Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I have a 16.5" gear on my Atlantis, and when I'm touring I sometimes spend hours climbing long climbs using it, so I've already abandoned whatever gyroscopic effects are available with bigger gears. I've read that the gyroscope effect is not relevant for bikes-- didn't someone build an anti-gyro bike, with a second wheel spinning in the opposite direction, and discover that it was easy to steer? On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Ron Mc wrote: > somewhere below 20" gears, you lose the gyro effect of the wheels, which > affects your ability to keep your balance on a bicycle. > > > On Friday, April 25, 2014 10:27:22 PM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >> >> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >> >> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >> can climb anything. >> >> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >> knobbies. >> >> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >> learn how to climb on this new bike. >> >> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >> >> -- >> -- Anne Paulson >> >> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >> >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Anne Paulson It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
it may not be completely gone. Trail is the next thing that comes to mind, since long-trail has such a strong on-center effect, and short-trail bikes hunt downhill in a hurry. On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:42:01 PM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: > > I have a 16.5" gear on my Atlantis, and when I'm touring I sometimes spend > hours climbing long climbs using it, so I've already abandoned whatever > gyroscopic effects are available with bigger gears. > > I've read that the gyroscope effect is not relevant for bikes-- didn't > someone build an anti-gyro bike, with a second wheel spinning in the > opposite direction, and discover that it was easy to steer? > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Ron Mc >wrote: > >> somewhere below 20" gears, you lose the gyro effect of the wheels, which >> affects your ability to keep your balance on a bicycle. >> >> >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 10:27:22 PM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >>> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >>> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >>> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >>> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >>> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >>> >>> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >>> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >>> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >>> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >>> can climb anything. >>> >>> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >>> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >>> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >>> knobbies. >>> >>> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >>> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >>> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >>> learn how to climb on this new bike. >>> >>> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >>> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >>> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >>> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >>> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >>> >>> -- >>> -- Anne Paulson >>> >>> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I'm still sure it's a combination of these two effects that you're experiencing. On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:48:09 PM UTC-5, Ron Mc wrote: > > it may not be completely gone. Trail is the next thing that comes to > mind, since long-trail has such a strong on-center effect, and short-trail > bikes hunt downhill in a hurry. > > On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:42:01 PM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >> I have a 16.5" gear on my Atlantis, and when I'm touring I sometimes >> spend hours climbing long climbs using it, so I've already abandoned >> whatever gyroscopic effects are available with bigger gears. >> >> I've read that the gyroscope effect is not relevant for bikes-- didn't >> someone build an anti-gyro bike, with a second wheel spinning in the >> opposite direction, and discover that it was easy to steer? >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
here we go, the third effect is mass distribution (front-rear) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_and_motorcycle_dynamics Read a quick link on Lovely Bicycles that upright bikes are more difficult to balance a low speed than road bikes because of mass distribution effects. On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:51:55 PM UTC-5, Ron Mc wrote: > > I'm still sure it's a combination of these two effects that you're > experiencing. > > On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:48:09 PM UTC-5, Ron Mc wrote: >> >> it may not be completely gone. Trail is the next thing that comes to >> mind, since long-trail has such a strong on-center effect, and short-trail >> bikes hunt downhill in a hurry. >> >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:42:01 PM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: >>> >>> I have a 16.5" gear on my Atlantis, and when I'm touring I sometimes >>> spend hours climbing long climbs using it, so I've already abandoned >>> whatever gyroscopic effects are available with bigger gears. >>> >>> I've read that the gyroscope effect is not relevant for bikes-- didn't >>> someone build an anti-gyro bike, with a second wheel spinning in the >>> opposite direction, and discover that it was easy to steer? >>> >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
obviously not anne'# Ron Mc wrote: >somewhere below 20" gears, you lose the gyro effect of the wheels, >which >affects your ability to keep your balance on a bicycle. > >On Friday, April 25, 2014 10:27:22 PM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >> >> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; >my >> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. > >> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I >couldn't >> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem >riding at >> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something >ridiculously >> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >> >> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now >can >> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the >Krampus >> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the >world, I >> can climb anything. >> >> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >frustrating. >> There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the Atlantis, >with >> smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the knobbies. >> >> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom >bracket >> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR >(like >> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just >need to >> learn how to climb on this new bike. >> >> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able >to go >> down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and >that has >> proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >Wow, >> you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >the >> brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of >skidding. >> >> -- >> -- Anne Paulson >> >> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >> >> >> > >-- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. >Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
