do not pedal fast enough, it feels as if there is no tension in the chain, because in fact there isn't: the hub is moving faster than you, and freewheeling, and so the chain isn't exerting any torque.

You must pedal faster or switch to a higher gear (if possible).

There is also a chance that the ratchet mechanism in your hub is not working properly, so that indeed there is some looseness.

The way to check this is to stand still with your brakes fully engaged, and try to pedal forward.

There should be almost no slack in your drive train: the pedal should not move forward if the bike is restrained.

If the pedals can rotate forward while your bike is restrained from moving, then have it serviced.

It looks as if your rear cassette hub or freewheel may need to be replaced, or some other problem in the overall drive train.

In other words does the problem reproduce when the bike is not already in motion?

If so: problem.

I just got an old 90's bike (like new with same problem) and usually it's the poor grease used in older entry level

Chinese made bikes that dries up and turns into wax that does this.

Of course it could be alot of other things too.

Adding light oil may work, from open side of freewheel hub, lay bike on side add oil and let gravity help it get into freewheel, then ride bike.

Some solvents or WD40 could work better on really bad dried up grease.

You may have to tear hub apart and repack with good grease, if it's not a mechanical issue

it's the lube inside period.

Good luck.

PS As a bicycle messenger in Boston for about 15 years , I coined the saying "

In this business either you break the bike, or the bike breaks YOU!"

Be good.

Question: I ride a rather usual Merida hard-tail mountain bike. Recently I've come to notice that when I start pedaling (bike already in motion), it can take up to as much as quarter of a turn for the pedals to  click  and the chain to start pulling the bike again. What could cause this and more importantly, how can this be fixed? Is this merely a problem of chain tension?

Pedaling not connecting right away

Most likely it is not the pedals clicking in but the hub / freewheel. Depending on the hub you have, a repair consists of either cleaning, rebuilding or replacing the freehub. That said, it's often possible to extend the life of a non-rebuildable freehub by flushing out the old grease & gunk and regreasing.  The mechanic at your local bike shop can almost certainly take care of this for you.

This is probably the ratchet failing to connect due to a worn part in the freehub or accumulation of grease and grime. You may need to clean, rebuild or replace the freehub. This can be done yourself or at a bike shop.


The point of the National Bike Registry, and similar schemes, isn't so much to prevent theft as it is to make it (sometimes) possible to recover a bike after it's been stolen.

Police departments do recover a lot of bikes; but, since it's usually impossible to trace ownership, most of them end up in police auctions.

The bike registries help to solve this problem, so that if your bike winds up in the hands of the police, there's at least a fair chance they'll be able to get it back to you.

If the tag is still on the bike, the cops (or a bike shop) won't have to look in five or six different databases.

They'll know which one to check.

But I agree it would be much better to have a single national (or better yet, worldwide) database.

I have a nice bike, and I know that there's no single way to prevent losing it to the creeps who go around stealing bikes.

But the more I do, the better my chances are.

After reading this today, I called the three local law enforcement groups; Santa Cruz County Sheriff, Capitola City Police, and Santa Cruz City Police.

NONE of them use ANY of these online databases.

They all use a stolen bike database that is exclusive to law enforcement.

In California if the value of the bike is $900 or less it gets listed in a California only database.

If the value is over $900, it gets listed in a national database.

Bike Registration is a solved problem.

It's what Bike Index has done.

It's the largest independent registry in the world

It's free to register (it's not for profit)

It provides automated registration for bike shops Police use and search it

It does lots of other things and is open source

Bike Index recovers stolen bikes (> 2600 to date), because it works.

Additionally : Bikes have serial numbers, adding additional registration points (such as stickers) is counterproductive, since it adds one more thing to track (and another point of failure).

Disclaimer:

I'm a co-founder of Bike Index.

I built it because I was frustrated by existing registries and that they took advantage of bicyclist without delivering.

Reasons National Bike Registry is a scam: it costs money to register registrations expire (and aren't transferable) limited and inaccessible search for stolen bikes

No support, it's impossible to reach them no maintenance or updates Paying National Bike Registry for a registration is absurd, it doesn't do anything.

Don't give them your money.

Its hard to say for a few reasons, but I'd be inclined to tend towards its not very effective: 1)

People have to be aware of it.

It doesn't physically provide any security.

The people who use this are likely to use it on nicer bikes so it could act as an attracting mark.

As far as I can tell, for the most part, the stickers could easily be removed or the bikes could be stripped for parts or more likely just used as is in a city (where delivery boys or whatever need cheap bikes frequently and don't really care where they're from, or whatever) - the bike would have to go through a bike shop which saw the sticker, and on top of that, did query the number in order to make use of it.

Or, recovering an impounded bike.

Having lots of bikes registered would make the registry more effectively.

If bike shops automatically registered every bike sold and governments that license bike automatically registered every bike, the system would be more more effective.

these processes could be computerized so that the shops and government needed very little additional effort.

Perhaps we need a meta-index, one that searches all the bike indexers in all the countries, then reports on matches based on serial number / brand / engravings etc.

Something like a email RBL blacklist DNS searcher, like https://mxtoolbox.com/problem/blacklist/

Personally I'd expect the sticker to be one of those permanent ones, or forgo that and use engraving on the steel/alloy frame.

Downside is, police don't have a lot of time for low value recoveries like this, so there's no incentive to use these databases.

Question: The  National Bike Registry  is an nationwide registry of bikes with identifying information (serial numbers, make/model, owner information) in the US that is intended to help identify stolen or impounded bikes. There are of course other bike registries such as the recent  Bike Index , many municipal registries, and the  International Bike Registry .  Are these registries effective, both at reducing bike theft (i.e. if you put a sticker on your bike thieves are less likely to steal it) or in tracking down stolen bikes?

Does the National Bike Registry work?

S0: The point of the National Bike Registry, and similar schemes, isn't so much to prevent theft as it is to make it (sometimes) possible to recover a bike after it's been stolen.  If bikes are registered then, if they are found by the police, the owner can be located. However, cyclists views on how effective it is differ. Some believe it works but the majority see it as in effective. Unfortunately, not all bikes are registered, the police have little interest in low value bike theft and many people are not aware of it so it is pretty ineffective.

The point of bike registries is for recovery rather than prevention, but since bikes are usually lower value and there are several databases, there is limited success matching stolen bikes that have been found to their original owners. Some databases are expensive with little support, and many bikes end up in police auctions. A tag will help police to find the bike on the right registry, but it provides no physical security against theft in the first place. Tagged bikes can also be used for parts, stripped of tags or used in the knowledge that they are unlikely to be traced.


Simple, yet powerful solution - pour max 1 teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda, found in any store) into the shoes before or after wearing them.

It will kill the bacteria and any other "stuff" that produces bad smell.

It has no negative effects on skin whatsoever, except when applying it to freshly shaven skin - as it may cause inflammation of the skin (but, hey - everything does under that conditions).

It also doesn't paint socks or shirts (if you use it as a deodorant replacement).

I use it on daily basis.

Also, it's great if you don't want the irritations on skin from the deodorants.

Sodium Bicarbonate is odorless itself.

More info on Sodium Bicarbonate Cheers!

If odor is your main concern, I can highly recommend the so-called boot bananas .

You put them in your shoes whenever you are not using them, and it slowly kills all odors.

I have a pair of boot-bananas for a year now, and I am very enthousiastic about it, all odors are gone since I use them.

It did not use them for my cycling shoes though (they don't smell as far as I know), but for other sporting shoes.

It is not cheap, but certainly worth the money.

Some people put their shoes in the freezer, as it also kills a lot of the bacteria, which cause the bad smell, but I do not have first hand experience with that.

I try to not wash cycle shoes.

I have found a boot/shoe dryer to be effective with odor.

The old style without a fan seems to work better for shoes.

Leave the dryer in for a day and cook that bacteria.

No I don't have medical information the dryer gets hot enough to kill bacteria but it seems to work.

