a) Is the headset tight?

Over time that can loosen up and it'll start to lean in one direction or the other (usually based on which side of the pothole you just hit).

b) Are your wheels true?

this probably won't make a major difference but it might combine with the previous point. c)

Is the weight on the bicycle evenly distributed?

E.g., do you wear a messenger bag across your left shoulder so the weight of the load pulls the bike in that direction?

d) Does this happen in a parking lot as well as on the road?

Don't forget that streets aren't flat - they curve off to the edges to allow water to shed from the roadway (and into nice deep puddles for motorists to drive through and splash cyclists).

If it only happens on the road (and you always ride on the right hand side of the road)

it's probably because of Gra-vi-ty.

First check that the handlebar is actually square to the front wheel.

Next check that the seat is straight relative to the top bar.

Stand in front of the bike, straddling the front wheel, and sight down the top tube.

Verify that there is no twist in the frame causing the front steering tube to not be in line with the seat tube.

Check the fork and frame for any other obvious out-of-alignment problems.

(Note that a frame can be straightened if it's slightly bent.)

Then check to be sure that neither of the crank arms is bent (a common problem with bikes that are frequently dropped on their sides).

Also make sure neither of the pedal shafts is bent.

Since the headset bearings tend to be always around the same position while riding (because the headset does not spin, except for those performing barspins), and we rarely disassemble them, sometimes the spheres create depressions on the bearing tracks.

This creates a "stable" position when the front wheel is pointing straight ahead, but sometimes this self-centering is to another (non-straight) position.

To check this problem, lift the bike from the top tube in normal riding position, and try to gently take the handlebar slightly away from this position.

If the bike tends to "self align", the most probable cause is this "marked" headset.

Fully disassemble and clean the bearings to perform a visual inspection is the only way to be 100% sure.

To solve the problem, these sequential steps should be taken.

If the former step didn't solve, go on to the next:

Loosen the headset just a little bit, letting it tightened just enough to prevent play when braking.

This solves the problem sometimes; Open it (no need to disassemble) just enough you can spin the spheres out of position.

Do this for the upper and lower bearing; Fully disassemble (including remove the cups from the frame), clean and remount in a different position; If neither of these solves, replace the headset for a new one.

EDIT

: take away the handlebar and perhaps the front brake, and perform some barspins, to reorient the spheres.

This could be the "Step 1.5" Hope it helps

How much lean are we talking about?

I jokingly said that you should ride around with a single pannier.

However I ride around like this all the time, and if there isn't much in the pannier (pump, some spare tubes, a couple of small tools), I can easily ride with no hands.

I would check that your wheel is actually properly set in the hub.

I know on my bike

it's possible to do up the quick release without the wheel properly seated.

However the few times that I've done it, I noticed right away because the wheel rubs on the brakes.

You should spin the wheels and ensure that the distance between the brake pads and the rims stays constant as it turns.

If it doesn't you either got warped rims, or the wheel isn't mounted right.

Has the bike been in an accident recently?

Your frame might be skewed as a result.

Happened to me, with the exact same symptom.

After careful checking it turned out the top tube was slightly bent in one place.

This happened in the days of steel frames, though.

An aluminum or carbon frame is more likely to break than to bend.

Question: The bike I use to commute - a cheap, no brand city bike - is unbalanced, and naturally leans to the right. This is not noticeable normally, but it's enough to make riding without the hands on the bars requires quite some effort to avoid drifting right.  Of course I can't just ask you what the cause is, but could you help me in finding it? What should I look for/test/check?

My bike leans to the right. What should I check?

A bike leaning to one side could be the result of a number of issues. The handlebar should be square to the front wheel, the seat should be straight relative to the top bar and there should be no twist in the tube. A check of the wheel should be performed to ensure it is straight in the hub and that the pedal shafts are not bent. Other factors, not related to the bike, could also be involved: carrying a messenger bag on one side or driving near the edge of the road where it curves.

Possible causes on the bike include a loose or marked headset, bent forks, frame, crank arms or pedal shafts, or a crooked seat. The  wheels may be improperly seated or slightly crooked, especially after an accident. This can also be caused by imbalanced weight on the bike or a tilted road surface.

Possible causes on the bike include a loose or marked headset, misaligned wheels, bent forks, frame, crank arms or pedal shafts, or a crooked seat.

Check the wheel alignment — it may be improperly seated or slightly crooked, especially after an accident.

Imbalanced weight on the bike or riding on a sloped road surface can have this effect. Does it happen only on roads, or in a car park too?


While Machismo answers the question asked, the reason why there is that reaction is mainly a lack of understanding about how and why compact cranks exist.

Obviously, you can look at it and say to give us better climbing (easy) gears.

But what many people miss is the rear ratio changes.

The race standard for many years was 53/12.

That is, the hardest gear, made up of the largest tooth count in the front, and the smallest in the back, was a 53 tooth front chain ring paired with a 12 tooth rear cog.

A few years back, Shimano started making an 11 tooth rear cog.

It was originally intended for pro racers and time trialists.

Somebody got out the calculator, and realized that with that 11 tooth rear cog now available, you could decrease the size of the front rings, and get the same gear ratio, or slightly faster .

That decreased front ring size allowed better climbing ratios when paired with the large cogs on the cassette, but also maintained the high gear speed racers are used to.

Someone riding a properly setup compact crank, actually is pushing a harder, faster gear than the 53/12 "standard".

That said, if you pair a 53 with the 11 tooth, it will be faster yet, but not often do you find the legs to push that combo.

I've included gear inch charts for both, so that you can see for yourself how it works out.

If you are not aware, gear inches are a comparison to the effective diameter of a direct drive wheel, when gear advantage is accounted for.

Pedalling with compact cranks is supposed to be easier.

So people who take great pride in how strong they are and how fast they can go

don't like when you're able to do the same with (apparently) less effort.

You can compare to being passed by electric bike while climbing, some people just feel the person on the e-bike doesn't "deserve" to be that fast and it hurts their ego.

It's pretty much

a "I'm manlier than you" thing, like "I use brute force to be fast, while you needed to have a mechanical advantage".

Add to that the fact humans don't like change and it's in our nature to frown upon new things trying to go against old "standards".

The blog

Why not tri? has a nice little article about Compact vs Standard.

Machismo.

Compacts came about to alleviate the high gearing of a standard crankset's gearing without inheriting the troubles that come with a triple.

Compacts are naturally geared lower than standards.

Some people (incorrectly) see lower gearing as a sign of weakness.

Some of those same people will serpentine their way up high grade mountain roads because they thought they could push standard gearing but can't.

Which gearing you go with is purely a matter of overall strength and riding style.

Neither one is the wrong decision in the right situation.

I've done races before where in the description it has read "compact gearing highly recommended.

" That's a fair warning to heed.

I think that compact (lower gears) supposedly would imply the person isn't strong enough to spin higher gears, or actually needs that low gears to be able to climb properly.

In any case, I think most people doesn't even know there is a difference on crank chainring sizes, not to mention they could very well prefer one over another.

I for one ride internal gear hub,

and I have one 46t and one 39t chainring.

When I feel fit and wanting to speed up, I install the 46t.

When I am more lazy, or more feel more tired for a longer period, I install back the 39t.

This scorn stuff, or "weakness" stuff, is all inside people's head, I would say.

I have no experience with the egos of aspiring cyclists, but I can note a (small) technical difference

A sprocket with a lower tooth count will require the chain to bend more sharply as it engages with the teeth.

The effect is complicated to describe, but it may be thought of qualitatively as the end of each successive link meshing onto the sprocket whipping around and causing an oscillation in the slack side of the chain.

This effect dissipates the majority of drivetrain energy lost through the chain.

The magnitude of the effect is nonlinear (roughly proportional to the square of angle of articulation)

so the difference is negligible at the chainring, but there is a non-negligible difference between 11T and 12T on the rear.

It's something like 0.4% higher theoretical drivetrain efficiency for the 12T.

Yep, a combination of maschisimo and most importantly a sad case of "It's not what the pros do".

Yes, you'll never see a pro racer on a compact, and rarely one on aluminum wheels at that, but somehow a lot of guys love to hate it.

Despite the fact that as the gearing post about mentions, you're rarely even in gears that make a difference in all but an out and out sprint.

Funny thing though, show up to a group ride and someone may laugh at a compact, yet show up with cyclocross gearing (like a 46/38) and suddenly you're he-man?

Insecurity and attitude.

As witnessed in answers to this question, the very presence of a compact crank leads to lectures about how pro racers can ever use regular crank and ranting about how regular crank users "serpentine their way up high grade mountain roads because they thought they could push standard gearing but can't.

" This gets old pretty fast.

Question: At the cafe stop on my local Saturday ride a few of the guys we chatting and one guy asked an other if he was riding a compact drivetrain. The other guy objected loudly and they then joked with other members of the group suggesting they were riding compacts.  Why would the notion of riding a compact drivetrain attract such a response?

Why might a compact drivetrain be frowned upon?

The general consensus is that frowning on a compact drivetrain is due to machismo and, more generally, to people's dislike of change. Another reason to disapprove of it is that it is not used by professional cyclists. The idea of the compact drivetrain is to make pedalling easier. Both standard and compact drivetrains are fine and the choice depends on the individual cyclist.

There are some technical differences between the two types and compact gears tend to be geared lower than standard ones. They are not normally used by professionals, and can have a reputation as an easy option for weaker riders. This can generally be dismissed as machismo and misunderstanding of the compact gear's role.

This is mostly due to pride and misunderstanding of the role of compact gears, especially as they are not used by professionals.

Compact gears alleviate the high gearing of a standard crankset without the need for a triple. There are small technical differences and the right choice depends on the use and personal preference.


Well, this probably sounds gross and I'm kind of reluctant to say it, but I'm able to blow the snot out of my nose without hitting myself or my bike.

I try to only do it when there's no one around, but occasionally that isn't possible.

Basically, I turn my head so my nostrils are towards the ground and exhale forcibly through my nose.

I'm not sure it will work for everyone--perhaps I have remarkably straight nasal passages?

There's no great way.

The main problem is that inhaled cold air causes an automatic reaction in the nasal passages to create more mucous.

