No 180 bends. Just over the knub and over the bolt and tighten. Just like in the picture. If there is a channel that appears to run under the knub thing, that is the alternate routing for STI and a triple.
On Jul 16, 3:47 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for that info, William. I'll look at it again tonight. > > Any idea what role that channel is supposed to play? My vague recollection is > that I'll need to bend the cable 180 degrees to go over the nub and through > the channel. If so, that seems "harsh" somehow. > > Yours, > Thomas Lynn Skean > > On Jul 16, 2010, at 4:59 PM, William <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Here's the photo of the cable routed correctly on a not-identical > > derailleur. > > >http://softsolder.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/dsc03170-front-deraille... > > > On Jul 16, 2:57 pm, William <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I agree it's not a problem, but from your photos it does appear that > >> you have your cable routed wrong. > > >> In that third photo, the anchor bolt thread into the derailleur arm. > >> On the arm is a bump, an appendage, a knubby thing. The cable is > >> supposed to wrap OVER that knubby thing. From the picture, it looks > >> like you have it neatly tucked UNDER that knubby thing. > > >> With the cable routed the way you appear to have it, a couple things > >> are going to happen. The potentially good thing is that your shifting > >> will feel faster. The derailleur will move farther with a smaller > >> move of the shiftlever. The bad things are twofold. One is you are > >> putting more bending strain on the cable routed that way, so it will > >> fail sooner. Whether sooner is 9 years instead of 10, or 1 year > >> instead of 10 is hard to predict. The second thing is that with the > >> faster moving derailleur geometry, it's trickier to trim out the rubs > >> with delicate shifter moves. > > >> I recommend you confirm that the cable is routed correctly, completely > >> independent of whether it touches that cylinder. > > >> On Jul 16, 2:41 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >>> Here are really grainy photos of my setup: > > >>>http://home.comcast.net/~thomaslynnskean/site/?/photos/ > > >>> first picture is when the chain is on the middle chain ring, (barely) > >>> showing the cable straight and clear > > >>> second picture is when the chain is on the inner chain ring, (barely) > >>> showing the cable bending around the black cylinder > > >>> third picture is simply showing how the cable is anchored, which is > >>> apparently the way the derailer intends to have the cable anchored, in > >>> that there is a slight "channel" under where the anchor bolt squeezes > >>> and the cable is lined up with it > > >>> As I say, the interference appears to affect nothing. So (especially > >>> knowing that the black cylinder need not roll at all) I'm fine with it > >>> as it is. And that's good, because I can't see that I can avoid the > >>> interference. > > >>> Thanks for helping me look into this! > > >>> Yours, > >>> Thomas Lynn Skean > > >>> On Jul 15, 8:36 pm, Ginz <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> I had a look and, yes, my cable touches the black cylinder as well. > >>>> I, too, find it a bit odd but seems harmless. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