It gets rid of the odor and the next time they get wet they don't seem to stink up as fast.

And a fresh set of socks with every ride.

According to this link you can kill odor bacteria with heat Foot odor Remove odor causing bacteria with Ozone, Sunlight, UV, Chemical, or Heat.

Soaking them in a bucket of very diluted bleach water (~1 cap in a 5 gallon bucket)

overnight should help with the odor.

As far as drying, either grab a fan, or there are a lot of commercial solutions available.

They're mostly marketed for winter/ski boots, but they'll obviously work for any type of wet shoe.

Start by replacing the insoles.

Typically this is what smells the most in old bike shoes.

After that you can also clean the shoe itself following any one of the many suggested methods outlined in this thread.

But be sure to remove you nice new insoles first before cleaning the shoe itself.

Also try to thoroughly dry the shoe as fast as possible, leaving the shoe damp for prolonged period will encourage growth of bacteria.

Good luck!

Dettol Liquid contains Chloroxylenol.

It kills bacteria and provides protection against germs which can cause infection and illness.

Dettol kills 99.9% of bacteria, such as E.coli and Influenza virus (H1N1).

Always read the label.

Serious, the smell is caused by bacteria and your mission is to kill them!

Put hot water, plenty of Dettol and your bacteria/shoes in a bucket.

Let it soak for one night.

Rinse and dry.

Enjoy the new smell!

You probably do not know this but baking soda can act as a good deodorizer for the shoes and sometimes even for the feet.

After using your shoes, sprinkle a little bit of baking soda on each one.

- Leave on the baking soda on the shoes overnight.

- Take off the baking soda from the shoes in the morning especially if it is already going to be used.

More info

This is a bit unconventional, but stay with me.

Take the shoes and place them in a plastic bag.

Remove as much air as you can from the bag and seal.

Place the bagged shoes in to the freezer.

Leave the shoes in the freezer at least overnight.

I based this on the idea that the cold temps of the freezer would kill most of the odor causing bacteria and it worked the times I've tried it, but your milage may very.

Buy a boot dryer.

Put your wet shoes and gloves on it after good rides.

It drys them out fast and prevents odors.

Great for winter commuting as well.

When my MTB shoes are covered in mud.

I just take them to the sink with a scrub brush.

Do a quick rinse and scrub the outside (about 2 min tops) to get the mud off and then toss on the dryer.

Question: So I have a pair of: Diadora X-Country 2 MTB Shoes (pic below)  How would I go about cleaning them, primarily to remove odor? I am tempted to put this in the washing machine- but the cleet is totally stuck to the shoe (imagine 7,000km, mostly in the wet). Brush + washing up liquid? What about the inside sole etc?  Any tips?   Update:I ended up using some handwash (with anti bacterial) and a brush/toothbrush and got the following results:

How do I get rid of odor from cycling shoes?

A number of methods are recommended for removing the odor from cycling shoes. Shoes can be washed but should be dried wuickly with a fan or a boot dryer. Boot bananas can be placed in the shoes. Alternatively, a teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate can be placed in teh shoes before or after wearing. This also has the advantage of killing bacteria.

Avoid letting the shoes stay wet, and dry wet shoes quickly with boot dryers or a fan. Baking soda helps to eliminate odor. Freezing shoes is also said to kill bacteria that causes odors.


You can cut an aluminum soda can into a small strip and wrap that around and fold it like a tiny burrito into the end.

Crimp with pliers.

Picture lovingly misappropriated from http://billgrady.com/wp/2002/11/14/how-to-wrap-a-burrito/

The empty ink-tube of a ballpoint pen makes good cable ends.

The metal ones may be squeezed into place.

If you have a plastic one cut off 1 cm, put over the cable end and heat with a flame.

I usually use an old spoke nipple.

Slide it over the end and crimp with an electrical (stake-on/solderless connector) crimper.

I have actually used these options: Epoxy glue:

let it dry a little before applying.

It is too liquid just after mixed, so let it dry and use it like if it were modelling putty.

Thin cooper wire from a telephone cord.

Wounded it around the end of the cable.

It would look like a bass guitar string.

Solder wire applied cold, wound a couple of turns and crimp it with pliers.

Thin metal office supplies used for holding pieces of paper together (fasteners and similar) cut into small pieces and crimped with pliers.

Failed attempts were made with masking tape, electrical tape and duct tape.

Soldering it was also a fail for me, the molten solder would not adhere to the steel cable, that's why I ended just crimping it.

Wrap it tightly with electrical/gaffa tape?

Anyone with a roll of lead-based solder can hammer it out against an iron plate to make a thin foil, then wrap the cable with it, and finally "swage" it by hammering it down.

The soft lead will press into the cable gaps and should create a very tight nipple.

I tried this at the handlebar end with not such good results, trying to jerry-rig a cable anchor: although the foil layer touching the cable does swage in well, the outer layers are too brittle to hold well together.

It's like trying to make a sandwich out of phyllo dough, the gaps make for a crumbly product.

I imagine it'd be pretty easy to make a little baby crucible out of steel, stone, or something else that melts at a higher temperature than lead.

It would be a mold for the anchor.

It would include a slot where you lay the cable halfway through it.

Then, stuff the cavity with solder (melt it in, jam your iron in, use a torch, whatever).

That should make for a good DIY anchor, meaning you could buy cable in bulk and make your own cables.

I use normal solder - this keeps the strands together and negates the need for a cap.

I thread the cable and then solder where I will cut, and then trim the excess off.

Note this method leaves a sharpish point still.

The trick is preparation... if you have stainless steel cables then they don't take solder too well.

You need to clean the end with a solvent to remove any grease, sand it or file it some to abrade the surface, use some flux liquid and a decently hot soldering iron.

Silver solder works better but is definitely overkill for a bike cable.

If you have a soldering iron and some solder, that may stop it from fraying further, but won't make it any less sharp.

You could consider a bit of alu foil, but I doubt this would stay on.

Perhaps with some glue suitable for metal?

Perhaps a small cable tie done up super-tight with pliers?

Question: I am in a pinch and need something to crimp onto the end of my brake cable to stop it fraying. There aren't any hardware shop's nearby and its a long way to the nearest bike shop.  Any household object that'll do the job?  Any good stop-gap until I can get a proper part?

What can I use for a DIY cable end?

There are numerous suggestions for making a DIY cable end. These include a strip from an aluminum soda can, an old spoke nipple, solder wire, paper clips, empty ink tube of a ballpoint pen, epoxy glue and metal glue.

A piece of metal from a can, a piece of copper wire or cold solder wire can be wrapped around and hammered down or crimped with pliers. The wire can be coved with a spoke nipple, ballpoint pen cap or cable tie. The end can be glued or soldered, but it may be difficult to get the solder to adhere to the cable.


Old but still worthwhile:

Breaking Away .

A few of my guilty pleasures: Hard-boiled: The Greatest Show On Earth ('74 Giro) Death on the Mountain: The Story of Tom Simpson Soft-boiled: The Flying Scotsman , Graeme Obree biopic Quicksilver

The Triplets of Belleville (originally released in UK as Belleville Rendez-vous )

Because I'm a mountain bike guy, and I think the stories and shots are way more interesting (sorry roadies):

Where The Trail Ends Strength in Numbers Life Cycles

Won't Back Down Rad Company

And of course all the old-school freeride films like Kranked.

A couple of classics for you... A Sunday in Hell

The Stars and The Water Carriers

Hell on Wheels is a German movie portraying Erik Zabel and Rolf Aldag during the Tour de France 2003.

It gives quite some insights into cycling on that level (while it ignores doping and we meanwhile know that the participants did quite some doping during that time ...)

Blood Sweat Gears is a documentary on Garmin Cycling Team, a good alternative to watching TdF dvds.

It's no Breaking away, but check out American Flyers too.

You've got your Kevin Costner, cycling, iconic scenes, and Russian bogeymen.