perversity rears its ugly head in the form of the Bullwinkle Show. Patrick, your evaluation is right-on. How Grant builds a frame that puts you on the right mass distribution for low-speed control. On Saturday, April 26, 2014 4:28:38 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > obviously not anne'# > > Ron Mc > wrote: >> >> somewhere below 20" gears, you lose the gyro effect of the wheels, which >> affects your ability to keep your balance on a bicycle. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound per wheel isn't nothing. Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill I need to pick up. On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller wrote: > One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" > MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an > even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have > yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On > my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ > bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff > equipped bike? > Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, > especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my > cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. > > One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on steep > sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow you to > climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose for that > purpose. > > Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb > with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe > gain a better overall ride. > > Good Luck > > ~mike > Carlsbad Ca. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Anne Paulson It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Anne, Standing while climbing took me 18 months to master. No doubt I've a steep learning curve to climb with my vertigo as part of that. I read and reread and read again Grant's description of how to do it in "Just Ride." Eventually I got there, just doing it for as long as I could, especially on parts I didn't "have" to to help with the learning curve. It's still a last resort before I break out the LCG as it uses more brain energy than remaining in the saddle (and on day rides, I often need the weight in the saddle for rear-wheel traction). Another thing that may help you is doing deep bend squats. Do them in slow motion. Add weight over your shoulders (I use a rock left over from building our house) once you find 10+squats at slow speed easy (start at full speed if slo-mo is too hard, then build up to slo-mo and then weight). I found doing so meant I climb better for much, much longer and I often am a gear or two faster than before I started it. With abandon, Patrick On Saturday, April 26, 2014 8:00:01 AM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: > > Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's > just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about > trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" > wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy > tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing. > > Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong > attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet > become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill > I need to pick up. > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller > > > wrote: > >> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" >> MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an >> even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have >> yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On >> my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ >> bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >> equipped bike? >> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >> >> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >> for that purpose. >> >> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >> gain a better overall ride. >> >> Good Luck >> >> ~mike >> Carlsbad Ca. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Try leaving things as they are and give it three months of riding. It takes a while to get used to new equipment, especially when it is quite different to what a person might be more accustomed to. I bet you end up really enjoying that bike with those big tires and wheels. IanA/Canada. On Saturday, April 26, 2014 8:00:01 AM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: > > Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's > just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about > trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" > wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy > tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing. > > Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong > attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet > become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill > I need to pick up. > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller > > > wrote: > >> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" >> MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an >> even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have >> yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On >> my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ >> bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >> equipped bike? >> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >> >> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >> for that purpose. >> >> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >> gain a better overall ride. >> >> Good Luck >> >> ~mike >> Carlsbad Ca. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Anne, You have a wonderful new bike and one of its unique features is the ability to accommodate really big tires. I'd think you would want to make sure lower gearing isn't the answer before abandoning that big big rubber. When I stop on a hill because "It feels like I just can't pedal any more" and "I'm breathing pretty darn hard", I find it's because I need to to go slower to stay within my capabilities. Sometimes its because I have been riding too hard and not pacing myself, sometimes its because my lowest gear isn't low enough. When I am stopped by control problems that typically means a quick foot down because I was falling over. Sometimes the two are related because I am pedaling so slow trying to go slow that I have to push so hard on the pedals (and therefore pull on the bars) that it makes it harder to control the bike. Did the gear inches you mentioned in your original post account for the actual measured rolling circumference of the rear wheels on your bikes with the pressures you use and loaded the way you ride them? I think the main reason big wheels seem harder to push up a hill is because the true gear development is larger. If you have, or can borrow, a gps you might check how fast you are going up those steep inclines on the Atlanti vs the new bike. At walking speeds a very small difference is still a significant fraction. Beware the clarion call of the weight sirens. It's true that "Half a pound per wheel isn't nothing", it is a pound per bike. But thats less than a full water bottle (at least mine come in at ~1.5lbs). If you and the bike are ~150lbs and you save 1lb, that's less than 1 percent. If you are on a climb where your effort is all going into raising the weight and you can go 2.5mph that savings will net you less than a tenth of a mile per hour. However if you go 2.25mph on your atlanti, and the gearing on you new bike induces you to go 2.75mph thats a 20% difference in effort. If you want to look into geometry variations not related to steering/control, measure the chain stays and front center. If the bottom bracket is relatively further back on one of the bikes that would probably translate to a further aft center of gravity (and more propensity to float the front end on a steep incline). Or you could just use a bathroom scale and some books or blocks of wood to measure your CGs directly. Hope you get it all sorted out satisfactorily soon ted On Saturday, April 26, 2014 7:00:01 AM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: > > Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's > just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about > trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" > wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy > tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing. > > Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong > attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet > become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill > I need to pick up. > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller > > > wrote: > >> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" >> MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an >> even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have >> yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On >> my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ >> bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >> equipped bike? >> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >> >> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >> for that purpose. >> >> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >> gain a better overall ride. >> >> Good Luck >> >> ~mike >> Carlsbad Ca. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message b
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I really think you are feeling the effect of wide, heavy tires/rims and the fact it is going to take more juice to get those up a hill. I bet you bomb down the hill quicker on the surly because of the same reason. So, you need more juice to get the bike up the hill and how do you get that? Well, you get stronger by working on it and/or just stand up and use your body weight to push on the pedals. You will get there and get that bike up the hill, but it is going to take some practice. Nothing wrong with stopping and pushing the bike though. On Saturday, April 26, 2014 9:00:01 AM UTC-5, Anne Paulson wrote: > > Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's > just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about > trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" > wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy > tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing. > > Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong > attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet > become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill > I need to pick up. > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller > > > wrote: > >> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" >> MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an >> even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have >> yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On >> my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ >> bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >> equipped bike? >> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >> >> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >> for that purpose. >> >> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >> gain a better overall ride. >> >> Good Luck >> >> ~mike >> Carlsbad Ca. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Good point Ted. There is the simplest way I knw to directly compare gear inches or ratios, and no GPS required. (Sheldon, of course): http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/ With abandon, Patrick On Saturday, April 26, 2014 9:07:09 AM UTC-6, ted wrote: > > Anne, > > You have a wonderful new bike and one of its unique features is the > ability to accommodate really big tires. I'd think you would want to make > sure lower gearing isn't the answer before abandoning that big big rubber. > > When I stop on a hill because "It feels like I just can't pedal any more" > and "I'm breathing pretty darn hard", I find it's because I need to to go > slower to stay within my capabilities. Sometimes its because I have been > riding too hard and not pacing myself, sometimes its because my lowest gear > isn't low enough. When I am stopped by control problems that typically > means a quick foot down because I was falling over. Sometimes the two are > related because I am pedaling so slow trying to go slow that I have to push > so hard on the pedals (and therefore pull on the bars) that it makes it > harder to control the bike. > > Did the gear inches you mentioned in your original post account for the > actual measured rolling circumference of the rear wheels on your bikes > with the pressures you use and loaded the way you ride them? I think the > main reason big wheels seem harder to push up a hill is because the true > gear development is larger. If you have, or can borrow, a gps you might > check how fast you are going up those steep inclines on the Atlanti vs the > new bike. At walking speeds a very small difference is still a significant > fraction. > > Beware the clarion call of the weight sirens. It's true that "Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing", it is a pound per bike. But thats less than a > full water bottle (at least mine come in at ~1.5lbs). If you and the bike > are ~150lbs and you save 1lb, that's less than 1 percent. If you are on a > climb where your effort is all going into raising the weight and you can go > 2.5mph that savings will net you less than a tenth of a mile