And to a degree simply having cold air blowing against the face around the sinuses

creates the problem.

Some people will experience this worse than others.

You can try using some sort of scarf or maybe a surgical mask over your nose to sort of warm the air going in.

The problem with this, of course, is that if your nose is running you can't wipe it without removing the scarf/mask.

Or you can use various drugs (OTC decongestants and nasal sprays) to try to control it.

Yeesh!

Why stop?

Spit down and to the side.

Keep going.

Main thing is to avoid spitting on the cyclist(s) behind you.

I really don't know why this is a problem.

Common sense usually works well. 2 Common Sense Rules Don't spit or blow snot on the folks behind you.

(Such as a pace line or other commuters) Avoid spitting or blowing snot on public places such as sidewalks or bike paths, etc.

On to peeing, I guess...

Out in the country, find a tree and go behind it...

in the city, find a bathroom at Starbucks or whatnot..

Keep your mouth closed when you breathe.

Holding the tongue against the roof of the mouth can make it easier to keep those passages warm and humid while you breathe through your nose.

Fisherman's friend or some other strong pepermint candy is a common remedy against such annoyances.

I like Fisherman's cause

it lasts quite long in the mouth - takes me 10 minutes to "eat" it.

Blow it away out of your nose while riding, to the side; Carry a cloth (handkerchief) to wipe your nose thereafter, so that it doesn't continue to be uncomfortable; If you come to a full stop, clean as much as you can with the two previous manoeuvers, so as to increase mucus-free time.

I guess I'm on my own not wanting to see people, whether pedestrians or cyclists, flobbing out phlegm.

Take one of @Idigas' Fisherman's friends and use old school cotton hankies.

Even one-handed should be fine in many places (possibly not whilst running a red).

(Also not good is the sound of phlegm snorting.)

bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/128/Tom Hawtin - tackline

I have the same problem, which I solve by blowing to the side, and then wiping my nose on my shirt sleeve.

When my wife found out what I was doing, she crafted a velcro "snot rag" that wraps around my forearm.

Works well and easier to launder.

A lot of gloves designed for running or biking have a little bit of fabric on the index and thumb specifically for wiping snot off.

You may want to consider using one of these, such as this one .

Question: Now that the weather's cold, my nose gets plugged up after about a mile and inevitably some runs down my throat and I have to pull over and spit. I feel like stopping all the time is probably confusing to the cars behind me and seek a better solution. What's the best (safest?) way to deal with this?

Runny nose while biking

Cold air when biking can cause mucus to build up, There is no great way to get rid of it but there are plenty tips for dealing with the issue.  A scarf or mask may keep the nasal passages warmer and therefore reduce the accumulation. Over-the-counter medication may help. Blowing the snot out of your nose as you are riding, obviously trying to avoid it landing on yourself, your bike, other cyclist or pedestrians. Running gloves usually have a special piece of material on them to deal with this issue or you can make a wrist band to use for wiping your nose. FInally, Fishermens friends are recommended for keeping nasal passages clear.

This is a common problem that affects some more than others, and cannot be fully avoided. It can be caused by inhaling cold air, so you can close or cover your mouth when breathing, take decongestents or use Fisherman's Friend to help reduce this, or carry a cloth to wipe your nose. Cycling gloves often have some fabric designed for this purpose too. Some people blow snot down and to the side, but other road users can find this disgusting. Use caution to avoid hitting people or footpaths.

There is no good way to avoid this, but it can be caused by inhaling cold air. You can close your mouth, take decongestents or use Fisherman's Friend to help reduce this, or carry a cloth to wipe your nose. Cycling gloves often have some fabric designed for this purpose too.

Some cyclists blow 'snot rockets', but this can be annoying to other road users and should definitely be done in a way that avoids hitting them or landing on footpaths.


I figured out a way to do it which was actually fairly easy.

This only worked because it was in my garage, trying to steal someone's bike like this would be crazy...

I took a hammer, and pounded on the bar.

The first thing that happened was the plastic broke away.

I kept pounding on it, until the lock just fell apart.

It took about a minute...

Note to self, don't buy a cheap lock next time...

Ideas:

If you still have any of the original paperwork or packaging, look for a lock code/number, you might be able to order replacement keys.

Take it to a bike shop and ask.

They might have the right tools.

They likely do this every once in a while A machine shop is sure to have tools capable of doing this The local police department will have the tools or be able to refer you to somebody that does (they have to deal with removing abandoned bikes) An angle grinder, or other rotary cutting tool with a metal-cutting disk Hacksaw

(electric preferably.

Maybe an extra blade)

Big bolt cutters could you close the lock without the key?

Cut away any rubber and slide a shim made from an aluminum can down to release the latch Is it a cheaply made lock?

Might be able to just beat on it with a hammer until the latching mechanism falls apart a small car jack.

Most u-locks lock on one side and connect with an L on the other,

so bending the U open will release it For the tool based approaches, I would be very tempted to work out some way with a vice or two to hold the lock and bike steady, to minimize the chances of damaging the bike.

Thieves also use leverage based attacks, but I believe those risk damaging the bike.

And, of course, having proper proof that the bicycle is yours is a good idea, too, since all those attempts to defeat a lock look suspicious.

A bit late now, but for the future it's worth knowing that it's possible to order a replacement key for most locks.

You'll need the serial number which is usually on the key or might be separately in the packaging

(it's not written on the lock itself for obvious reasons), so you need to make a note of that somewhere and keep it in a safe place.

We all lock ourselves out of something at some point.

At times it can be useful to respect friends 'with links to the criminal fraternity': cheaper with fewer questions asked when it comes to getting cars opened, D-locks removed and house windows opened. @Daniel

R Hicks See this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hsM88Wx8QQ Picked with a biro in a matter of seconds, not even 'Kryptonite'.

Some locks used to only come with half a dozen or so key variations so the security was assumed anyway.

With manufacturing outsourced to the Far East any brand, no matter how 'reputable' can have locks on sale that are not really that clever.

Sounds like you actually had a 'fake D-lock'.

Even the big makes foist these on the public, where the barrel is some bent tin inside a chunk of plastic.

Those can be opened with a moderately sizeable piece of wood.

Even if it was a real D-lock, have a look at how it would respond to the disc-cutter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XTYEcQAurs

What is that, 5 seconds?

This works with almost any type of lock:

Cost $0.

(optional) lubricate the lock with all purpose oil or graphite powder.

the lighter the oil the better.

get a similar key that goes in.

just find a friend with a ulock that still has the spare key.

get the spare key and file down the tallest teeth so that the key is a series of the lowest teeth insert key and keep applying pressure as if you were going to turn it to open the lock, and releasing the pressure.

keep doing this over and over during next step. get a small hammer and gently knock the key.

as if nailing it INTO the lock.

several times.

keep doing it.

does not loose your temper and apply force.

gently.

eventually, the key will turn!

the Technic is called Bump Key .

Bonus information: lock-picking is a nerd past time with several tournaments in the hacking community.

If you want to learn more look for the MIT guide to lock-picking .

Yes, that MIT.

Question: Some time ago, I stuck a U-lock on my bicycle for safe keeping, on the top tube below the seat. It's annoying when riding, and I'd like a way to remove it. I've lost the key some time ago, or I would have removed it that way. Preserving the lock is optional. What would you suggest?

U-lock stuck on a bike

When a U-lock is attached to a bike and they key is lost, there are basically two options. The first is order a spare key or take it to a local bike shop. The second it to deal with the issue using tools, either yourself or with the help of a specialist or the police. If using the tools yourself, it is important to be careful not to damage the bike. Obviously, for the tool-based approach, proof that the bike was actually yours would be needed.

If you have the original paperwork, you may be able to order a replacement key, or get help at a local bike shop. Some lock types only come with a few variations, so a similar key may be able to be filed down to fit. Destructive options include hammering, levering or cutting with a hacksaw, angle grinder or bolt cutters. It can be good to carry proof of ownership though, to avoid looking suspicious.

If you have the original paperwork, you may be able to order a replacement key or ask at a local bike shop. Some lock types only come with a few variations. A similar key may be able to be filed down to fit.

Hammering, levering or cutting with a hacksaw, angle grinder or bolt cutters are three effective ways to destroy locks. It can be good to carry proof of ownership though, since otherwise it looks suspicious.


If you're at home, use a floor pump.

They are very easy to use and have a gauge so you can measure the pressure.

When you're on the road, the quickest and easiest way to get you back on the road is to use CO2 cannisters.

They are not that cheap though and the CO2 will leak out of the tube faster than air (mostly N2), requiring topping up over the next few days.

More information is available on Wikipedia

If you're at home, I recommend an air compressor , there's no easier or quicker way than this.

Usually these have pressure gauges, and you can even (with some accessories you can) control the max.

pressure, just press and

it stops when done.

If on the road, the easiest way (and also the quickest) is: If near a gas station, use their air compressor (if available)

Otherwise, use a portable air solution (the quickest is the CO2, but mind the cost of the refills), there are really nice hand pumps also,not the quickest, but easy IMO.

Finally, and knowing that in my case I just need to inflate every three weeks, I would recommend getting newer inner tubes, maybe the ones you're using are loosing air quicker than normal?

(I mean, inflating every week could be too much, although I understand if you really want them to be tip-top :)

Answer:

Mini-Pump in combination with a Track Pump.

Read on for my experiences of 'Cyclaire' pumps...

I purchased a 'Cyclaire' portable pump as I genuinely believed it would be the answer to all of my puncture/tyre care problems.

It came with a neat bag that I could use to carry it on the bike and worked perfectly.

However, on a day to day basis I carried a mini-pump and over time I forgot to dust off the 'Cyclaire' pump, to eventually never even think about taking it out for longer rides.

If I was on tour with a group

then I might just dig it out as it does have a gauge and high pressures can be achieved.

This could be useful to maintain tyre pressures 2+ weeks in to an 'expedition'.

As it is, I recommend a small plastic mini-pump for the road and a track pump for back home.

The trick with the minipump is to get one where there are no extra gadget features, e.g. gauge, 2-way motion, telescopic barrel or any of that nonsense.

These features can make the pump liable to rattle apart, rendering it useless when you need it.