The Sufferfest offer motivational/training videos.

Also, Bromley Video in the UK has lots of DVDs, books, videos etc.

of all things cycling - grand tours, races, bios, documentaries, dramatisations.

Not particularly cheap but the best selection I've seen in a single place, also some of the DVDs are self-produced

so I'd imagine are unavailable elsewhere.

I think they also have an eBay outlet, you may find some things cheaper on there.

Great bicycle movies Top Five Cycling Films of All Time 9 Cycling Movies

You Can't Miss 10 Best Cycling Movies Ever Bonus: Best Bicycle Movie Scenes All bicycle movies Wikipedia Bicycle Universe IMDB 1 IMDB 2

The Armstrong Lie In 2009 director Alex Gibney set out to film The Road Back, a documentary on cyclist Lance Armstrong's comeback year after a four-year retirement from the sport.

Three years later, on October 2012, a doping investigation led to his lifetime ban from competition and the stripping of his seven Tour de France titles, and the documentary was shelved.

On January 14, 2013, three hours after his appearance on Oprah, Armstrong went back to Gibney to set the record straight about his career.

If you are into mountain biking at all, I highly recommend any/all of the NWD (New World Disorder) series, and also the films The Collective made.

NWD is pretty much straight up old school bike Pr0n.

Professionals on bikes doing ridiculous things to awesome music.

The collectives movies were a bit more artsy, but very close to the same thing; both sets were well done.

Finally I'd also like to recommend Bang Bang, which was a film that sort of revolved around Aaron Chase and the year he broke his back.

It's very behind the scenes and gave me a very unique perspective on what some of the riders are actually like and how to some extent "the show must go on".

Question: Can you recommend high quality cycling-centric films? Can you recommend good sources (for example, publishers, distributors, vendors, etc.) to locate these films?

What are some good films about cycling?

Recommended films about cycling: Breaking Away, The Greatest Show On Earth ('74 Giro)  Death on the Mountain: The Story of Tom Simpson   Soft-boiled:   The Flying Scotsman , Graeme Obree biopic  Quicksilver, The Triplets of Belleville, Where the Trail Engs, Strength in Numbers, Life Cycles, Won't Back Down, Rad Company, Kranked, A Sunday in Hell, Hell on Wheels, The Road Back and many more...

Breaking Away, Hard-boiled:   The Greatest Show On Earth ('74 Giro),  Death on the Mountain: The Story of Tom Simpson,  Soft-boiled:   The Flying Scotsman , Graeme Obree biopic  Quicksilver, Where The Trail Ends,  Strength in Numbers,  Life Cycles, Won't Back Down  Rad Company, Kranked, A Sunday in Hell, The Stars and The Water Carriers, Hell on Wheels, Blood Sweat Gears, American Flyers, The Armstrong Lie, Bang Bang. The Sufferfest offers motivational videos, Bromley Video has a selection of films and resources, NWD (New World Disorder) has a series on mountain biking and The Collective made a few films.


I do like you do when riding, and I usually save up my tubes with holes and patch a bunch of them all at once.

That way I can use a tub of water to both find the holes, and can go back through them after patching and test to see if they are holding air.

If I have any doubt after patching a tube, I give it a little time to cure and then I pump it up and hang it from a hook in my garage overnight to see if it loses air.

You should inflate the tube to 1.5 to 2 times the "normal" diameter, in order to develop a modicum of pressure.

(Wait until after the patch has "cured" overnight to do this, however.)

Then either test in a tub/sink or let it sit overnight again to see if it loses air.

(Getting the tube to fold up nicely is not a problem, if it's a Presta.

Just squeegee out all the air, close the valve, then lay it flat and fold it up.

Schrader is harder -- best is to remove the valve core temporarily while getting the air out.)

You have the right idea.

Inflate the tube to roughly the side it is in the tyre, which will be a much lower pressure than it would be if it was in a tyre.

My floor pump doesn't register the pressure of a tube pumped up like this, so I expect it's less than 10psi/1 bar.

A properly applied patch should resist inflating the tube up to 1.5-2 times the nominal diameter.

This is useful for testing the quality of the patching work but also to find the tiniest holes that sometimes are harder to spot.

As other say, the definitive way to test is to inflate and submerge in water or to inflate and let overnight to see if it holds.

However: I you get these tiny punctures and specially if they develop on the inner side of the tube (or "high" on the face sides), then the problem may be a faulty or degraded tube.

Tubes may suffer from chemical reactions which makes them prone to develop spontaneous pores.

When such moment arrives it is best to buy a new tube (one that has not been in the shelves for too long).

Some other ways to spot a chemically damaged or degraded tube is that when inflating them outside the tire, they have irregular shape (thicker in one parts than other) or the valve spins towards the outside.

Other may show cracked or rough spots (or other odd texture).

Another symptom may be the tube looks "too black" (a normal tube is actually dark gray) and they feel sticky.

My experience is that you can't fully test a patch until you take it up to full pressure.

I had a patch that was fine for months at low pressure on the bike.

I took the 2.10 up to full pressure to ride on the road and the patch failed.

Even if you put it on the bike to test the problem is getting the fresh tube you used back in the seat bag.

I only use patched tubes for repair at home.

Question: I normally swap out a the tube on the trail if I get a flat and then patch at home. So that leaves me with a patched tube  ready  to put in a tire and I'd like to test it without having to swap out a tube ('cause I'm lazy :).  I thought that perhaps I could just inflate it but I'm concerned that without the opposing pressure of the tire it might blow an otherwise solid patch.

How can I tell if I have properly patched a tube? (specifically a 2" mt. bike tube)

Pump up the tubes and hang them in the garage and see if they deflate to find out if they are patched properly.  However, the definitive way to test is to inflate and submerge in water or to inflate and leave overnight to see if it holds.  A properly applied patch should resist inflating the tube up to 1.5-2 times the nominal diameter.

It is easiest to patch tubes at home and leave them inflated overnight to see whether they lose air. Inflate the tube to 1.5-2 times the nominal width to test the patch properly. Tiny punctures away from the outer side of the tube may indicate a degraded tube, and an irregular shape of the tube or positioning of the valve when inflated could also be a sign of this.


It sounds like your pump is not on the valve properly, so instead of inflating the tire you're just pressurizing the inside of your pump.

Does your bike have Schrader valves (the kind you see on a car) or Presta valves (skinnier, with a kind of pointy top)?

If it has Presta valves, make sure the top of the valve is unscrewed.

There's a little nut that you can thread up, and you need to do that before you can put air in to the tire.

Also, try wiggling the pump nozzle around on the valve while you push down on the pump handle, you should be able to hear the change as air starts going in to the tire.

Image of a closed Presta valve: Image of an open Presta valve: Image of a Schrader valve:

Pressure is the ratio of force to the area over which that force is distributed, so if you want to use less force, solution may be a double-handle pump with a thinner cylinder.

Pump with a large diameter cylinder can pump air faster but needs more force.

Pump with a smaller diameter cylinder will deliver less air with a single stroke, but requires less force to pump, which may be what you need when you inflate high pressure tire.

I've had that happen with schrader valves when I don't get the fitting on the valve stem all the way.

There's a little pin that has to be pressed down in order for air to get into the tire, and if it isn't pressed down enough, it won't allow any air in no matter how much you pump.

Make sure you press hard enough to fully seat the pump fitting onto the valve.

If that doesn't help, your tire valve could be stuck closed, or the pump fitting (the thing you press over the tire valve) might be broken.

Inside the pump that attaches to the stem is a micro bolt with a vertical line.

When you attach the pump and pull the lever up to lock the pump to the stem, that little bolt turns and locks the stem to the pump.

Most often I have been in such a hurry that I jam the pump to the stem and pull the lever, not locking the stem, and of course after 60 psi or so it pops off.

The trick is to make sure that vertical line on the stem of the air valve, is exactly lined up with vertical line in air pump connection.