per hour. > However if you go 2.25mph on your atlanti, and the gearing on you new bike > induces you to go 2.75mph thats a 20% difference in effort. > > If you want to look into geometry variations not related to > steering/control, measure the chain stays and front center. If the bottom > bracket is relatively further back on one of the bikes that would probably > translate to a further aft center of gravity (and more propensity to float > the front end on a steep incline). Or you could just use a bathroom scale > and some books or blocks of wood to measure your CGs directly. > > Hope you get it all sorted out satisfactorily soon > ted > > > On Saturday, April 26, 2014 7:00:01 AM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >> Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's >> just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about >> trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" >> wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy >> tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound >> per wheel isn't nothing. >> >> Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong >> attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet >> become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill >> I need to pick up. >> >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller >> wrote: >> >>> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to >>> 29" MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use >>> an even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I >>> have yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. >>> On my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a >>> 29+ bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >>> equipped bike? >>> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >>> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >>> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >>> >>> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >>> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >>> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >>> for that purpose. >>> >>> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >>> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >>> gain a better overall ride. >>> >>> Good Luck >>> >>> ~mike >>> Carlsbad Ca. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Patrick, True indeed, As Always Sheldon Has The Answer. But often people calculate gears without accurately accounting for the true circumference of the wheel (I didn't see 29x3.0 in the pull down menu). Also the remaining variable driving speed, and therefore effort, is pedaling cadence. The calculator won't tell you how fast you pedal. A very fundamental parameter that's probably relevant to Anne's situation is how fast she is trying to go up those climbs on her different bikes. If she has access to one, a GPS is a simple and direct way to measure that. Of course there are other ways to go about it, and I certainly wouldn't buy one just to use it once or twice. regards ted On Saturday, April 26, 2014 8:15:31 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote: > > Good point Ted. There is the simplest way I knw to directly compare gear > inches or ratios, and no GPS required. (Sheldon, of course): > http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/ > > With abandon, > Patrick > > On Saturday, April 26, 2014 9:07:09 AM UTC-6, ted wrote: >> >> Anne, >> >> You have a wonderful new bike and one of its unique features is the >> ability to accommodate really big tires. I'd think you would want to make >> sure lower gearing isn't the answer before abandoning that big big rubber. >> >> When I stop on a hill because "It feels like I just can't pedal any more" >> and "I'm breathing pretty darn hard", I find it's because I need to to go >> slower to stay within my capabilities. Sometimes its because I have been >> riding too hard and not pacing myself, sometimes its because my lowest gear >> isn't low enough. When I am stopped by control problems that typically >> means a quick foot down because I was falling over. Sometimes the two are >> related because I am pedaling so slow trying to go slow that I have to push >> so hard on the pedals (and therefore pull on the bars) that it makes it >> harder to control the bike. >> >> Did the gear inches you mentioned in your original post account for the >> actual measured rolling circumference of the rear wheels on your bikes >> with the pressures you use and loaded the way you ride them? I think the >> main reason big wheels seem harder to push up a hill is because the true >> gear development is larger. If you have, or can borrow, a gps you might >> check how fast you are going up those steep inclines on the Atlanti vs the >> new bike. At walking speeds a very small difference is still a significant >> fraction. >> >> Beware the clarion call of the weight sirens. It's true that "Half a >> pound per wheel isn't nothing", it is a pound per bike. But thats less than >> a full water bottle (at least mine come in at ~1.5lbs). If you and the bike >> are ~150lbs and you save 1lb, that's less than 1 percent. If you are on a >> climb where your effort is all going into raising the weight and you can go >> 2.5mph that savings will net you less than a tenth of a mile per hour. >> However if you go 2.25mph on your atlanti, and the gearing on you new bike >> induces you to go 2.75mph thats a 20% difference in effort. >> >> If you want to look into geometry variations not related to >> steering/control, measure the chain stays and front center. If the bottom >> bracket is relatively further back on one of the bikes that would probably >> translate to a further aft center of gravity (and more propensity to float >> the front end on a steep incline). Or you could just use a bathroom scale >> and some books or blocks of wood to measure your CGs directly. >> >> Hope you get it all sorted out satisfactorily soon >> ted >> >> >> On Saturday, April 26, 2014 7:00:01 AM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: >>> >>> Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's >>> just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about >>> trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" >>> wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy >>> tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound >>> per wheel isn't nothing. >>> >>> Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong >>> attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet >>> become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill >>> I need to pick up. >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller >> > wrote: >>> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff equipped bike? Of course it takes more power