The simpler (but not necessarily cheaper) pump just keeps on giving.

The portable pump only has to get you home, you can ride on 20 p.s.i.

if that is all the minipump can give, back home

you can then get the rest of it in effortlessly with a gauge to keep it correctly inflated.

Maybe

the 'Cycleaire' strays from 'keep it simple', as does the CO2 cannister.

A workshop compressor is nice, but, unless you work in a bike shop and need one on the whole time, then you have to faff with it and wait for its cylinder to charge.

For that reason, stick with the track pump (with gauge) and plain-as-possible mini-pump for on the road.

If you really want a 'Cyclaire' pump then find a suitable scenario - either the long tour or, if you commute, inside your desk drawer.

Definitely a floor pump (with built-in gauge) for regular at-home inflations.

Fast, accurate, easy, can handle any pressure.

I've never tried the CO2 inflaters

but I assume they work.

Most mini-pumps suck -- too little volume for fat tires and too little pressure for skinny tires --

so for on the road I'd recommend a full-sized frame pump.

Another Option would be to use the air pumps for the cars by your local gas station.

I really like this option, because the pumps there have enough pressure for most mountain- and citybike tires.

If you have a Schrader valve, the air pumps will connect directly.

If you have a Presta valve, you can use a converter.

It weighs like one gram and will fit anywhere.

Eg, duct tape one to your seat rail.

Also, at least in the city where I live, there are gas stations all around.

Be careful thought, these pumps fill up a bike tire pretty fast!

So if your pass a gas station on your commute, this could be even the fastest option.

While the question is directly about easiest/fastest way to pump up a tire, it is worth noting that all the above methods work.

It really comes down to fastest.

Try benchmarking against a flat car tire.

This is a high volume, low pressure problem, which while different from a bike tires (low volume, higher pressure) is a good benchmark of speed.

It is actually an interesting challenge to pump a totally flat car tire up with a small frame pump, a floor pump, or a CO2 cart.

Alas, a compressor takes all the fun out of it,

Question: I find that I need to pump up my tyres at least weekly and am looking for how to make this quick and easy.   So what is the easiest and quickest method of pumping up a bike tyre?  As an example, I found this device recently. (forwarded to the best part)

What is the easiest and quickest way to pump up a tyre?

The easiest way to pump up a flat tire depends where you are. If you are at home, a floor pump seems to be the best answer. If you are on the road, there are a few options. You can use the compressed air at the nearest gas station, otherwise, use a portable air solution (the quickest is the CO2, but mind the cost of the refills), there are really nice hand pumps also,not the quickest, but easy to use. An additional recommendation is a Mini-Pump in combination with a Track Pump. Some cyclists think the Mini-Pump is not useful because it is small and low-pressure.

Practical options include floor pumps and air compressors for home use, and mini pumps, frame pumps, CO2 cannisters and gas station compressors for the road. Air compressors at home can take time to charge, while mini pumps can be awkward, especially when they have extra features. CO2 pump refills can be expensive, but they are quicker. Frequent need for inflation could indicate a slow puncture.

If you have to inflate your tyres often, maybe you have a slow puncture and should replace the tubes.


The coating is generally a form of wax, which is an excellent chain lube, and less apt to attract dirt than most chain oils.

All you really should do is wipe off (with a dry cloth) any excess.

If the wax seems excessively heavy you can add a little solvent to the cloth, to just wipe off the outer coating.

You want to leave the lube on the inside of the chain, where it's really needed.

Sheldon Brown says no (http://sheldonbrown.com/chains.html): This factory lube is superior to any lube that you can apply after the fact.

Some people make the bad mistake of deliberately removing this superior lubricant.

Don't do this!

It depends on the brand.

Most brands used to use a heavy packing grease that was very tacky and an absolute dirt magnet.

It's more of a preservative for the metal than a lubricant.

Some manufacturers have moved away from that type of grease to a lighter lube that you can use out of the package (Shimano moved to this lighter lubricant if I remember correctly, SRAM has not).

Regardless of brand, if the new chain feels overly tacky you can use your favorite lube and over-apply it to the chain then give it a thorough wipe down to remove the excess.

Your lighter lubricant will combine with the heavier lubricant and help remove it.

You can also use a non-water based solvent on a rag to achieve the same result, just be sure you re-lube the chain afterwards.

I always find it more worthy to ride the new chain as is, and clean it when needed.

Since if you'll need to clean it anyway, at least take advantage it is already lubed, although with a less-than-ideal lube.

I use KMC chains, by the way, and they are in the sticky end of the spectrum, but I didn't perceived any dust-attracting property, at least not more than any other lubed chain, wiped to remove excess or not

(I never remove the excess, but try to put just the "right" amount of oil, not an easy goal although...).

I would recommend leaving the manufacturers grease in place

but I know it's seems a bit over done on some chains.

If it seems like it'll attract too much dirt

you could take a degreaser like Clean Streak and spray some on a rag and then make one quick pass around the left and right sides of the chain.

Avoid getting the degreaser in contact with the rollers along the top and bottom.

I just got a new Shimano CN HG-53

and it was covered in a honey-like lubrication.

I wiped all that stuff of and used my own lubrication on the chain.

Worst part of the factory-applied lube was, that it was all over the place just waiting to collect all kind of dirts on my first ride.

I have learned the hard way that chain suck can also be caused by sticky factory lube on a new chain.

I followed Sheldon Browns advice to NOT remove the factory lube from a new SRAM chain, something I have always done in the past (and will in the future).

This caused terrible chain suck to the extent I had no confidence in the bike.

I degreased and lubed the chain with my normal go to lube

(Muc Off dry), problem solved!

Personal advice, don't clean it.

Let it collect dirt first.

Eventually there will come a time that you'll clean it depending on your use.

Then you degrease and apply your preferred lube.

Saves you time and money.

The wax on KMC chains can sometimes be so thick (perhaps been on shelf for a long time?)

that it causes sounds and sucking even on brand new bikes that are perfecty set up.

In these cases, degreasing and then relubing by soaking will IME solve the problem and improve performance.

Just saying I had a new SRAM chain installed by a local owner of a bike shop who said the factory lube is better than anything you can apply and relube in 300 miles (482 km or three weeks).

bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/39489/80's Cannondale original owner

Question: My new chain is totally coated in lube. I would never ride a bike with a chain like this normally. All that goop is just going to collect flotsam from the road and wear out the chain.  Should I clean this coating off the new chain too?

New chain is pre-lubricated, should I clean it before use?

Most people, including Sheldon Brown, are in agreement that the lube on a new bike chain should not be removed before use, The excess can be wiped off it is too sticky. The grease is far suoerior to anything to be found on the market so there is nopoint to remove it and lube with a different, inferior product.

Most comments and online advice suggest that the thick factory lube is better than commercial lubes, but others say that it is tacky and attracts dirt. The excess can be removed from the outside while leaving the lube in the internal parts where they are needed, or a degreaser can be used to remove the factory lube before applying the preferred product.

Some manufacturers add a heavy lube or wax in the factory that is superior to commercially available lube. Others have switched to a lighter lube. Some users say that the factory lube should be left after removing the external excess, others complain that it attracts dirt and should be removed before relubing.

If you choose to keep the factory lube, use a cloth with a little solvent to remove the excess from the outside. Otherwise use your normal lube and thoroughly wipe off excess.


With any bike the most important thing is "fit" -- is the bike too tall, too short, too much "reach", too little?

For a bike to have a good basic fit you should be able to stand over it flat-footed and have "comfortable" clearance at the crotch.

For bikes with lower than normal top bars (eg, many mountain bikes), you should pick a bike that would be comfortable even with the top bar at the "normal" height.

And for "real" off-roading you want more actual crotch clearance than for more normal riding.

But too much crotch clearance is a signal that the bike may be too small for you.

The bike should also be tall enough that you can raise the seat high enough to have your legs nearly completely extended at the bottom of your pedal stroke.

When riding, the "reach" should be comfortable for your style of riding.

For casual riding you want a shorter reach and more upright posture than for racing or aggressive off-roading.

However, for really tall, long-torso people a "casual" reach can be too short for even casual riding, forcing the rider to curl his torso too much, and short people, on the other hand, may have to use a bike that's a hair smaller than ideal to get the most comfortable reach.

When you ride it is it stable (but is it also responsive -- there's a trade-off).

And obviously you want a bike that suits your needs -- multispeed or not?

"Road" vs "mountain"? Upright or "aero"?

Can carry a load with a rack, or is stripped-down for lightness and speed?

Checking the bike over:

Everything should be parallel (except, perhaps, the chain on a derailleur bike).

Stand straddling the front wheel looking toward the back of the bike.

With the front wheel centered you should be able to look down and see the tire "disappear" under the frame tubes, with it not peeking out more on one side vs the other (which would indicate a warped frame).

Similarly, the front and rear wheels should be exactly in line, not one more to one side than the other.

Look at the derailer.

When the arm of the derailer is moved it should stay parallel to the wheel.

Look at the chainrings.

When the crank is turned, the chainrings shouldn't wobble.

Standing over the top bar, grip the rear brakes and move the bike forward and back.

There will be some "spring" in rim brakes, but there should be no "rattle" sensation.

Do the same with the front, only also feel for any looseness in the headset bearings.

There should be no detectable looseness in the headset.

Off the bike (and preferably with the bike upside down or suspended in a stand)

shake the wheels, feeling for any looseness in the wheel bearings.

Likewise shake the crank.

And, obviously, check for serious rust, things that are seriously dinged, scratched, etc.

A few scratches on a well-used steel frame is not a reason to reject the bike, though (unless you're looking for a "perfect" specimen).

One important thing is to give the bike a test ride, and feel it.

You can tell a lot that way.

Check the frame over well, look for dents, scratches in the paint (and rust, if the frame is steel) make sure the wheels are sound.

The components, everything.

Just give it a good look all over.

Anything broken should be fairly obvious.

Also ask a lot of questions

Only one thing to add to the other answers.

Be aware of a frame with a brand new coat of paint.

From experience I have found that this is done to cover defects in the frame.

In my case the down tube had a slight crack in it that the new paint covered over and after a quick test ride it

the crack was still not visible.