When you pull the lever up very gently you will feel it lock in place.

Here is the answer for Dunlop valves (= Woods valve, = english valve) .

This kind of valve is actuated by pressure only .

And the modern form uses a small steel ball that is pressed into a rubber ring by the pressure in the tire.

The trouble is, that the ball gets quite comfortable within that ring, and it will take some force to push it back out. Force that must be applied in addition to the force needed to overcome the pressure in the tube .

The effect is, that when you want to pump a tire that's currently at 2 bar, you may need to apply a whopping 5 bars pressure from the pump, just to open the valve.

You will feel/hear when the ball comes free (because that's when the content of your pump tube suddenly rushes into the tire).

After that, pumping is easy and straight forward, but you must deliver this one first pressure peak first.

If you already have 5 bar within your tire, it may be plain impossible to free the valve.

I had that several times.

I actually unscrewed the valve in these cases to deflate the tire entirely, then screwed it back tight, and only then was I able to blow the valve free with my pump.

Ps

: I'm switching to Schrader valves now, they don't have this issue.

bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/36555/cmaster - reinstate monica

Air is not going in valve.

If Presta valve, the nut on top must be loosened.

Then tap the end with your finger.

You'll hear a little air escape.

Connect the pump chuck and inflate.

If a Scrader valve (like a car tire valve), the chuck probably is not pressed on far enough.

Even after years this was helpful.

I stuck a screw driver into the valve to let some air out.

That loosened up the valve enough for the pump to engage.

If you are trying to find out what is wrong with the pump, don't forget to check whether the problem is with the valve instead.

Question: When trying to inflate my bike tire, I pump maybe 5 times then it gets difficult for me to pump because the handle is hard to pump?

Difficulty inflating my bike tire

It sounds like your pump is not on the valve properly, so instead of inflating the tire you're just pressurizing the inside of your pump.  If it has Presta valves, make sure the top of the valve is unscrewed and if a Scrader valve (like a car tire valve), the chuck probably is not pressed on far enough. This happens a lot with schrader valves when the fitting on the valve stem isn't all the way. Make sure you press hard enough to fully seat the pump fitting onto the valve.  The trick is to make sure that vertical line on the stem of the air valve, is exactly lined up with vertical line in air pump connection.

The pump is not entering the tyre, and is only pressurising the pump itself. The valve may be stuck or not properly opened, or the pump may not be properly seated on the valve. On Schrader valves, the spring can be released with a screwdriver, and on Presta valves the pin needs to be unscrewed properly. A pump with a smaller diameter cylinder may help by delivering less air per stroke, but with more pressure.


They come with bolts because QR's typcially don't clamp with enough force to keep the wheel from slipping forward.

It looks like you have rear facing dropouts, so you should easily be able to use QR's if you get yourself a Surly Tuggnut .

That little circle on the side of it is a QR adapter.

You just pop it in and then slide your skewer all the way through.

It's not a bad idea to have a chain tensioner anyway.

One on the drive side will help you get the chain tensioned correctly when mounting the wheel.

I personally like to use chain tensioners on both sides so that the wheel doesn't get knocked crooked if I hit a bump.

I've had it happen.

It sucks.

I've used a bunch of chain tensioners and can say from experience that the Tuggnut is by far the easiest to use on the market, partially because it's the only one I've ever found that requires no tools.

It's also the only one I've ever found that has a QR adapter.

The built-in bottle opener is handy too.

After that little rant, I feel I should mention that I am in no way affiliated with Surly.

The tuggnut is just a really good product.

I've always used a quick release for the front of my fixed gear bike, I've only ever used the bolts on the back.

His highness Sir Sheldon Brown says you should be okay to use a quick release with an enclosed cam ( not an exposed cam ) with an acorn nut that has steel teeth ( not aluminum teeth ).

http://sheldonbrown.com/skewers.html disclaimer: there's no guarantee

this is safe with your particular bike, modify with care and be safe.

Just to add to the other answers, it is my experience that you can't get as secure a fit with a QR skewer as with a nutted axle.

If your bike has track forks (like below), rather than forward facing horizontal dropouts, you can probably get away with this, especially by adding a chain tug to keep the wheel from sliding forward in the rear fork end.

If however your bike is a fixie conversion with an old-school horizontal dropout (like below)

I'd highly advise against using a QR.

The forces exerted when pedalling tend to pull the rear wheel forward relative to the rest of the bike.

The axle nut is the only thing resisting this force.

If this connection isn't tight enough your rear wheel could fall out of the dropouts when in motion.

With a fixed gear drivetrain this is very dangerous for obvious reasons.

You can't use a chain tug to prevent this as they old work for backward-facing track forks.

Images from sheldon brown

With the horizontal dropout the axle can shift.

You pretty much need the nuts to get a tight enough grip.

But I suspect people have used quick release on a single speed.

So Sheldon states an enclosed cam is good enough - not good enough for me.

I am not buying the historical reasons as I see new bikes with nutted horizontal dropout and still QR on the front.

If they were doing it for historical reason they would nut front and rear.

At some point you need to trust that he manufacturer did it that way for a reason.

I have never seen a manufacturer with QR on a horizontal drop out.

The other factor is alignment.

I typically tighten the non drive side first and tweak the drive side for chain tension.

The other factor is the axle size.

On my single speed the axle/skewer is much larger.

I have never seen a nut on the smaller size and never seen QR for the larger size.

Please note that since those fenders are mounted on the outer side of the frame, your skewers are tightened against the fender brackets instead of tightened directly against the frame.

Therefore the skewer's nut splines and material are not the only thing to look at.

You could of course get a pair of those anti-theft-skewers that you tighten with a wrench to get enough torque...

I would simply just enlarge the hole in the fender bracket to 10mm.

Preferably with a round file, since drilling through an oval hole is cumbersome by hand.

That'd be easiest and most reliable.

No need to swap axles and you could securely tighten your nuts as before.

Discalimer: Modifying the brackets would of course make your fenders un-returnable to the store if they don't fit for some other reason.

You could avoid interfering with your wheel fastening solution by mounting the guards using P-clips on the seat stays.

Don't change the axle assembly just to fit mudguards!!

Adapt the mudguards instead.

As pointed out lockuts secure the wheel with much greater force than skewers.

I have these mudguards and whilst they are suited for use with skewers you need to use an adapter with a bigger hole to fit them.

Alternatively direct mount the mudguards to the frame.

Question: I recently purchased a fixed gear bike,  Kilo TT . I had some fenders lying around,  SKS raceblade . I tried to install them on my bikebut noticed that the fenders attached to the skewers. My fixed gear bike has bolts in the front and back and the fenders only fit quick release skewers.   What are some options? Can I put QR skewers on a fixed gear bike? Is there a reason they come with bolts?

Quick Release on Fixed Gear Bike

The fenders come with bolts because QR's typcially don't clamp with enough force to keep the wheel from slipping forward.  With rear facing dropouts, you should easily be able to use QR's if you get yourself a  Surly Tuggnut. The Tuggnut is by far the easiest chain tensioner to use on the market, partially because it's the only that requires no tools. If your fenders are mounted on the outer side of the frame, the skewers are tightened against the fender brackets instead of tightened directly against the frame. You could avoid interfering with the wheel fastening solution by mounting the guards using P-clips on the seat stays. It is beter to adapt the mudgaurds than the frame.

Horizontal dropouts require a more fixed axle to counter the  force pulling the wheel forward. QRs have a less firm grip, so chain tensioners can be used to prevent the axle being knocked out of alignment or sliding forward. Rather than adapting the bike to fit the mudguard, adapt the mudguards or use mudguards that attach to the seat stays.


If one bike has a rear rack, you can attach the second bike's front wheel with a bunch of bungies and tow it.

I've done this, and it worked fine.

Now I have a cargo bike, and the towing is simpler:

Walk :) Safest.

I do this from time to time

(usually when one of the kids have 'forgotten' their bike), and find it easiest to do as pr above, but with a little variation.