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I've been wondering lately if there is such a thing as too big a tire. A point when the height or circumference is just too big, and some negative things start happening. 29+ bikes haven't been around too long given the history of bicycles. If I recall a BQ article correctly, years of innovation in bicycles seem to have the optimum tire diameter/height at around 680-690mm. That's about the typical 700X28C, 650X40B, 26X2.25" wheel sizes that have been standardized over the last 100 or so years. Cheers, David "it isn't a contest. Just enjoy the ride." - Seth Vidal On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Jeremy Till wrote: > I don't want to add just another voice in the peanut gallery, but I have > had similar experiences recently. I bought my first "real" mountain bike > earlier this year, a pretty standard aluminum hardtail 29er from Raleigh. > By "pretty standard," it's geometry is the kind of mass-market stuff that > Rivendell geometry departs from: steepish seat tube angle, short > chainstays, long top tube, relatively low bars. To keep the reach in > check, I even sized down a size from the recommended, very non-Riv indeed. > Previous to this, a lot of my off-road exploring had been done on a Long > Haul Trucker with Albatross bars, so probably somewhat similar to your > experience on your Atlantis. > > At first, I was pleasantly surprised by the climbing ability of the > Raleigh, but in retrospect I think it was the fact that it had the lowest > gears of any bike I've ridden recently, as well as the traction afforded by > 29x2" knobbies versus the 700x42 file treads on the LHT. On longer rides > with a lot of climbing, however, I definitely get worn out on that bike. I > think a lot of this is down to the riding position: the wide, low flat bars > force me into one position, with very little options for changing my hand > position or back angle. I plan to cut down the bars and add Ergon grips > with built-in barends to address some of this. However, especially > off-road, not only does the component spec of the bike force me into this > low position, but its geometry demands it in order to maintain traction and > handling. Specifically, the short chainstays and long front center/top > tube force a certain approach to climbing. I need to lean low over the > handlebars and sometimes slide forward on the seat in order to keep > traction on that front wheel and be able to properly direct the bike. The > times that I've had to put a foot down going uphill on this bike, it hasn't > been because I've run out of gas, but because the front wheel has started > to wander off my line and I haven't been able to reign it back in. > > If you read mainstream mountain biking mags and bike reviews, right now > there is kind of a self-reinforcing obbession with this type of geometry on > the part of designers and reviewers. People are obsessed with short > chainstays, long front centers, short stems; they describe such geometry as > "aggressive," "playful," and "fun" (that "aggressive" and "playful" are > synonyms for each other is indicative of the general techno-cultural > problem with mountain biking these days). And I think this is further > reinforced by the type of riding featured in MTB magazines and videos: high > speed, big jumps, riding up and down ledgy technical features. All of this > leaves those of us who want to get away for a few hours, to enjoy the > escape and beauty of riding trails for a few hours but not feel like we're > riding out of the depth of our bicycles, out in the cold somewhat. > > If you look at the Surly marketing around the Krampus, you'll see that > they designed this bike very much in the mainstream conception of "fun" > geometry: short chainstays, even with giant tires; long front center/TT, > short stem, low-ish handlebars. A lot of the early photos of the bike > featured guys wheelieing them and boosting them off jumps. I wonder if > optimizing the geometry around this type of riding has made it not as ideal > for your type of riding, specifically grinding up long, steep climbs. > Perhaps an ECR, with it's touring geometry ,might be different. I've never > ridden one, and I've only ridden someone else's Krampus (Tyler from Cycle > Monkey's, coincidentally) around the block, so I'm not really in a position > to say. Certainly, I'm intrigued by the ECR myself; even though I don't > really see myself doing long bikepacking tours, the fact that it's > geometry, at least on paper, might allow a position closer to that of my > LHT, has me interested. I'm also super interested to try the > long-chainstayed Hunqapillar proto featured on the BLUG a few weeks ago: > high handlebars at a comfortable reach, relatively slack seat tube, long > chainstays to keep everything planted even while maintaining an upright > riding position. > > For the moment, I've accepted that my current MTB is less than ideal from > a fit perspective, and I appreciate it more for its ability to h
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Speaking of rear stay length, I'm slowly coming to terms with the idea of 430mm stays being better for me when climbing. I'm finding the typical Rivish length of 450mm leads to a lot of slipping when climbing, while 430mm maintains traction up the hill. That's on similar 40mm-ish tires, same 72^ seat tube, 595mm top tube, etc. Yes I can balance and move around to keep the 450mm bike planted, but why would I want to do that? I haven't fully committed to the idea of the shorter stays, but they're looking like positives to me. Cheers, David "it isn't a contest. Just enjoy the ride." - Seth Vidal On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 9:33 AM, ted wrote: > Jeremy wrote: > "... And I think this is further reinforced by the type of riding > featured in MTB magazines and videos: high speed, big jumps, riding up and > down ledgy technical features. ..." > > To which I would like to add (despite veering off topic a bit), this is > why I don't think of, or refer to, my quasi moto shod, bullmoose sporting, > bombadill as a mountain bike. Rather it's my park bike, or off road bike or > some such. Mountain biking as it's typically portrayed in marketing and > media doesn't interest me at all (at least not as something to do > personally). > > Closer to on topic, even with my bombadil's longish chain stays I find the > front end stays down better with a few things in a small trunk sack on a > mini front rack than with more stuff in a seat bag. With short chain stays > I'd think one would have to climb steep stuff standing forward over the > bars to keep enough weight far enough in front of the rear hub. > > > On Saturday, April 26, 2014 9:00:48 AM UTC-7, Jeremy Till wrote: >> >> I don't want to add just another voice in the peanut gallery, but I have >> had similar experiences recently. I bought my first "real" mountain bike >> earlier this year, a pretty standard aluminum hardtail 29er from Raleigh. >> By "pretty standard," it's geometry is the kind of mass-market stuff that >> Rivendell geometry departs from: steepish seat tube angle, short >> chainstays, long top tube, relatively low bars. To keep the reach in >> check, I even sized down a size from the recommended, very non-Riv indeed. >> Previous to this, a lot of my off-road exploring had been done on a Long >> Haul Trucker with Albatross bars, so probably somewhat similar to your >> experience on your Atlantis. >> >> At first, I was