A couple of months later we found that the crack had opened up and the tube had to be replaced.

Lift the bike so one wheel is off the ground and spin the wheel.

Look at the rim where it meets the brakes, and see how much it wobbles.

Ideally, the wheel should be perfectly round, but this is pretty rare on used bikes.

Deviation of 2 mm or less is pretty good; 5 mm means it should get fixed; 15 mm means it's beyond fixing, and the wheels are garbage.

(This assumes the bike has rim brakes; with disk brakes, the tolerances are a little more generous.)

Check for loose spokes.

Grab a spoke between two fingers and gently shake it - if it's installed properly, it shouldn't move at all, if it feels like it's not firmly attached, then you have a problem.

Check the tires.

Worn-down tread is not necessarily a problem (unlike car tires), but watch out for cracked, brittle-looking rubber.

One thing I did not see already mentioned, you can ask the seller to let you have a local bike shop look it over.

Question: I've been looking at used bikes but I'm worried that I will get taken advantage of because I don't know a lot about bikes. Are there key questions or things I should look for when shopping for a used bike?

What can I do to be sure I'm getting a fair deal when buying a used bike?

With any bike the most important thing is "fit" -- is the bike too tall, too short, too much "reach", too little? The next thing to decide is type of bike: road or mountain. It is important to take the bike out on a test ride to ensure it is stable and responsive. A bike check should be carried out to ensure everything is in its proper alignment. Obviously, with a used bike, it is important to ask lots of questions about its history and check nothing is broken.

Ensure that the bike has the correct fit for the rider and the riding style. Check for correct crotch clearance and reach, and test ride the bike to make sure it is comfortable. Check the responsiveness and stability, and consider the intended use and riding surface. Think about gears and carrying capacity. Check for proper alignment of the frame, wheels, brakes and other parts. Check for looseness, wobbling or rattling, especially in the headset, cranks and wheels. Check for rust, dents and scratches, but don't worry about slight problems. Ask plenty of questions.


Drop bars in of themselves are fine for winter riding.

However, there are some peripheral issues involved.

Your average flat bars will offer a bit more control in slippery conditions because flat bars are much, much wider than drop bars.

A bike equipped with drop bars may not be the best bike for winter riding.

But properly configured and sized drops can be excellent for winter riding.

Handlebar Width:

Drop bars tend to be narrower than flat bars.

You can mitigate this by getting wider drop bars; the ones meant for touring are great for winter riding.

Keep in mind that handlebar sizing isn't an exact science, but you generally want them to be as wide as your shoulders.

A lot of road bikes won't have anything approaching this kind of width.

(Also, there aren't that many wide, stocky roadies.)

Tires:

Road bikes--which is where you usually see drop bars--often won't allow for the fitting of appropriate tires for riding on snow and ice.

Not the fault of the drop bars!

I'll say it as bluntly as possible.

The style of handlebars on a bicycle has absolutely no bearing on its suitability for winter conditions.

Personal experience here, but I do not see any reason why drop handlebars wouldn't be suitable for winter riding.

I have ridden extensively the past two winters with drop handlebars in ice and snow

(Madison, WI).

I personally find that in rougher and slippery conditions, I prefer riding with my hands in the drop position.

It tends to give me better control while both giving me better access to the brakes and lowering my center of gravity a bit.

Despite snow and ice not traditionally considered commuting conditions, many choose to continue biking through the winter months.

There are some good resources online with the best compilation I've seen being Chicago Bike Winter site. .

One caveat I will make is that bikes that traditionally have drop handlebars aren't viewed as being optimal winter bikes due to typically having thinner road-style tires.

Perhaps that is what the experienced cyclist was referring to.

Besides considering leverage as the only advantage of bicycling in icy and snowy temperatures, I would also consider the aspect of familiarity.

My first few rides in icy/snowy conditions were quite nerve-wracking: constantly sliding right off the shoulder into the chocolate mousse or the ditch.

I soon learned to avoid the treachery of the road shoulder and ride in the plowed area with the most asphalt exposed.

One of the things that I felt good about was that I knew my bicycle well, and I wasn't making flustered or nervous mistakes with hand placement.

So, I would recommend focusing on keeping your hands and feet warm during the ride so that you are not impacting your ability to react or distracted by your extremeties.

If it takes ziplock pogies and hand-warmers, or full-on BarMitts and Lake MXZs for your feet, being relaxed and perceptive to your conditions will make your ride safer than changing your ergonomics at the last minute.

And if you do ride in icy conditions and don't have studded tires, I would recommend those, too.

Seasoned winter cyclist here :-)

Drops and flats both work fine.

One consideration with flats is that you are more upright, and so less vulnerable to the classic "front wheel suddenly sliding off to one side" in the ice/snow.

Question: I've been told by somewhat knowledgable people that drop bars aren't suitable for winter cycling in snow and ice. Is there any validity to this? If so, why, and which style of handle bar would be preferable?

Are drop bars suitable for winter commuting?

Both flat and drop handlebars are fine for winter riding. However, there may be a few things to take into consideration. Drop handle bar bikes are not usually built for taking winter tires. Flat hanndlebars ma also offer a bit more control.

Drop handlebars are not necessarily unsuitable for winter riding, but they do tend to be much narrower than flat bars and are normally used with road bikes that can be less stable in winter conditions. Winter tyres are recommended as well as ensuring a comfortable riding style that allows you to respond to situations without changing position. The less upright stance can also make it easier for the front wheel to slip to the side.

Some riders prefer this style, but winter tyres are recommended as well as ensuring a comfortable riding style that allows you to respond to situations without changing position. The less upright stance can also make it easier for the front wheel to slip to the side.


Things like this are out there.

Look at the suppliers of mountaineering clothing as well as cycle manufacturers for innovative use of contrasting fabrics for ventilation.

I have an older model of this jacket: http://www.patagonia.com/us/product/mens-wind-shield-pullover?p=24991-0-425

It treats me pretty well--wind-proof front, but with fleecy breathable arms and back.

I believe that, in Canada, MEC carries Patagonia clothing.

Rivendell sells the MUSA Windshield , which covers the front of your torso.

This could be worn over a fleece base jacket.

In Europe, it is sold by Decathlon .

You can order it here (I don't know if they deliver in Canada).

I am using an Endura Windchill .

Even though it does not fit your initial description, I have found it excellent for autumn/early winter use.

It has soft shell fabric in front, on top of arms and shoulders and even more breathable fabric in the back and under the arms.

I have worn it with a microfiber liner shirt and a thin merino middle layer at approximately 0 degrees Celsius with good results.

In slightly colder weather (around -5C)

I replace the base layer with another merino shirt.

I expect to wear it for most of the winter with merino+fleece layers underneath.

Water resistance is excellent, it does not get soaked through even after several hours of moderate rain.

At the same time it breathes very well as it does not have a hard shell layer.

ski gear.

water prof, light weight, bright colors, and WARM.

my BURTON jacket even has a pocket made for an i-pod, and loops for headphone wires.

now how cool is that?

When I used to row I had the exact opposite top layer - a sleeveless gilet with a fleece front and a shell back (highlighting where water typically splashed up at you).

The gilet was long enough in the back to be able to be sat on while rocked over.

Given the hunched nature of the riding position when battling into a headwind in the rain, I've often worn this as the top layer on those inclement days.

I love Ibex stuff.

I have a vest similar to this - http://shop.ibex.com/Outlet/Mens/Momentum-Jacket

I own numerous ibex items and I would highly recommend them.

Wool on the back and the front is wind/rain resistant.

In bright orange, it is highly visible and the $135 price tag for ibex is a steal.

Question: Looking for a good fall/winter/spring coat. In my imagination it is: a hard raincoat type shell on the front of the jacket to block wind and fleece on the back to make it extremely breathable.  Looking to use it in Ottawa, Ontario in temperatures between +5C to -10C (although that is flexible, I wouldn't mind having to layer or figure out something cooler for warmer weather).    Bonus: It should also have some kind of reflective material.    Does this coat exist? Where can I find it?

Looking for coat: shell front, fleece back

Coats with a shell front and fleece back do exist. It is worth looking at the suppliers of mountaineering clothing and skiing gear as well as cycle manufacturers for innovative use of contrasting fabrics for ventilation.  Endura Windchill and Burton manufacture such items and stores like MEC in Canada and Decathlon in Europe carry them.

This kind of clothing is available, often using contrasting fabrics in different places that may need more weather protection, insulation and ventilation depending on the activity, and offering pockets for electronics and other gear. Mountaineering and ski clothing can be useful. Recommended brands include Patagonia, the MUSA Windshield by Rivendell, Decathlon, the Endura Windchill, Burton and Ibex.


Sidi make a wide fitting version of their shoes.

I have a pair of Sidi's and they have been the best fitting, most comfortable shoes I've ever found.

From their website : Mega sizes are cut with more material throughout, and a larger-volume heelcup.

Mega sizes roughly correspond to a EE/EEE width on the Brannock sizing scale.

Possibly still not wide enough for your needs

but they're worth checking out.

Yes, D2 Shoes will make you a custom extra-wide shoe.

Good info on the D2 Shoes website.

41 sizes, 9 widths available.

$975 price tag is tough, but looks like D2 Shoes will manufacture you an extra wide road or mountain shoe.

The widest off the shelf bicycle shoe I could find is the Shimano SH-M087GE Mountain Bike Shoes.

The GE version is a wide version of the regular SH-M087G.

I have 4E feet and the only shoes that I have found that fit are Lake

Once met a guy who had had his shattered foot "reconstructed" with screws, etc, and it was about half-again as wide as his other foot.

He was riding in custom-reconstructed cycling shoes.

He told me that the cobbler took two regular bike shoes, cut them apart, and sewed them back together as one.

As I recall (it's been maybe eight years), the shoes had cleats, probably SPDs.

(Of course, I have no idea who did the work for him, but probably an outfit that does "orthopedic" shoes.)

I found a cheap pair of shoes from Specialized that are awesome for wide feet.

The Tahoe From Specialized .

Note: this isn't a 'competitive' shoe; it's classified as recreational.

I ride a hybrid for fitness, and I wear 10.5 US 4E New Balances when I buy athletic shoes.