If the transported bike is lightweight and otherwise allows it, simply 'wear' it as a backpack, putting your arm through the big triangle.

Once it's on, you can determine if it will Work.

Did this once with a racing bike at 7,5Kg.

As the other answers, except I grab the center of the handlebar with palm forward, and then lift the front Wheel of the bike.

This allows me to sit on my own bike more comfortably, and balance is way better since the transported bike doesn't try to steer.

If you are reasonably firm at riding one-handed, you can drive them home by riding one of them while pushing/pulling the other one beside you with one hand.

Let's assume that the bike you will ride is called A and the one you push/pull is B .

First decide, which bike is better to be ridden and therefore will be your bike

A and which hand is better to get freed to steer bike B .

Which hand is better will depend on if you will need to change gears and how your brakes are arranged on the handle bars.

Then lean bike B somewhere, e.g. to a tree or wall – putting it on its stand is not so good as it might get complicated to get the stand folded in later.

Also make sure to lean it on with the correct side, depending on your choice of which hand you want to use to steer it.

Finally mount bike

A

and place yourself on the bike beside B .

Now grab either the stem or the center of the handlebar (where it is held by the stem) of bike B , such that you have some steering control over the handlebar if you twist your wrist.

The most complicated part in this is starting as you will have some wobbly moments on the start

and you have to take care not to interfere with the handlebars of both bikes.

Having drop bars (as in your case) will make things a bit easier in terms of interference as they are not that wide and it is easier to keep both bikes separated.

Also you have to take care to not lean onto the wrong bike, as putting your weight on bike B will make it go somewhere more or less unpredictable and you're quite likely to crash.

So only put your weight onto bike A 's handle bar.

Once you have the whole train running, this arrangement is quite fine (albeit a bit clumsy) as long as you don't have to cope with too much traffic (which is given in your case).

However, 5 miles is some piece to ride this way so expect to be somewhat slower than normal and plan to do some pauses on your way as you won't have a very relaxed riding position.

One possible way is to ride one bike and push the other.

One hand goes to handlebars and front brake, the other grips the second bike by the handlebar stem.

This is slow and clumsy, of course, but if you are able to ride the said route with no hands, you should be able to move both bikes as well.

Ghostride it, so long as you're not dealing with high speeds or heavy traffic: http://www.instructables.com/id/How-To-Ghostride-a-Bike/ And make sure you have a soundtrack:

Ride one bike, and have a friend ride the other bike.

Once home, give friend a beer and say "thank you, see you tomorrow."

I'd walk with both bikes - with each hand on their seats, one to the left and other to your right.

Bicycles can be easily pushed and steered when holding them at the seat (in the same manner as you would correct steering when riding without hands, through the balance).

I find it easier than pulling them by the middle of handlebars as others suggest.

Doing so with two bikes at once is tricky, and this is slower than riding; but it's safer and you'd get there in the end with no risk of falling yourself; at worst you'd have to stop and readjust them a few times.

Personally I enjoy running as much as riding.

If I could not carry the second bike I would ride one home, run back, ride the other home.

It would take a bit longer and be a great workout....... Presuming 2 bikes @10

km/h

that is about 45-50 minutes (without prangs), or 30km/h (2*16minute) on bikes + 5 minute/km (40 minute) run - 1:15.

My friend was able to ride a few miles with a second bike attached to his backpack with a ropes.

You need a wide road for this way of transportation and it can be tricky to tie bike in such a way that it doesn't weights to one side.

Also, you can detach wheels and tie them to the frame, so bike will be more compact.

I am contemplating this - fit a "truck bed front fork clamp" to the parcel rack on my electric bike and tow the other bike.

Have to remove the front wheel and strap it on the towed bike's frame.

Possibly could get away with an old front hub sans spokes, and clamp that onto your rack or even the rear seat stay of teh front bike.

Have to watch the clearances of course, left

/right turns as well as up/down.

300mm velcro cableties will be used to strap towed bike's front wheel to the frame.

Edit: I did this and it was not a success.

Complete write up in this answer

Question: I need to move two bicycles from work to home. The route is 5 miles long and car free. My only means of transport is to ride one of the bicycles so my question is this: What is the safest way to get both bikes from work to home in one journey? (without some kind of trailer)  The bikes are a Carrera Virtuoso and a Scott Yecora (dropped handlebars)

How to move a bicycle by bicycle

The safest way to transport two bikes is to walk. However, there are other options. One option is to ask a friend to ride the second bike. Another is to ride one bike hoe, run back and ride the other. If riding one'handed is no problem, ride one bike and hold the other with your free hand. Moreover, you could wear the other bike like a backpack. Finally, if one bike has a rear rack, the second bike can be attached to it.

The safest way would be to walk while holding both bikes,  get a friend to ride the second bike or take the bikes in two trips. If you are comfortable riding one-handed, you can hold the other by the stem while steering and holding the brakes of the bike you're riding. If the bike is light enough, you can carry it on your back. You could attach the front wheel or fork to the luggage rack of the bike in front, then tow it.


(MTB rider here, XC & DH, with little road exp.).

There is a certain speed for which up to that speed you should pedal, above it you gain more from adopting the most aerodynamic position and use gravity the best you can.

In my case I find this speed by trial and error in specific circumstances, because it changes according to slope, terrain, bike and tires used and length of the descent.

What I have found is that once you get to the highest gear and start approaching your max cadence, it is very difficult to provide the power needed to accelerate, and it may be even harder to do so while tucked in aero position.

At this point, if the incline is steep enough, tucking in more will give you more advantage than pedalling.

In have one example, where a hardtail mtb with knobby tires on a paved road with little incline (I can ride it up at 20km/hr approx)

this speed is around 42 km/hr .

At this point I'm near max cadence in highest gear, so I adopt my aero position.

It is common for me to even overtake other riders who are pedaling and when I get to the bottom of the hill, I can pedal harder because I have had a rest during the descent.

In those descents, I get near 50 Km/hr just because of aerodynamics.

(In a road bike in the same road, my threshold is near the same, and i know/feel my speed in aero position is much higher, unfortunately I don't have the numbers yet)

This works for me because in my general shape and level of fitness, on MTB rides, if I stop and rest for 3-5 minutes I resume pedalling approx 5 km/hr faster than if I pedal continuously.

For longer rests my body starts to cool down

and I have to re-warm up.

And this is where descent length comes into place.

If the descent is long enough for you to cool down, (climate can have a role in this too)

then the benefit of the rest you get, is negated because once you get to the bottom of the hill you have cooled off and will have to warm up again.

For these cases, I recommend what some call "soft pedalling", that is pedal just to keep the blood flowing, sustaining the heart rate up.

This can be done at intervals, alternating between aero position and soft pedalling, according to your cool-off time in that particular descent/climate.

You need to find a certain speed threshold, a simple computer will do.

I know this is subjective, but there is a speed where you feel you need to put double the effort to get 1 Km/hr faster.

In that point tuck in aero position an watch what happens with your speed.

Here's a good article from a man who knows a thing or two: Coast or Pedal on a Downhill?, Joe Friel Aug-10 Key thing from the article is reference to a 50-40-30-20-10 rule: Coast (and focus on getting aero) at

>50km/h Pedal easy at >40km/h Pedal steady at >30km/h Pedal moderately hard at >20km/h Pedal hard at >

This lends itself more to racing against the clock (e.g. Time Trials and Triathlon) rather than a road race where staying with the bunch is important for the drafting effect of riding behind someone else.

The above "rule" is down to the fact that the faster you go, wind resistance increases and more-and-more energy is required to increase your speed by a set increment.

E.g. the difference in effort to ride at 20km/h compared to 10km/h is a lot less than, say, 40km/h compared to 30km/h. Check out the 'Drag (physics)'

on Wikipedia if you want to read more: drag is proportional to the velocity multiplied by itself (squared).