pleasantly surprised by the climbing ability of the >> Raleigh, but in retrospect I think it was the fact that it had the lowest >> gears of any bike I've ridden recently, as well as the traction afforded by >> 29x2" knobbies versus the 700x42 file treads on the LHT. On longer rides >> with a lot of climbing, however, I definitely get worn out on that bike. I >> think a lot of this is down to the riding position: the wide, low flat bars >> force me into one position, with very little options for changing my hand >> position or back angle. I plan to cut down the bars and add Ergon grips >> with built-in barends to address some of this. However, especially >> off-road, not only does the component spec of the bike force me into this >> low position, but its geometry demands it in order to maintain traction and >> handling. Specifically, the short chainstays and long front center/top >> tube force a certain approach to climbing. I need to lean low over the >> handlebars and sometimes slide forward on the seat in order to keep >> traction on that front wheel and be able to properly direct the bike. The >> times that I've had to put a foot down going uphill on this bike, it hasn't >> been because I've run out of gas, but because the front wheel has started >> to wander off my line and I haven't been able to reign it back in. >> >> If you read mainstream mountain biking mags and bike reviews, right now >> there is kind of a self-reinforcing obbession with this type of geometry on >> the part of designers and reviewers. People are obsessed with short >> chainstays, long front centers, short stems; they describe such geometry as >> "aggressive," "playful," and "fun" (that "aggressive" and "playful" are >> synonyms for each other is indicative of the general techno-cultural >> problem with mountain biking these days). And I think this is further >> reinforced by the type of riding featured in MTB magazines and videos: high >> speed, big jumps, riding up and down ledgy technical features. All of this >> leaves those of us who want to get away for a few hours, to enjoy the >> escape and beauty of riding trails for a few hours but not feel like we're >> riding out of the depth of our bicycles, out in the cold somewhat. >> >> If you look at the Surly marketing around the Krampus, you'll see that >> they designed this bike very much in the mainstream conception of "fun" >> geometry: short chainstays, even with giant tires; long front center/TT, >> short stem, low-ish handlebars. A lot of the early photos of the bike >> featured guys wheeliei
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
David, that may be a good size for roads. paved or smooth dirt, but rocky, sandy and rutted roads are much faster and smoother on wider tires than that. Just one ride on those 650B Thunder Burts convinced me otherwise. The 29+ tires are really fast and smooth once you are rolling and especially downhill, but climbing means more rolling resistance, and more rotating weight to overcome. I'm waiting for the 650+ tires to come to market like WTB's 2.8" Trailblazer. Slightly smaller in circumference than a 29 x 2.2 tire but with 70 mm of width. They would work great on a Krampus since the BB is pretty high already. ~mike Carlsbad Ca. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Yes road=/=dirt, but maybe the same principle, just scaled up? Perhaps a 27.5+ would be better than a 29+ just due to how huge a tire you're getting into??? Cheers, David "it isn't a contest. Just enjoy the ride." - Seth Vidal On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Mike Schiller wrote: > David, that may be a good size for roads. paved or smooth dirt, but rocky, > sandy and rutted roads are much faster and smoother on wider tires than > that. Just one ride on those 650B Thunder Burts convinced me otherwise. The > 29+ tires are really fast and smooth once you are rolling and especially > downhill, but climbing means more rolling resistance, and more rotating > weight to overcome. > > I'm waiting for the 650+ tires to come to market like WTB's 2.8" > Trailblazer. Slightly smaller in circumference than a 29 x 2.2 tire but > with 70 mm of width. They would work great on a Krampus since the BB is > pretty high already. > > ~mike > Carlsbad Ca. > > >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Unfortunately, lower gearing can't be the answer. I'm already below the Rohloff minimum. I can't go lower. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:07 AM, ted wrote: > Anne, > > You have a wonderful new bike and one of its unique features is the > ability to accommodate really big tires. I'd think you would want to make > sure lower gearing isn't the answer before abandoning that big big rubber. > > When I stop on a hill because "It feels like I just can't pedal any more" > and "I'm breathing pretty darn hard", I find it's because I need to to go > slower to stay within my capabilities. Sometimes its because I have been > riding too hard and not pacing myself, sometimes its because my lowest gear > isn't low enough. When I am stopped by control problems that typically > means a quick foot down because I was falling over. Sometimes the two are > related because I am pedaling so slow trying to go slow that I have to push > so hard on the pedals (and therefore pull on the bars) that it makes it > harder to control the bike. > > Did the gear inches you mentioned in your original post account for the > actual measured rolling circumference of the rear wheels on your bikes > with the pressures you use and loaded the way you ride them? I think the > main reason big wheels seem harder to push up a hill is because the true > gear development is larger. If you have, or can borrow, a gps you might > check how fast you are going up those steep inclines on the Atlanti vs the > new bike. At walking speeds a very small difference is still a significant > fraction. > > Beware the clarion call of the weight sirens. It's true that "Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing", it is a pound per bike. But thats less than a > full water bottle (at least mine come in at ~1.5lbs). If you and the bike > are ~150lbs and you save 1lb, that's less than 1 percent. If you are on a > climb where your effort is all going into raising the weight and you can go > 2.5mph that savings will net you less than a tenth of a mile per hour. > However if you go 2.25mph on your atlanti, and the gearing on you new bike > induces you to go 2.75mph thats a 20% difference in effort. > > If you want to look into geometry variations not related to > steering/control, measure the chain stays and front center. If the bottom > bracket is relatively further back on one of the bikes that would probably > translate to a further aft center of gravity (and more propensity to float > the front end on a steep incline). Or you could just use a bathroom scale > and some books or blocks of wood to measure your CGs directly. > > Hope you get it all sorted out satisfactorily soon > ted > > > On Saturday, April 26, 2014 7:00:01 AM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: > >> Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's >> just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about >> trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" >> wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy >> tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound >> per wheel isn't nothing. >> >> Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong >> attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet >> become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill >> I need to pick up. >> >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller >> wrote: >> >>> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to >>> 29" MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use >>> an even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I >>> have yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. >>> On my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a >>> 29+ bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >>> equipped bike? >>> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >>> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >>> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >>> >>> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >>> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >>> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >>> for that purpose. >>> >>> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >>> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >>> gain a better overall ride. >>> >>> Good Luck >>> >>> ~mike >>> Carlsbad Ca. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com. >>> >>> Visit this group at htt
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Why not go tubeless? I expect that your rims and tires are designed for this and, if they don't have to be built up with lots of tape, you should save the weight of the tubes mines the weight of the sealant and the heavier rim strip. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Anne Paulson wrote: > Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's > just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about > trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" > wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy > tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound > per wheel isn't nothing. > > Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong > attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet > become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill > I need to pick up. > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller > wrote: > >> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" >> MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an >> even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have >> yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On >> my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ >> bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff >> equipped bike? >> Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, >> especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my >> cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. >> >> One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on >> steep sections. That will take some weight off your rear wheel and allow >> you to climb easier. The WTB saddles even have a little drop on the nose >> for that purpose. >> >> Another option is to try some 2.3" tires. They will be easier to climb >> with then your 3" Knards. You'll lose some downhill traction but maybe >> gain a better overall ride. >> >> Good Luck >> >> ~mike >> Carlsbad Ca. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews. By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. Other professional writing services. http://www.resumespecialties.com/ Patrick Moore Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I to was thinking that the greater mass of the Knard wheels might be the reason. While this comparison is only on pavement, I do know that the Fargo's wheels, with SnoCat rims and 60 mm Big Apple tires -- which roll very well on flat pavement, incidentally -- certainly require more effort to push up steep hills -- again, paved, compared to wheels with lighter rims and tires. I also wonder if geometry is not another cause: one that forces you to lean forward when you are used to sitting back may well wear you out faster. At any rate, I'd be interested in the upshot -- whether the OP gets used to the Krampus, or modifies the gearing, or ditches it. Interesting discussion for me, who have so often thought I'd like a fat tired off road bike (fat = considerably fatter than 50 to 65 mm). On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Garth wrote: > I'm guessing the rotational weight difference is what you are feeling. > Compare the weight of your Atlantis tires and rims, to that of the > Surly's. It's likely more, but I don't know your Atlantis wheels. > 700g for a 700c Rabbit hole rim > 1205-1229g for the Knard 29 x 3" 27 tpi > http://fat-bike.com/2012/01/tire-weights-for-fat-bikes/ > > A 700c Synergy weighs 500g > fill-in-your-tire-here :) > > I'm going to guess off the cuff you're going to have over a pound per > wheel more rotational weight. Some will say it does not matter, some say > it does. To me, yes, it does, and yet, it does not. For the bottom line is, > Do I enjoy riding the bike as I define my Joy of Riding ? > > And finally, each bike is it's own Bike. the Surly isn't a Rivendell, so > comparing the two , unless it pleases you to do so, is an exercise in > futility :) An apple is an apple, an orange and orange. Love them both or > neither or one , I get to choose !!! > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews. By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. Other professional writing services. http://www.resumespecialties.com/ Patrick Moore Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Well that's simple enough. Though it may still be worthwhile to check out how the gearing of your bikes compare, also the relative weights. If either of those comparisons explain what you are experiencing, then you will have a better idea of what you are dealing with. If not, well it sounds like a rather interesting mystery. I hope you will let us know what you figure out. Glad you are enjoying your new bike so much. Certainly looks and sounds very cool, and must be a whole lot of fun. On Saturday, April 26, 2014 2:31:24 PM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: > > Unfortunately, lower gearing can't be the answer. I'm already below the > Rohloff minimum. I can't go lower. > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:07 AM, ted >wrote: > >> Anne, >> >> You have a wonderful new bike and one of its unique features is the >> ability to accommodate really big tires. I'd think you would want to make >> sure lower gearing isn't the answer before abandoning that big big rubber. >> >> When I stop on a hill because "It feels like I just can't pedal any more" >> and "I'm breathing pretty darn hard", I find it's because I need to to go >> slower to stay within my capabilities. Sometimes its because I have been >> riding too