I paid $85 from a retailer

but I think you can get them cheaper.

The shoe works because of the construction.

They're built like Keen or Merrell sandals, meaning they wrap around your foot in a basket-like construction.

It's not a sandal though, in that the sides of the shoe have strips of leather and nylon that flex around the toe

box.(don't know if I'm using the right terms)

Again, I'm a fitness rider, and I need a versatile shoe for commutes and long rides.

And I've been wearing them on long rides for two weeks without any pain.

These have a pop-out section on the forefoot to accomodate a clip if you want to install one.

You may also want to check out custom=made shoes from BONT .

They aren't cheap though!

It's also possible, if you have the tools and the inclination, to make your own from a pair of non-cycling shoes that already fit correctly.

Ideally these should have a flattish outsole (so they don't catch on the pedals) which is also thick enough to recess the cleats.

You'll still ideally want the stiff insole from a cycling shoe (as here ) to spread the pressure from the plate the cleats bolt onto.

So, you need a donor cycling shoe whose sole isn't too narrow, but at least it doesn't need to fit around your feet for this to work.

Question: I have mutant-wide feet and it's generally impossible to find comfortable shoes for any occasion. For the most part my only options in life are New Balance. I'm cycling a lot lately and would like to take advantage of cleats. So, does anybody actually manufacture 4E shoes? I'd rather not try stretching them out with mink oil/boiling water/wooden shoe stretchers and the pain from narrow shoes can be pretty excruciating. My google-fu is coming up with a few dozen forum discussions with no real solutions.

Does anybody manufacture extra-wide (3E/4E or EEE/EEEE ) wide road or mountain biking shoes?

Extra wide mountain bike shoes are made by Sidi, D2 Shoes, Shimano, Lake, Specialized and BONT.

SIDI, Shimano, Lake and Specialized have wide-fitting versions of their cycling shoes, while D2 and Bont offer custom versions. This may be an expensive option though. Wide non-cycling shoes may be easier to find, and may be adapted or used with flat pedals.

SIDI, Shimano, Lake and Specialized have wide-fitting versions of their cycling shoes, while D2 and Bont offer custom versions. This may be an expensive option though. Using wide athletic shoes (e.g. New Balance) may be easier.

Wide non-cycling shoes may be easier to find, and may be adapted or used without cleats.


If you are asking how to calculate the maximum capacity of the chainrings and cogs, based on looking at the derailleur, then it's not going to be as easy as just looking at them.

Finding a derailleur to fit your chainrings/cogs based on just the chainrings/cogs is going to be a lot easier than finding chainrings based on looking at your derailleur.

HOWEVER, there are some standards for manufacturer, I have listed them below.

I have also included the formula to find out your capacities, since I misread your question initially and decided to answer the part you weren't concerned with.

I am not deleting it because, well, it took a while to type.

According to United Bicycle Institute: Determine Maximum Chainring Difference by subracting the number of teeth in the smallest chainring from the number of teeth in the largest chainring Determine Maximum Cassette Cog Difference by subtracting the number of teeth on the smallest cassette cog from the number of teeth on the largest cassette cog Determine Total Drivetrain Capacity by adding Maximum Chainring Difference to the Maximum Cassette Cog Difference Record

the Maximum Cassette Cog

(the number of teeth on the largest Cassette Cog) For Shimano: SS - Short Cage Road Double - Maximum Cassette Cog is 27 and Total Capacity is 29 GS - Medium Cage MTB/Road Triple - Maximum Cassette Cog is 34(MTB)/27(Road) and Total Capacity is 33(MTB)/37(Road)

SGS - Long MTB - Maximum Cassette Cog is 34 and Total Capacity

is 45 For SRAM: Short - Maximum Cassette Cog is 34(MTB)/28(Road) and Total Capacity is 32(MTB)/31(Road)

Medium - Maximum Cassette Cog is 34 and Total Capacity

is 37 Long - Maximum Cassette Cog is 34 and Total Capacity

is 45 For Campagnolo: Short - Maximum Cassette Cog is 26 and Total Capacity

is

27 Medium - Maximum Cassette Cog is 29 and Total Capacity

is 36 Long - Maximum Cassette Cog is 29 and Total Capacity

is 39 NOTE -

THIS INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY MANUFACTURER And

a great source for all of this is Sutherland's 7th edition http://www.sutherlandsbicycle.com/7th_Edition.html Hope that helps

You should be able to estimate the tooth capacity of a rear derailer by installing it on a bike, threading a chain through (and over a cluster), anchoring one end of the chain so it can't move, and pulling on the other end.

You'd first pull just enough to achieve "minimum" tension, then pull until the derailer was stretched close to tight.

Count the chain links that are pulled past a fixed spot

(ie, don't just count how many links roll off the jockey wheel) as you pull between these two positions.

You'd probably want to try this 2-3 times on different cogs of the cluster.

Definitely takes a bit of judgment, but should come within 1-2 teeth of the "right" answer.

Some nice detail in the big answer there.

However I should add that on my fancy road bike, I'm running a Shimano Ultegra 6700 SS (i.e. short cage)

Derailleur on a 10 speed cassette that is 12-30.

(I have a compact 50-34 at the front.)

Not that I do, but crossing the chain isn't a problem either, except for rubbing on the front derailleur.

So I don't understand the limits that Shimano give, except for - either covering their asses if somethign does go wrong- or more likely, wanting to sell more kit on the back of incompatibility.

I'm building a new touring bike and finding the capacity specs far below what I've used on the old one I put together.

The crank is 44-20 and the cassette is 36-11, which is a 49 capacity.

It works perfectly with old friction shifters, and an extra long derailleur screw.

and yes, this low gearing really has been useful/necessary with a loaded bike in the mountains.

I have found that the length of the derailleur from the bolt centre (rear axle) to the first jockey-pulley's outer edge (when the derailleur is in its lowest gear), must be greater than the radius of the largest rear cog (with the chain on it), i.e. an RD M592 9-speed will work on a 40 tooth maximum cog but not on a 46 tooth maximum cog.

Thank you

The manufacturer's specs are total BS.

The max cog sizes and capacties can he extended ALOT!

Flipping the B tension screw over can get a Shimano Short Cage RD up to 36t max cog size (vs 27t spec) and

39t is the real capacity (vs. 29t spec).

The Specs are leaning WAY TOO PARANOID on the safe side.

The manufacturers are TERRIFIED of lawsuits.

So in essence you are lost and at the mercy of blogs and youtube videos to find THE REAL SPECS.

Lacing up a chain so the chain doesn't drag or drags just a tiny bit in small/small combo, then flipping the B tension screw so the head of the screw leans against the derailer hanger stop and max extending it, and then experimenting with the max tooth count cassette cog that'll fit w/o the upper jockey pulley grinding the largest cassette in small/big and the chain not jamming in big/big shift will determine your true RD max cog size and total tooth capacity.

It's that simple.

Question: It's easy to calculate what capacity of a rear derailleur will be needed based on the size of the big and small chainring and the big and small cog. What about the converse question, how to calculate the capacity of a derailleur?  I was comparing some short-cage rear derailleurs I have lying around, and I noticed that the cage length and pulley sizes varied enough that they probably had different capacities.  Related question: is there a fairly comprehensive place to look these up?

How to calculate the capacity of a rear derailleur

There are a number of explanations on how to calculate the capacity of a rear derailleur based on the cogs and chainrings. However, they are extremely complicated and difficult to follow and a better solution may be to find a youTube video or a blog for a clearer picture.

It is easier to find a derailleur to match your chainrings/cogs rather than the other way around. You can estimate the capacity by comparing the radius of the largest cog to the length of the extended derailleur and by installing it on the bike and experimenting with the high and low gears that can be used without grinding or jamming. The official specifications are more cautious than the true capacity, so some users find that these can be exceeded significantly.


No Roadster lugs are available for the independent or small shop.

That is why I had to make them.

Roadster lugs are made [India, China, Taiwan and of course in the Netherlands], it is just that distributors like Nova and Ceeway do not buy them.

I find it amusing about the comment about TIG welding lugs.

Why lug anything really...

it is just for looks.

Stamped lugs are welded together :) Only the expensive racing lugs are cast.

I think you best bet is to try and find them in India or Taiwan and ask for a sample.

Try this link

If by "roadster geometry" you mean a slack (66-68 degree)

head tube and seat tube angle

I think you might be out of luck for anything commercially produced.

The cost of creating a wide variety of investment castings and distributing the product is high and the demand is minuscule.

You might look into TIG-welded custom lugs, such as those made by ANT bikes or by Mark Nobilette as described in Bicycle Quarterly vol.

no. 4 .

This ANT-built bike appears to be an example of a roadster geometry frame using custom lugs.

Most of the examples of bicycles I've seen in this style appear to have just very simple tubular lugs rather than anything particularly fancy.

The best place I've found is Henry James Bicycle supply .

They make frame building jigs, and supply most boutique US based frame builders.

Ceeway is a good choice in Europe.

Some lugs may need to be custom cast, or modified, depending on the head tube and seat tube angles you choose.

The fork rake will need to be fairly slack to match that style.

Nova Cycle Supply offers many framebuilding components including lugs.

I can't speak to geometries.

Question: The title says it all. I want to build my own frame and need lugs that will fit the roadster (e.g. Raleigh Tourist) geometry.

Where can I buy lugs for a classic roadster frame geometry?

Roadster lugs are not available to individuals or small shops. They are made in India, China, Taiwan and the Netherlands. Distributors do not buy them.  However, it appears they are available at Nova Cycle Supply, Ceeway and Henry James Bicycle supply. Perhaps the best way to get them is find a seller in India or Taiwan and ask for a sample. An alternative is to use very simple tubular lugs.

Some commenters say that Nova and Ceeway stock lugs, while others suggest that they are usually not made to order and can only be sourced from the manufacturers in Asia or the Netherlands. ANT Bikes, Mark Nobilette and Henry James Bicycle Supply are also good suppliers, but custom casting or modification may be necessary.

These are usually not made to order, so they may only be available from Asia or custom made to fit your frame and preferences.