I have no idea if it's efficient or powerful

but I do know that ever since I was a kid right up until now it is pure FUN to pedal as fast as I can, get as much speed as I can, and then see how far it it carry me.

Simple arithmetic.

There's a few possible answers: 1, For racing

yes

but as Jahaziel says, you will reach a point where either the effort is too great to increase speed or actually you're just spinning out2, On a ride for fun or fitness there's no NEED to pedal downhill

but I find that if it's downhill followed by an uphill it launches you into the hill with more momentum which at least starts the climb better3, Obviously you might be trying to better a descent time in which case treat it like racing.

Obviously all this is dependent on the conditions, your skill and your experience.

Because wind resistance is proportional to velocity squared it takes more power to go from 30 to 32 than from 15 to 17.

So you get more bang from your pedal power at lower speeds.

If it is a relatively short downhill

and you have considerable speed

you are typically better off coasting and then pedal when you get to a flat or flatter section.

You are better off exerting yourself on the lower speed ascent.

Then recover on the downhill.

It might be 2 minute recovery or 20 minute recovery.

If you notice racers typically go all out on the ascent.

If you went up the hill at 8 mph and down the hill at 13 mph compared to a constant 10 mph you would have about 5% more wind resistance.

Question: How do I use up less when I go down the hill? What is better? If I really drive down (I start down the hill fast and when I will at the foot of the hill I will have a rest since I slow down to my average velocity - in this point I will start pedaling again.) or if I have rest by the way down the hill and start pedal again at the foot?

Is it preferable to pedal downhill?

There are different opinions among cyclists about pedalling down hill. Some believe it is a waste of energy as it increases your speed little and it is better to have a rest and be ready to face the next climb.  There is no need to pedal downhill on fun or fitness rides. Others see pedalling downhill as fun and enjoy reaching the maximum speed possible.  Moreover, if you are training for racing, it may be valuable.

Due to wind resistance, it becomes exponentially more difficult to cycle faster at higher speeds. For that reason, on downhill sections it can be more effective to use an aerodynamic position to lower wind resistance and stay fresh for uphill sections. It can be fun to pedal downhill, but since it provides less advantage it can be helpful to rest before pedalling harder when you get to the bottom.


I definitely recommend this.

Running lights will make you more readily visible as the light will penetrate the fog to an extent.

Reflectors and high-viz clothing will be somewhat less effective during foggy conditions.

Use caution riding in foggy conditions as drivers may not see you until they are very close.

You should use lights in fog.

On a car, you don't use high beams in fog (but you're supposed to use low beams (required) and fog lights (optional, but useful since they cast a low and wide beam which increases visibility) since they reflect back too much, but on a bicycle, your lights aren't that powerful for this to be a problem (and the distance they cover is less than a car light).

You should also be extra on edge and wear your high vis stuff, since your visibility is lower (and more importantly, people who are driving cars have lower visibility and aren't always very good at driving in fog).

Many people run lights on a clear day for safety.

In the US by law a motorcycle must run lights all the time.

Law was based on safety.

This is a related post

Does it make you safer to use lights during the day Cars turn their lights on in the fog.

Another answer was criticized for stating this is a no-brainier.

But it is.

As for high beam versus low beam.

A bicycle light is typically oriented as a low beam.

I always turn on my headlights even in the daytime for safety reasons, whether driving a car or riding a bike or motorcycle.

Many times I have tried to change lanes when visibility was limited and had to correct back into my lane because what I thought was a clear lane was actually occupied by a very hard to see vehicle coming up from my blind spot.

Many accidents could be avoided if everyone drove with their headlights on during limited visibility.

In Ohio, the way I read it, it appears that lighting falls under the generic vehicle lighting guidelines, so bicycles are required to act like cars in this one aspect (other rules explicitly state motorized vehicle or even "motorcycle").

So, lights are required when: Between sunset and sunrise Visibility less than 1000 feet Windshield wipers are on (recent addition which I think is reallydumb as we often have bright sunny days with occasional lightsprinkles and lights are totally unnecessary, yet you'll be using thewipers).

I've not yet seen a bicycle with wipers, so perhaps"raining enough that I'd use wipers if I had them

" would be a goodgeneral rule too?

Question: Today it was foggy, visibility was only slightly reduced, I already wear a high-vis on my bike but I am wondering if it is still worth me using my lights or is that overkill?

Should I use lights in foggy conditions?

It is definitely recommended to switch your bike lights on when it is foggy. Reflectors and high visibility clothing are less noticeable in fog. Other vehicles are required to use lights in fog and, in the US, motorcycles must use lights at all times. According to law in the US: Lights are required:   Between sunset and sunrise  Visibility less than 1000 feet  Windshield wipers are on.

Visibility is greatly reduced in fog and high visibility clothing is less effective, so lights are definitely recommended. Lights can improve visibility on a clear day, especially for motorcycles and bikes, and this is more important in fog. In some places, motorcycles must have lights on at all times for visibility, and other vehicles including bikes must use them in darkness, low visibility or rain.


I have read an article regarding partial fairings for upright bikes .

It is interesting that a partial fairing will reduce the energy needed to keep the bike rolling at 35km/h

while in a fairly relaxed riding position by about 1/4 (220 watts to about 160 watts)!!

(Data sourced to David Gordon Wilson, Bicycling Science , 3rd ed., p.188).

So the heck with the speed or rain rationalizations: if you want to travel farther and conserve energy in the process (a.k.a. touring), a partial fairing should definitely be considered!

Well one of the main things is that a fairing is pretty inconvenient, say for locking up your bike (and may not be comfortable in a crash).

Also, the advantages aren't very high for speed for most bikes, given that you're not moving so quickly -- the main advantage for most people would be that it acts like a larger front fender.

But they are made, such as by these people : or in this thread which shows some more aero style fairings.

If you want to go faster, get a more aggressive road bike rather than a hybrid and/or pedal faster.

I doubt many riders could get a significant advantage from a fairing on an upright bicycle unless they were racing (and if they were racing, they wouldn't be on a hybrid anyway).

For a velomobile or recumbent, the speeds you can reach are higher to begin with, and the locking problem is already big enough that it isn't too bad to add a fairing.

You also have a less of a stability problem (say with crosswinds) than on an upright bike which makes the design somewhat simpler.

Are you trying to block rain or are you trying to be aerodynamic?

For rain, a front fairing doesn't do much unless you can get one where you can tuck your head behind while also going fast enough that the rain blows over you.

In Japan, I've ridden mom bikes with fairings and can say that they do zilch for rain until you're going at least 20kph or higher.

For aerodynamics, fairings can also act like a sail which can lead to considerable instability.

One significantly nice thing on a recumbent is that the fairing will prevent you from eating bugs .

Since you're more upright, there is a tendency to consume more than on a road bike where you are facing downwards.

If you're planning on an extended trip at high speed (such as a cross-country run) it might be worth it, but otherwise you may find them to be a net disadvantage.

Only one way to know though -- try it!

p.s.

There have been crowdfunded attempts at full fairings

but they weren't funded -- I think most people don't think it worth putting something on full-time for something they'd only use on rainy days and which might also block your vision (note lack of windshield wipers).

Even bicyclists in Seattle just use rain gear.

Fairings work, and work well.

I had one, about like the Zipper pictured, on a bike I rode from the west side of Bainbridge to Ballard (Seattle area) and back every day for years.

Wind was common on that route, and I was wet as often as not.

The fairing was noticeably faster, and more comfortable, than the bare bike.

Zzipper Fairings in the USA make handlebar mount fairings.

I've used the same one on and off for 30 years!

Great product.

So much faster than without.

Question: Do front fairings have an advantage for upright bicycles?   There are fairings for recumbent bicycles such as this Zipper one:  I wanted to know if anybody has experienced increase in speed/reduction in air drag with a fairing [with an upright hybrid].  I saw the body of F40 bike( http://www.lightningbikes.com/f40/ ) and I was wondering if such an aero design exists for upright bikes and if doesn't, exist would making such a aero design for upright bike worthwhile?

Fairings for an Upright Hybrid Bicycle?

There is no consensu as to whether fairings increase speed or decrease air drag. Some people love them, others are not so keen. On the negative side, apparently in rain, a front fairing doesn't do much unless you can get one where you can tuck your head behind while also going fast enough that the rain blows over you.  Moreover, with regard to  aerodynamics, fairings can also act like a sail which can lead to considerable instability.   On the positive side some say fairings work, and work well. Some believe that if you want to travel farther and conserve energy in the process (a.k.a. touring), a partial fairing should definitely be considered! On the other hand, if you want to go faster, get a more aggressive road bike rather than a hybrid and/or pedal faster.

There is a difference of opinion on their effectiveness, where some claim that they do not improve efficiency or protect against rain, while others claim that they are much more efficient. Fairings have a much clearer advantage on recumbent bicycles, which already have a low profile. A fairing on an upright bike may present a sail area on a tailwind or crosswind, and may cause problems in a crash. Fairings may be effective on longer tours at high speed, but can be awkward for normal use. The aerodynamic advantages may be easier to obtain with a faster road bike.


Everyone climbs at their own best rate and cadence.

On a tandem, both riders have to ride at the same rate and cadence, which will be closest to those of the strongest rider.

So neither of them are climbing at their best rate and cadence.

On a tandem with very well matched riders , they are in fact quicker, largely due to the draughting effect of the two riders being so close together.

On the other hand, if the hill is so steep that the riders would have to stand, it becomes a matter of rider skills.

Many tandem riders struggle to master the two-person coordination of efforts required to make the transition to the standing position.

When climbing a hill on single it is normal to rock the bike side-to-side as you climb.

This rarely matches exactly for both riders.

It's similar to the way people run slower in a three legged race.

Coordination:

When riding in a group of singles, it can be hard to stay together on a hill climb, because everyone climbs at different paces.

It depends on so many factors, weight, gear ratios, preferred cadence, getting out of the saddle when it feels comfortable and so on.

Being forced to climb faster or even slower than you'd like to can upset a rider's rhythm.

On a tandem it's more likely that your hill-climbing rhythm will be awkward.

If the captain wants to stand up, the cadence becomes more "stompy", leaving the stoker feeling they're not able to put much power in.

If the stoker stands, they can end up rubbing their face on the captain's back.

If they both stand, then the tandem can be hard to control unless the captain is much heavier and stronger than the stoker.

Power-to-weight ratio:

A tandem with two light riders feels similar in pace to a single with a heavy rider.

Most heavier riders are slower on climbs.

Lack of aerodynamic advantage: The Coordination factor above is more than compensated for on the flat by a tandem's aerodynamic advantage: 195% power for perhaps 120% aerodynamic drag.

However, air resistance is negligible on a climb.

It may be that other sources of drag are not reduced so much.

For example: Rolling resistance may be similar to two singles due to the similar weight.

In addition to the stated answers there is also a psychological reason: the Ringelmann effect .

The more people work together on a task, the less each individuals' effort unconsciously (even if everyone thinks he does his best) becomes.

This was first observed on rope pulling and the decrease in performance

it is not explainable by synchronisation inefficiency alone.

This effect applies even for groups of only two people: (Ingham, Levinger, Graves, & Peckman, 1974) attempted to repeat this experiment in 1974 because they were unsure of the early methodology and descriptions of Ringelmann's earlier study.

Had groups of 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 perform the rope pulling task.

Groups of 2 performed at 91% of potential, 3 at 82%, 4 at 78%, 5 at 78%, 6 at 78%.

Source

It is not harder to ride uphill if your captain and stoker are in perfect unity .

I ride a tandem with my wife a lot, and I find it way easier to climb hills with a stoker than riding single.

If you have the proper communication, then it's literally two people riding one bike, which is double the power of one person riding one bike.

The real disadvantage of riding tandem, is drag , two people and a bigger bike don't cut though the air like one person on a compact frame does.

Which is why tandem track-racing times are typically a couple seconds slower than single rider times.

Well, that and the fact that tandem track races are typically for disabled people, like at the paralympics, where the stoker is disabled, and the captain isn't allowed to be a pro racer.

But on hill climbs, where aerodynamics isn't a factor, tandem racers annihilate single racers on the hill climbs.

Some pairs of people may struggle on a tandem because their riding styles are different, as others have mentioned already this only matters if you're doing something like riding out of the saddle, on a tandem bike

you can't be two minds, you have to ride as one mind.

Question: With equal power to weight ratio, why is a tandem bike harder to ride uphill? I have friends whose Cannondale tandem bike weighs the same as their single rider bikes combined. But they find it easier to climb hills (compared to the bunch) on single rider bikes than on the tandem. They are experienced tandem riders.

Why is a tandem harder to ride uphill than a single rider bike?

It depends on so many factors, weight, gear ratios, preferred cadence, getting out of the saddle when it feels comfortable and so on. Some pairs of people may struggle on a tandem because their riding styles are different, this only matters if you're doing something like riding out of the saddle, on a tandem bike. On a tandem with  very well matched riders , they are in fact quicker, largely due to the draughting effect of the two riders being so close together. In other words, the speed of the tandem depends on how well matched the two riders are.

Tandem bikes require the riders to work together. Where riders are well matched and cooperate, they can be much more effective on hills than single riders. When the cooperation stops, a rider standing up, changing cadence, wobbling or acting erratically can upset the balance and counteract the effort of the other rider.


A polite nod, wave or smile usually suffices.

It doesn't need to be much, where I live in the UK raising one or two fingers from the steering wheel

is plenty when driving.

Not sure about down south , I've heard it's a fairly local thing, but I don't imagine it being too different.

I use a sort of wave, raising my hand but with no movement in it (so not a 'Hey buddy' or 'I need help' side to side movement)

.... it works on my bicycle, on my motorcycle, and while driving a vehicle.

It's got somewhat of a dual purpose: acknowledgement that I did something wrong, and/or

'thanks for letting me in' gratitude gesture.

This is the same gesture I seem to get from many other people.

There's no side/side or waving motion (would be more like "Hi!"), just a hand up, fingers together, "Thanks/Sorry".

This would generally come down to you locality as some cultures would consider certain gestures rude.

I guess there isn't a universal sign for thank you, but in most cultures I think a wave of the hand (more of a raise the hand and show the palm slightly) with a courteous smile or nod would do the trick.

I tend to vary between a wave of the hand or a thumbs up followed by a wave of the hand.

A smile always tends to convey gratitude, but that depends on whether you can be seen clearly or not.

Motorists (I'm both a cyclist and motorist) use to salute with each other making a "V" sign with the index and middle fingers of the hand with the palm forward.

At least it's that way in southern Europe, don't know in other parts of the world.

They would understand that with as a symbol of empathy to them.

One thing we do in France is to take off one of your legs from the pedal and put it on the side (usually your leg on the side of the motorist you want to thank).

Which looks a little like this : The fact that you take the time to do it and stop a little your effort by taking off your feet from the pedal is usually well considered by motorists.

Question: Often motorist do something that makes me wish they had stayed at home, but they also frequently do nice things too. Like slowing down to let me in to the lane, or making sure that they overtake with plenty of room etc...    Is there an unambiguous gesture that means "thank you"? I don't want to confuse people about my intentions (by using a gesture that could be interpreted as something else) but it would be nice to show appreciation.

How to thank motorists?

A thank you gesture to motorists depends on culture and location. In the US the majority of cyclists seem to favor a raised hand, palm outwards, fingers together. a thumbs up sign orjust a smille. In France removing a leg from the pedal is the custom. Different cultures presumably have other acceptable gestures.

There is no universal sign, but a smile, nod, holding a hand up, a thumbs up sign or waving is usually understood to be friendly. Some cultures will interpret certain signs differently than others, and may have their own accepted signs that can be used.