Some commenters say that Nova and Ceeway stock lugs, while others suggest that they can only be sourced from the manufacturers in Asia or the Netherlands. ANT Bikes, Mark Nobilette and Henry James Bicycle Supply are also good suppliers, but custom casting or modification may be necessary.


I agree with the others, it doesn't seem like stickers should be a problem.

My helmet has stickers on the shell added by the manufacturer - clearly they were added make me ride faster.

Paint is a different story... Polystyrene (aka Styrofoam) and certain other plastics can be damaged by the solvents used in paints, like some spray paints.

I believe petroleum solvents in particular can cause polystyrene to melt.

Polystyrene is sometimes used in crafts and model building, so a hobby store might stock some polystyrene safe paints or be able to recommend a brand of paint that'll be safe to use.

As long as the material in the paint doesn't cause the helmet material to degrade, it should be fine.

While helmets do sometimes break apart in a crash, that's not a primary design requirement for them to keep your head protected.

The two things a helmet does to keep your head safe during a crash are compress (to absorb the impact) and stay securely fastened to your head (so the foam stays between your head and the hard thing the helmet is hitting).

Breaking apart is very much a secondary thing that simply sometimes happens after the primary purpose (compressing) happens to destroy the bits holding the helmet together.

If the stickers are a hard raised item that will compromise the effectiveness of the helmet, however, since the protrusion could be driven through the foam in a crash.

One of the concerns with stickers and paint to a lesser degree is that it may mask or hide damage to the shell.

Manufacturers reccomend inspection prior to every use and damage prior to or after application of a sticker could be hidden.

Stickers are fine... paint is the danger as mentioned already.

Some helmets are constructed using a thin plastic shell that is stuck to the foam base.

If you remove the shell and paint that seperately, then re-attach it you should be fine.

However, as you should get a new helemt every few years, to make the manufactures happy and to be safe because the materials break down over time due to UV light and other variables, I'd just go out and find a nice helmet in the colour that you want.

The cost isn't extremely high and you'd look very chic ;-)

About stickers: The Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute writes in an article: The Snell Memorial Foundation has informed us that the hundreds of crashed helmets they examined in a study done in the mid-1990's with Harborview Injury Prevention Center showed no ill effects from any of the stickers that had been applied.

But duct tape can compromise a helmet.

Details are in the article.

I personally wouldn't worry about most stickers and decals.

Paint can be more of a problem, or if you used the wrong clear coating over a sticker/decal.

It's a question of whether the particular paint reacts with the plastic shell.

Question: Would sticking stickers on a helmet or painting them etc make a helmet less useful in a crash? Not knowing the science of helmets but perhaps stickers in the wrong place might make it not behave how the manufacturer intended during a crash (not breaking apart correctly)?

Do stickers or paint compromise a helmet?

Sticker do not damage a helmet, parts of the helmet may however be damaged by the solvents found in paint. It may, nevertheless, be possible to find a suitable paint in a hobby store. Stickers do pose a potential problem in that they may hide any helmet damage, so the helmet should be inspected before the sticker is applied.

Stickers have not been found to compromise a helmet's effectiveness, but the chemicals in some paints can damage the body and sometimes the shell of a helmet. Stickers could be a problem if they protrude or are used to cover existing damage, and duct tape can compromise helmets. You could use paint that is designed not to react with the helmet materials or paint the shell separately from the more sensitive polystyrene, but a better solution could be choosing your preferred colour on your next regular replacement.

You could use paint that is designed not to react with the helmet materials or remove and paint the shell before reattaching to the more sensitive polystyrene, but a better solution could be finding your preferred colour on your next regular replacement.


In that order (my opinion, of course): Tires.

Bad tires suck your energy and are prone to flats.

Good tires can make your bike fly, sometimes even act as a suspension.

As an extra, tires aren't actually part if the bike, so if you have good tires, you can use it in other bike(s); Brakes and brake levers.

This is safety and comfort.

Bad brakes can make your hands sore, if you have to squeeze them too much to stop.

Good brakes give you much more control of the bike than anything else.

Good brakes are THE things that allow you to go really fast if you want/need. Saddle and grips.

These are contact points on the bike.

In the end, all the bike-rider interaction flows through them (and the shoes you use to pedal, but they are not part of the bike).

These parts alone can turn a very nice ride into a very painful one, and vice-versa.

I think if these are OK, it's possible to live with a relatively cheap bike, provided it fits and don't require too much mainteinance, which are also required for a nice biking experience.

In a bike that costs, new, only 150GBP, you have to ask where the savings will have been made and the easy first answer is: everywhere.

The frame will likely not be massively stiff and will be fairly fragile in comparison with its more expensive peers.

Steel is fairly forgiving giving a comfortable ride, but you don't want too much give.

The wheels will probably need attention too, expect the tyres to be thin and offer little puncture protection, the rims will be weak and probably lose their trueness relatively quickly and the hubs and bearings will need TLC quite soon too.

Expect the chain to be thinner and stretchier than you'd like and the rear cog to lose its bite quickly.

The brake compound will be soft and disappear fast and the cables won't hold their tension for long.

Obviously these are all worse case scenarios -

but given that you could spend the purchase price on just a pair of tyres, a pair of inner tubes and two pairs of brake pads - a bike at this price isn't necessarily the saving you might hope for.

In order to get from A to B, this bike would work, but if A and B are too far apart

and you're making that journey fairly frequently, then it might not work for that long.

But to make a real difference, well, send it back and spend a little more up front.

In general all new bikes make some concessions to price, but they'll be more than the sum of their parts.

The manufacturers pay less than you'd be able to buy the components in the shop, so you'd be better off finding a better bike to start with.

As the old Irish saying goes, "if you want to get there, I wouldn't start from here."

First thing to do is to get the bike completely tuned up -- wheels trued, bearings adjusted, shifters adjusted, brakes adjusted.

Changing out the brake pads (the ones supplied are often too hard or too soft) can often improve braking effectiveness.

Depending on the bike design, adjusting brake lever position may or may not be possible and may or may not improve riding comfort and brake effectiveness.

And, of course, adjust the seat and handlebar.

If the handlebar can't be adjusted upward enough or has the wrong "reach" (probably even more common with expensive bikes)

then replacement parts are available to fix this.

Good quality tires, appropriate to your riding style, are a fairly cheap investment.

The right seat (which is something of a personal choice) can make a big difference in comfort.

Your critical factors are comfort, stability, braking effectiveness, and ease of use (eg, shifters that work reliably, etc).

Plus basic bike "fit" to your body.

Many of the features of fancier bikes -- light weight, exotic materials, bladed spokes, et al -- are vastly overrated and will make little difference in your riding experience.

The cheapest thing to upgrade on a bicycle is the motor.

It costs as much as a bit of extra food and time.

Ride a lot.

Ride up big hills a lot.

Go as fast as you can.

Edited because some dumbass downvoted this most brilliant answer: None other than Eddy Mercx, (who won the Tour de France 5 times and once cycled 49.431 km in an hour), once said: Don't buy upgrades, ride up grades.

QED

Nice thing about cheap bikes is that they cost less than the sum of their components, and when you ride them, they get you from a-b just like the expensive bike.

The cheapest upgrade is to adjust and grease the bearings properly.

While doing this, the bearings with cages can be replaced with loose ball bearings giving more bearing contact points.

Adjust the wheels properly for true and spoke tension.

I you learn to do this yourself

it costs almost nothing, just need a spoke wrench, and a cheap bike is a good one to learn skills on.

I put chain adjusters on my fixie's rear axles to help align the wheel while setting the chain tension, there are some very inexpensive ones on the web.

Tools needed to work on your own bike are always a good investment.

I have to add another option to the answer.

The most cost effective way to improve a bicycle is sell it and buy a better bike.

This is almost always a better option for all bikes, from cheap to expensive, except custom builds.

As a rule a bicycle is worth a lot less than the cost of its parts.

Unless you can get parts for significantly less than normal prices, upgrading the entire bike is more cost effective.

If you have a particular desire to keep the bike and upgrade it, often the most cost effective upgrade is a donor bike, unfortunately this requires a large outlay up front.

The most expensive way to upgrade a bike is piece by piece as you can afford it.

Question: What are things to improve on a cheap bicycle that make a real difference? I'm looking at the bang for buck tradeoff.   The bike is an inexpensive Fixie/Track Bike (less than 150GBP).    11 kg steel frame  Flat bar  Front and rear V-Brakes

Best bang for the buck to improve a cheap fixie?

Cheap bikes are often not worth it as putting them right will cost more than the bike itself. It is often better to invest in a more expensive bike. However, if you must fix up a cheap bike, there are a number of ways to improve it. The major things to look at are tires, brakes, brake pads, a good saddle, adjust brakes, bearings and shifters, adjust seat and handlebar.

Buying a better quality bike may be cheaper than upgrading a cheap bike with expensive individual parts. Another cheaper option is to use parts from a donor bike. For the best value upgrades, good quality tyres are more durable, comfortable and efficient, and can be used on other bikes. Good brake levers and pads give you better control and safety. A comfortable saddle and grips will make a big difference. Proper tools will allow you to maintain your bike. Completely tune the bike and adjust the positioning of the seat, handlebars and brake levers if possible for the best fit.

Good quality tyres are more durable, comfortable and efficient, and can be used on other bikes. Good brake levers and pads give you better control and safety. A comfortable saddle and grips will make a big difference. Proper tools will allow you to maintain your bike.


Your local bike shop should be able to sell you some carbon gripping compound, for example Finish Line Fiber Grip.

Other similar brands are available!

I've no idea what the seatpost clamp is on your bike

but I'm always suspicious of ones that are hand tightened.

I have 2 bikes with carbon seatposts & Ali frames, I use Salsa clamps that require an allen key & I don't experience any slippage.

I have never used carbon frames or components, but I've had similar issues with aluminum posts in aluminum mountain bike frames.

In all cases the clamp was a hand tightened quick release type.

I also helped friends with this issue, some of them had carbon frames or seat posts.

Possible causes and correction applied where as follows: Clamp is not providing enough clamping force.

Adjust the clamp.

Almost always this kind of clamp has some quick release lever in one side, and a corresponding bolt or nut in the opposite side, tighten it a little bit at a time until problem disappears.

Seatpost or inside the seat tube is dirty or oily.

Debris, sand, mud, oil or even water between seat tube and seat post will create this kind of problem, also accelerating wear of both even when no apparent slippage occurs.

Clean both and make sure they are reasonably dry before putting them back together.

How does all the stuff get in there?

mainly the rear wheel trows it, it sticks to the seatpost and then, during cleanup it runs down into the seat tube.

Some frames are more prone than others to collect dust.

Shall this be the case, there are commercially available neoprene or rubber protections that seal the clamp area, but on the cheap you can use scraps from old inner tubes.

The quick release lever is producing too much friction: due to dirt and/or damage or wear, the quick release may be developing too much friction, giving the false feel of tightening, but the force you excerpt is being wasted.

Inspect the clamp and be sure it is not dirty or deformed, specially around the quick release pivot.

Friction surfaces of the quick release and their counterparts shall be clean, smooth and dent free.

Some clamps have a plastic, teflon or steel "cushion" that help these friction surfaces slide.

This must be well shaped and clean.

The friction surface of the quick release lever can be lubed with oil or light grease.

That also helps reducing the force required to securely tighten the seat post.

Dents and small deformations can be sanded down and polished with very fine grit sand paper.

There is dirt caught between the clamp and the neck of the seat tube: Dirt or other materials caught in there can also prevent clamp force to properly tighten the seat tube.

Clean it, the the inside of the clamp and remove any stickers or loose paint.

(Special attention with repainted frames here)

The inner surface of the clamp can also be lubed and it helps, but very little.

Clamp is misaligned: The seat tube has a cut part in the neck, this should be aligned with the clamp's gap (Unless some weird manufacturer says otherwise).

Check alignment, special attention if the clamp is an aftermarket one.

Wear: If your problem has been happening for a long time, chances are the seatpost or even the inner seat tube is worn out, thus having too much "play" between them and being too much flex for the seat tube to take up, so tightening it is not effective.

To be sure seat post and seat tube must be measured with a precision caliper.

Shall wear be the problem, hopefully changing your seat post is enough to solve the problem.

Final considerations:

Never use excessive force to tighten the seatpost (or any other component), specially with carbon components, you'll cause too much stress and reduce the time to failure of the component.

If the carbon gripping stuff does not work.

Try a collar with two bolts.

These are typically used for mountain bikes.

Obviously you need to ensure it is the correct size for your frame.

I had the same problem mating my carbon cyclocross frame to my carbon seat-post.

Carbon gripping compound helped and seemed like the solution, but when it mattered (that is during the race) the seat-post slipped.

You can always go to a hardware store and get a stainless steel spiral screw hose clamp.

Wrap the post with a couple of wraps of rubber from an old inner tube, then apply the clamp, tight against the existing collar.

Tighten the heck out of it.

Always a risk you could crush a hollow post

, I suppose, but once you get that thing on the post isn't going to slip down.

I had this problem and looked into it at the time and the carbon gripping compound as mentioned ny Nick H, is the way to go.

But there was also a "cheap a&%e" solution of using either hairspray or the spray-on adhesive for sticking paper together.

You spray some on the seatpost and clamp it tight.

The light glue in the spray provides enough grip to keep the post in place.

But its not so sticky that it stops the seatpost from being adjusted later on (and it can be washed off)

I have a Giant mountain bike with original seat and post.

It has been slipping side to side when I ride.

It is kept tight with a seat post clamp.

I was just able to get it tighter.

I needed to align the clamp with the opening of the seat tube (the receiving tube).

That is the part of the clamp which hold the screw or opening of the clamp must align with the crack or opening of the tube.

Of course you still need to adjust the clamp after.

I bought a PVC tube of the same inside diameter as the outer diameter of my seat tube.

I positioned the saddle at the right height

and I measured the length between the seat and frame tube in which the seat tube engages.

I sawn PVC tube to this length.

I just have to engage the seat tube in the PVC tube and the frame tube .

The PVC tube prevents the seat tube to slip more than the length of the PVC pipe .This works for me now.

This works for me now.

Question: I got a  Cannondale Quick1 2010 , with the seatpost made with aluminium carbon-wrapped.  The problem is that the seatpost tends to slide downwards, even if I squeeze a lot the snap ring; if the ground is uneven the seatpost slips completely.  Is there a way to solve this problem?  Many thanks.

Problems with a slipping seatpost

There could be a number of reasons for a seat post slipping. There is dirt or oil on the post or tube. The clamp may be dirty or deformed. A carbon gripping product may solve the problem. Apparently, a cheaper product to do the same job is hairspray. Moreover, Salsa clamps or a collar with two bolts may hold the seat in place. Finally, the clamp alignment should be chacked as this may well be the cause.

If there is dirt or oil in the seat tube or seatpost, there may not be enough friction to grip the post. Make sure the friction surfaces are clean and smooth, and remove small dents and deformations with very fine sandpaper. Carbon gripping compound, lube or the cheaper options of hairspray or spray-on adhesive are often advised, but may not be sufficient. A stronger clamp can help, but excessive force should never be used, particularly with carbon components. This problem can also be caused by misalignment of the clamp or a worn seatpost or seat tube.

Carbon gripping compound, lube or the cheaper options of hairspray or spray-on adhesive can help, but may not be sufficient.

This can be caused by misalignment of the clamp or a worn seatpost or seat tube.


In general, I don't know why one would do this.

Especially men.

Here's what Sheldon Brown has to say, and I tend to agree:"If the saddle is tilted down in front, the rider will tend to slide forward onto the narrower part of the saddle.

Women who are riding on saddles that were designed for men frequently tilt their saddles down.

This will relieve some of the discomfort from the saddle itself, but creates new problems: The downward slope of the saddle causes the rider to tend to slide forward, and this can only be counteracted by pressure on the hands.

Thus, poorly-angled saddles often are the cause of wrist, shoulder and neck problems, due to carrying too much of the rider's weight on the hands."

Lennard Zinn mentions that a "very slight" tilt in either direction may be optimal for some riders; but no more than ~2 degrees.

Basically the same reasons that Sheldon Brown mentions.

The downward forward tilt adds pressure on the arms, back, and shoulders due to sliding forward.

You want your "sit bones" to be on the widest part of the saddle.

If you slide forward, the pressure will shift from the sit bones to the perineum; and that's probably a bad thing.

There are special cases for tilting the saddle nose downward; but for the general rider it's not necessary.

I had some saddles that in some bikes were best with a slight tilt down, otherwise they would crush my perineum.

One of my current saddles (Brooks) is tilted nose-up, otherwise it is very uncomfortable because I feel thrown forward.

In the end, I think it depends on: Rider's anatomical shape; Saddle shape (in case of a leather saddle, might change over time);

Overall position of the bike (if you put the saddle on different bikes, optimal tilt might vary; Cruise speed of the bike.

If you pedal hard, tilt down might be fine.

If you pedal slowly and upright, most probably tilt down would be very uncomfortable.

Tilting the saddle forward relieves lower back pain.

Don't take my word for it; here is a clinical trial in the British Journal of Sports Medicine:

They tilt the saddle forward a lot (10-15 degrees), and show big improvements in back pain.

I had this problem and it worked for me.

If you look at the spine position drawings it's pretty obvious

why: tilting forward means your back doesn't have to round so much.

Though 10-15 degrees is a bit extreme I think.

5-7 degrees was enough for me.

I tilt the seat down slightly to make it much more comfortable for me to ride, When the seat is horizontal, I find I end up with pain from that narrow part of the seat pressing where it shouldn't.

Tilting the seat down means that I am only in contact with the slightly wider part of the seat.

The way I have my bars set up means there is no possibility of sliding forwards on the seat.

While my bike is a road racer, with bars and seat set up accordingly, I use it for commuting - about 35 miles a day.

Quite a few bike messengers tilt their saddle forward a little bit.

Personally, I do it because if you're riding a long distance, it will put more weight on your arms, tilt you forward, make you more aerodynamic

, it's better for speed, and it takes the weight off of your "sensitive areas".

There are some pretty interesting studies about riders with perineum numbness.

Tilting the saddle forward will help relieve the stress on the mentioned area, and put more of it on the sitting area.

BE CAUTIOUS

: this will put considerably more stress on the arms and shoulders.

Be prepared.

As with anything else, your body will adapt naturally after a while.

For time trialing, or other riding where the rider will be in a very aggressive position for extended periods of time, a slight tilt forward can relieve unnecessary pressure on the perineum.

I have what most people would call an extreme forward tilt on my saddle.

I use a racing saddle with a large cut out.

The reason I use this angle is to stop me getting pressure on the perenium.

I have been riding like this for around twenty years to the derision of "experts" wherever I go.

I recently rode the new forest epic.

My first sportive with no training in 6.01 with no ill effects and no nasty numb areas.

I sit on the top wide edge of the seat and the nose drops away at that point and makes no contact with sensitive areas.

My riding position is aggressive but feels comfortable with my body almost acting like a stressed member with weight spread between between balls of feet on pedals, hands on hoods and bum on top edge of saddle.

I understand there may well be loads of studies done on bike fit and there may well be a bible on the ultimate riding position, but maybe more time should be spent looking at "people"in relation to bike fit.

I love riding my bike.

I have a reasonably decent boardman roadbike.

I do not own a car

so I use my bike to commute, for recreation and fitness.

I love my wacky but effective riding position!!!?

Enjoy your riding everyone:-)

Question: I have seen a few people do this where their saddle was angled down a bit. Why would someone do that?

What are the advantages of angling your saddle down?

Tilting the saddle forward is generally done for reasons of comfort and especially for long distance riding. I straight saddle can cause back pain, discomfort to the perineum and crusch your "sensitive parts". Bike messengers often tilt their seats forward. However, it does cause the rider to slide forwards putting more pressure on the hands.

Some riders tilt their saddle forward to relieve seat or back discomfort, shift pressure to the hands or adjust to a more comfortable posture. Other riders find a tilted position more comfortable for fast riding in a more aerodynamic position. Tilting may result from using an unsuitable saddle, e.g. women riding with a men's saddle. Experts suggest that some tilt may help, but too much can create new problems.