It's hard to tell from the photo ( is that large vertical streak said crack? ), but if your frame is cracked, don't use it.

Riding on a cracked frame is risky as it could result in a catastrophic failure / injury / death.

It looks like that's probably a steel frame, so find a local frame builder ( not your buddy who's handy with a welder ), and depending on the damage they may be able to repair it for you.

I am going to get beat up for this but

steel frames don't fail catastrophically.

Pull that post.

If the end of the post is in the middle of the crack then look for a longer post.

Get a seat post that extends at least 2" below the bottom of the crack and ideally 4".

The post reinforces the frame.

Mark the two ends of the crack.

If the crack grows stop riding.

I know this is kind of ghetto but put a couple hose clamps on the crack.

That old frame is not really worth a professional repair.

But you may be able to get a couple more years out of it.

If that was an aluminum frame I would tell you to throw it away.

Honestly, how much did this bike cost?

It looks to be at least 30 years old, judging by the tire and brakes we see in this picture, and even when it was new, I doubt it was worth repairing this kind of damage.

The cost of repairing it would be far in excess of buying a new bike.

Now, if you'd spent $1500 on it, even 30 years ago, well, maybe it's worth it.

But probably not.

My guess is that $300 would have been an excessive amount when it was new, and the bill to repair this crack would be larger than that.

Dawes Galaxy?

Looks like an older model - so a good quality touring frameset - possibly Reynolds tubing.

Anyway, what price do you put on sentimentality?

I'm not sure where the idea of long seatpost comes from as the picture doesn't show it.

But if you are UK based a company like Argos cycles can easily fix that frame for you.

Its a welding job - so the frame could be resprayed and Dawes decals reapplied.

On their website they quote £120 for a seat tube repair

but this is a complete replacement of the seat tube.

So yours may be different.

A full respray is £135.

A couple of years ago we had a new seat tube fitted to my wifes bike (a 20 year old Claud Butler Lady Dale) after it sheared where it joined the top tube - this was on a step through frame.

Fortunately we live close enough to Roberts, one of the few frame builders in the UK, to be able to deliver it.

I had to strip the frame for them and it cost about £150.

They completely stripped the paint off the frame

so we had it powder coated - approx

We did this as she really likes the bike and finds it comfortable for long rides.

I don't think that we could get something similar for the price.

If you want to get a new seat tube, you will probably have to send it away.

None of the local bike shops would consider it - they make money selling new bikes after all.

I think that only Mercian and Roberts offered a quote.

Hopefully this has given you an idea of the costs and what is involved.

If you like your bike as it is then it can be a viable option.

I suspect that the longer seat post may be the cheaper alternative.

I just fixed mine

, I took it to a local welding shop in London, they charged me only £8, it's not pretty

but it works fine.

I made this little video

Question: I noticed the other day that my frame has a crack in it! I believe that it's my seat post causing the problem. A couple of questions really, a) how serious is this? and b) can it be repaired?   Edit: I've added a picture of the height of the seat-post to give some extra context on whether or not the frame is too small for me. I've never thought that the seat was crazy high or anything; is it?

What can I do about a cracked frame?

Riding on a cracked frame is risky as it could result in a catastrophic failure / injury / death.  Some people believe it is worth repairing a frame crack but others think that the cost of repairing it would be the same or more than buying a new bike. All are agreed that riding with a cracked frame is dangerous.

Generally you should never use any bike with a cracked frame, but this may not actually be the case here. Unlike carbon or aluminium, steel frames do not fail catastrophically and can be welded and resprayed. If the crack grows, stop riding. Some users argue that the necessary professional welding would be more expensive than the bike was worth, and suggest that the bike should be replaced or the cracked frame strengthened with a longer seat post or hose clamps.


While I agree that there are no real risks to string your wheels by the rim, there are a number of DIY and commercial wall mounted racks for hanging wheels at the axle.

Wheelzrack makes one good option, and even integrates a storage shelf for shoes and helmets.

They support up to for sets of wheels, which may be a good option in your case.

Feedback sports used to offer a Wheel Arm system, which had a bolt-to-wall mounting option (note: the Wheel Arm is no longer listed on home page

but they sell alternate models).

These are designd for shop displays, but will work in the home as well, assuming your significant other is tolerant. :-)

Hope that is helpful.

As suggested by this answer , there's really no problem with hanging wheels or even an entire bike up by the rims.

It's a good idea to pad the hook to avoid scratches, but this should be easy enough with some cheap foam or even tape.

Failing that, a narrow shelf with some blocks either side of each wheel to stop them rolling away would work and take up little space.

I imagine you could even use a short loop of rope to hold a couple of wheels.

To avoid touching the rims, you could loop this between the spokes and around the hub.

If the wall is rough, cover it with some cardboard or thin foam/rubber.

If they are QR hubs you could remove the skewer and pass a length of cord through the axle, then knot it, so that the wheel could be hung by the cord.

I have an old steel coffee-table leg screwed to the wall of my carport by the flanges at the top of the leg.

It holds about 6 random rims normally, and sticks out slightly upwards To get more space and protect the nicer aluminium ones, I use a length of ribbon or soft rope like sash cord.

This goes around the rim and is tied in a loop with ~100 mm of slack.

Then the loop is hooked over the leg and left to hang.

Works well for me.

Advantage - soft cloth is in contact with the rim.

Downside -

its still hanging by the rim.

Another option might be a frame somewhat more like a dishrack but for storing wheels?

Advantage - rims are protected Downside - you'll have to make it.

And it will chew up floor space unless you make a wall-mounted one.

Final thought -

how about one of these cheap wheel stands for each one?

Advantage - Just buy them, no making required Downside - Floor space used up/clutter Plus

even cheap ones are $11-$12 US each which adds up.

Put them in wheel bags and simply hang the bags up.

Keeps wheels protected, clean and dust free.

That's what I do.

Another option, very simple DYI is to make a pair of clamps for each wheel, eg.

metal plates (spacers?) , big enough to drill two holes: one to put axle through and one to pass cord through.

Hang that cord on the hook or wherever you like.

You either need to use the axle or support from below if you are not wanting to hang from the rim.

If you're going to slide them on a skewer then the other answers have plenty of suggestions.

If you're supporting from below, assuming you are leaning them against the wall

then you need either a shelf or 2 poles perpendicular the the wall.

You could hold poles up with shelf brackets and since your wheels will be light anyway you could get several deep.

You could anchor the end of the poles to the ceiling too if need be.

HANG THEM BY

THE RIMSeriously get some hooks with a rubber coating on the outside from something like home depot or lowes or Amazon.

then hang up the wheels.

YOU WILL NOT SCRATCH THE RIMS.

I hang my zipp 808 like this and they are fine.

Heck, they are fine even when they have a bike attached.

Look man I get beeing protective about the wheelset you just dropped hundreds of dollars on but you will waste more of your precious money or time if you don't go this route.

Thats my 2 cents.

Best of luck to you

Question: I have 5 pair of extra wheels, which I would like to store on the wall efficiently.  I am a little skittish about storing them using the rim since some of them are carbon wheels and I don't want to risk scratches. Any suggestions?

How can I store my extra wheels on the wall efficiently, without hanging them by the rim?

There are no real risks to string your wheels by the rim, there are a number of DIY and commercial wall mounted racks for hanging wheels at the axle. Wheelzrack  makes one good option, and even integrates a storage shelf for shoes and helmets. Feedback sports used to offer a  Wheel Arm  system, which had a  bolt-to-wall mounting option. Another option might be a frame somewhat more like a dishrack but for storing wheels. You either need to use the axle or support from below if you are not wanting to hang from the rim.  Other alternatives included a short loop of rope or using wheel bags.

There should be no risk from hanging wheels or an entire bike from suitably padded hooks, although there are commercially available racks that hold wheels from the axle or base. These can also be built yourself. Wheels could also be suspended with rope rather than hooks, or placed in wheel bags that are hung from hooks.