Some riders tilt their saddle forward to relieve seat or back discomfort, shift pressure to the hands or adjust to a more comfortable posture. This may result from using an unsuitable saddle, e.g. women riding with a men's saddle. Experts suggest that some tilt may help, but too much can create new problems.

Some riders find a tilted position more comfortable for fast riding in a more aerodynamic posture.


The main thing is that the Presta valve is thinner, and takes less of a bite out of the rim.

This is quite important as the rims get narrower.

Further, the Presta works better with hand pumps in that there's no spring that the pump needs to overcome to get air into the tire.

Also, the Presta always has the fully-threaded body (which is possible with Schrader, but rare), so a nut can be used to hold the valve in place -- again, quite important with hand pumps.

Never had a bike valve stem break on me, that I can recall.

This primarily comes up as the pressures in the tires get higher.

With lower pressure wider tires, Schrader makes the most sense, if only because you can hit a gas station for some air pressure.

Presta makes more sense on higher pressure tires, since it allows you to pump in higher levels with a floor pump.

Per the comments let me try and clarify.

When you use a Schrader stem the valve is depressed by a thingy in the pump head the whole time.

With a mechanical constant pressure pump (like at a gas station) this is fine.

But with a floor pump where there is a pause between pumps, Presta works better because each time you release pressure, the valve head closes.

Then as you build pressure in the pump, when it exceeds the tires current pressure it forces the value to open, allows air in, and repeat.

Thus you can pump to higher pressures with it.

(Or at least with poorer quality pumps.

But if it bothers you, get the little one dollar adapters, and you can use a car pump with no issue.

Schrader valves are more robust, this is the reason why you see them universally in use for vehicle tires.

With Presta, you have to be more careful when putting in or taking off the pump nozzle or you might bend or even break either the rotating (locking) tip of the valve.

You could also go to literally any gas station to pump air to your tires if you are using a Shrader valve.

Presta's advantage is that it is thinner and the rim has a smaller valve hole in which case it makes the rim stronger.

This can be a factor especially in thin bicycle rims.

Another advantage of Presta valves is they can be made longer, a lot longer in fact than Shrader valves.

This is especially important when you have deep aero type rims.

I've also had fewer issues with crap clogging the valve with presta valves; as long as you remember to spin the valve closed you don't need a valve stem cap.

This is particularly important if you're riding in mud or dirt.

I run presta on both my road and mountain bikes for this reason.

I have used both presta and shrader valves, like neither.

I go for Blitz/Dunlop.

Easier to use than both others.

Maybe it is just a case of what you are used to,

but I think the Dunlop least fussy, easiest to use and least likely to fail.

Your rim will be drilled for one of the two.

Usually a schrader.

A presta (which is thinner) will allows fit in a schrader sized whole, but give more freedom for the valve to move around, often causing a valve wall tear and leading lots of people to think "wow what a useless valve".

A typical case of human error.

This can easily be countered with a schrader to presta valve converter, a cheap little bit of plastic cushioning which usually costs pennies.

Prestas are far more performant in terms of the amount of pressure they can hold, and the rate they can take air in.

Schraders are widely used not just because "they're the best" but because they've become a standard which is hard to break away from.

In addition to what others have said, many gas station air compressors won't push the tire pressure past 80 psi.

This is fine for cars where the tires are usually inflated to about half that, but no good for a road bike where you probably want 100+ psi.

This means that you're stuck using a floor pump, a frame pump, or a Co2 pump alll the time.

And as others have mentioned, Prestas just work better with hand pumps.

And if you're filling your tires to 100+ psi all the time, you might as well have a valve that works easily with the pump that you'll be using.

Question: It is standard for road bikes to adopt Presta, whereas nearly all else use Schrader.   I personally think Schrader are better:   I've had fewer Schrader valves break on me than Presta  No problems if needing to use car pumps  Have also seen long Schrader valves for deep rims  Less fiddly

Why are both Schrader and Presta valves still used on tubes?

Presta valves are thinner and longer, they are easier to pump, better with hand pumps and work better on high pressure tires.  Schrader valves are more robust and are used universally on vehicles tires.

Presta valves are thinner and take more pressure, which is useful for road bikes. They can also have longer valves, which can be used in aero wheels. Presta valves close without a spring when air pressure is removed, and can be attached more securely to a pump. This makes them preferable for use with hand pumps. Presta valves are also better at keeping out dirt without a cap. Schrader valves can be used with gas station compressors and are more resistant to damage, which is why they are used on most road vehicles.


Aside from weight, there is no real benefit.

Titanium is an alloyed steel, and has no limitation on weight or riding style, generally, although there are likely ultra light versions which do have limits.

Titanium alloys are typically made of Aluminum and Vanadium:

e.g. on a 3AL/2.5V Ti bike Frames for instance there is 3% Aluminum, 2.5% Vanadium and the rest is Titanium.

Main benefits of Titanium is no corrosion, immense resistance to fatigue (material failure due to cyclic constraints), and weight indirectly (i.e. stronger material allows to use thinner tubing, for bike frames for instance).

Titanium parts are usually very very long lasting, mainly due to resistance to fatigue and corrosion.

I have broken a Ti stem that held my handlbars.

Ti seat rail Ti frame (in 3 places now, alas)

So Ti is not magical, but this is on a 18 year old frame now, so not that surprising.

I have broken several axles, but steel ones have been sufficient for the last few years for me.

I suspect weight is the only benefit, however when you care at the level of a few grams, it seems silly when a full water bottle weighs almost a kilo.

(1 litre of water weighs 1 kilo)

The rear wheel (with a Ti skewer) on one of my road bikes would flex and rub against the frame when I stomped on the pedals or climbed a steep hill no matter how tight I made the skewer.

I fixed the problem by switching to a steel skewer.

No more flex and even the rear derailleur shifts better.

For skewers, weight.

That's it.

Ti skewers will make your bike and your wallet lighter.

Ti = really expensive = really light = usually racing parts = shortened lifespan due to the gram saving which actually weakens the parts for the long haul.

If you race and need every ounce shaved off and your sponser is paying

then they're great.

If you don't race or are paying your own way then you'd be better off spending your cash on something meant for longer life and trying to skip that post ride beer to save on long term weight.

It is light, and doesn't corrode.

The skewer doesn't take weight at all - that is all held on the axle.

The skewer just provides compressive force to stop the axle dropping out of the forks.

For skewers, other than weight and durability, one unmentioned advantage of titanium is its resistance to corrosion .

Rusty steel skewers can get stuck inside your hub, forcing expensive replacement which is much less likely with titanium (you should still grease them though).

Question: What's the benefit of using titanium skewer beside the fact that it's light?Is it strong enough to hold my weight?

What's the benefit of a titanium skewer?

Titanium parts are light, do not corrode and have great fatigue resistance, but they are expensive. They are great for racing but for normal use maybe not worth the money.

The main advantage is weight, although this is insignificant compared to other potential weight savings. Titanium parts resist corrosion and fatigue, and could eliminate potential costs caused by rusted and seized parts. Titanium parts are sometimes built thinner and can therefore be more liable to fail.

While titanium is stronger, parts are sometimes built thinner and can therefore be more liable to fail.


Markus Storck, lead engineer and owner of German carbon frame powerhouse Storck Bicycles, told me at a conference about 3 months ago that the best ways to tell if a frame is cracked are movement and time.

Movement, because a crack will flex if it's through the paint into the carbon, and you put pressure on the center of the crack, and time, because a crack will grow with time if it's more than paint.

If you are even halfway concerned with a crack, don't buy the frame.

It's just not worth the risk, unless you can afford to be wrong about the frame's ride-ability.

I hope that helps.

Why don't you take the bike to a Cervelo dealer and have them check it out?If

the seller of the bike is being honest with you

it shouldn't be a problem

Last year I had a horriffic crash with my Trek Madone going over 20mph and the only damage my frame sustained was a small chip in the frame.

otherwise the frame is perfectly sound.

If you can't feel it with a fingernail, the crack probably isn't in the carbon.

Another trick is to whack the tube with a quarter over and around the crack.

Do the same at a similar location that doesn't have a crack.

If there are any differences in sound, the frame has probably sustained damage.

For what it's worth, I bought a bike with very similar circumstances in December.

I used a piece of tape to mark the beginning and end of the crack, so I can watch for any expansion.

No movement so far.

The BB and head tube are some of the thickest carbon parts.

Listen to sound differences around it, but I think these areas would be some of the last places to crack.

Most cracks would occur either at a junction, thin spot, like middle of the down tube.

Also, if the crack you see has no marring, chipping or other damage on either side, its probably superficial.

Cracks caused by outside forces (impact) would leave other evidence on the paint, like scuffs, chips, etc.

Have a look at http://www.carbon-bike-check.com .

AFAIK there is no other way to find structural issues in carbon frames.

Everything else is just guesswork.

Even a competent dealer cannot look into the fibers.

So if the frame is checked on the surface only, i wouldn't buy it.

Question: I am looking at a carbon framed road bikethat has me concerned.On the topside of the bottom bracket,drive side there is a very small hairline crack in the paint.The seller states that it has been there for two years with no change.He was told by the dealer that it is just in the paint and a fairly common occurence.Anyone else experienced this?It is a three year old cervelo.The crack is 3/4 inch long and you can't feel it with a fingernail.

How to tell if a carbon frame is damaged or if the paint just has stress cracks

It is difficult to tell if a crack in a carbon frame is in the paint only or has gone into the carbon. If you can't feel it with a fingernail, the crack  probably  isn't in the carbon and if the crack you see has no marring, chipping or other damage on either side, its probably superficial. Cracks caused by outside forces (impact) would leave other evidence on the paint, like scuffs, chips, etc.  However, If you are even halfway concerned about a crack, you should not buy the frame.

A crack in a carbon frame may be serious without being obvious. You should have it checked properly by a certified dealer or not risk it at all. A deeper crack will flex and grow over time, so use pressure to test for movement and tape for growth over time. Cracks in the carbon can usually be felt with a fingernail, or will sound different from other areas when tapped with a coin. Structural cracks usually leave evidence on the surface, especially when caused by outside forces.