hard and not pacing myself, sometimes its because my lowest gear >> isn't low enough. When I am stopped by control problems that typically >> means a quick foot down because I was falling over. Sometimes the two are >> related because I am pedaling so slow trying to go slow that I have to push >> so hard on the pedals (and therefore pull on the bars) that it makes it >> harder to control the bike. >> >> Did the gear inches you mentioned in your original post account for the >> actual measured rolling circumference of the rear wheels on your bikes >> with the pressures you use and loaded the way you ride them? I think the >> main reason big wheels seem harder to push up a hill is because the true >> gear development is larger. If you have, or can borrow, a gps you might >> check how fast you are going up those steep inclines on the Atlanti vs the >> new bike. At walking speeds a very small difference is still a significant >> fraction. >> >> Beware the clarion call of the weight sirens. It's true that "Half a >> pound per wheel isn't nothing", it is a pound per bike. But thats less than >> a full water bottle (at least mine come in at ~1.5lbs). If you and the bike >> are ~150lbs and you save 1lb, that's less than 1 percent. If you are on a >> climb where your effort is all going into raising the weight and you can go >> 2.5mph that savings will net you less than a tenth of a mile per hour. >> However if you go 2.25mph on your atlanti, and the gearing on you new bike >> induces you to go 2.75mph thats a 20% difference in effort. >> >> If you want to look into geometry variations not related to >> steering/control, measure the chain stays and front center. If the bottom >> bracket is relatively further back on one of the bikes that would probably >> translate to a further aft center of gravity (and more propensity to float >> the front end on a steep incline). Or you could just use a bathroom scale >> and some books or blocks of wood to measure your CGs directly. >> >> Hope you get it all sorted out satisfactorily soon >> ted >> >> >> On Saturday, April 26, 2014 7:00:01 AM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >>> Mike, sigh, you're saying what I suspected but didn't want to hear: it's >>> just harder to push those big wheels up a hill. I'm already thinking about >>> trying 2.3" tires, though it does seem silly to buy a bike that takes 3" >>> wheels and then not use them. In any case, I'm going to replace the heavy >>> tubes with lighter tubes and see what difference that makes. Half a pound >>> per wheel isn't nothing. >>> >>> Rather than sliding forward, which seems to put my body at the wrong >>> attitude toward the pedals, I've been trying leaning forward. I haven't yet >>> become comfortable standing on the steep climbs, but that's the next skill >>> I need to pick up. >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Mike Schiller >> > wrote: >>> One thing most people experience when going from 26" wheeled MTB's to 29" MTB is that they can't climb as well. I've learned that you need to use an even lower gear to be able to turn the larger circumference wheels. I have yet to try a 29+ bike but I can guess it will need an even lower gear. On my 29er I run a 20-34 low combination. I'd probably go to a 20-36 on a 29+ bike. Maybe you can try a smaller chainring up front for your Rohloff equipped bike? Of course it takes more power to push the wider and heavier tire, especially uphill on dirt.. I climb much faster on the same trails on my cross bike with 35mm tires. Downhill is another story. One trick you may not know is to slide forward on your seat a bit on steep sections. That will take some wei
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I figured out one position change that made a big difference. I have Jones Loop H bars, which I like a lot. But I'd been always riding with my hands out at the ends of the bars. Turns out, if I put my thumbs inside the loop and grasp the bars that way, it makes a huge difference in climbing. Huge. My hands have moved forward and inboard, and now the front wheel tracks a whole lot better. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Nils Eng wrote: > Anne, > Don't despair! This is EXACTLY the experience I had on my Krampus, but > now it's sorted and he'd climb a telephone pole if I had the legs. I think > it's the front end-- it's really slack-- and the way there is mucho weight > on the back wheel. While the "All-Mountain" geometry IS great for going > down hills, it has the drawback of a "wander-y" front-end going uphill. > Long story short-- I got a longer stem, flipped it (downward), and dropped > it down until I got the balance of downhill and uphill handling > characteristics I wanted. I also moved my saddle forward a bit. The basic > idea was to move weight forward and down w/o losing too much downhill > awesomeness. My stem was stock 70 mm and I'm now riding a 100. I kept the > same degree of rise as the original (7 degrees?) and then moved the stem > down a spacer at a time until I liked it. I also read somewhere that Grant > thought that longer chain stays helped w/ climbing, so I moved the wheel > back in the dropout, but I moved it back because I like the way it turns > better with shorter stays. Anyway, I think with a little tweaking you can > get it to feel the way you like. All the best, > Nils > > > On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >> >> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >> >> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >> can climb anything. >> >> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >> knobbies. >> >> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >> learn how to climb on this new bike. >> >> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >> >> -- >> -- Anne Paulson >> >> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >> >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Anne Paulson It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Excellent, Anne! Yes, that is my preferred position for climbing as well, relatively, and one of the reasons I so love the Albastache bars. Great job playing around -- keep on learning! With abandon, Patrick On Monday, April 28, 2014 5:44:15 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: > > I figured out one position change that made a big difference. > > I have Jones Loop H bars, which I like a lot. But I'd been always riding > with my hands out at the ends of the bars. Turns out, if I put my thumbs > inside the loop and grasp the bars that way, it makes a huge difference in > climbing. Huge. My hands have moved forward and inboard, and now the front > wheel tracks a whole lot better. > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Nils Eng > > wrote: > >> Anne, >> Don't despair! This is EXACTLY the experience I had on my Krampus, but >> now it's sorted and he'd climb a telephone pole if I had the legs. I think >> it's the front end-- it's really slack-- and the way there is mucho weight >> on the back wheel. While the "All-Mountain" geometry IS great for going >> down hills, it has the drawback of a "wander-y" front-end going uphill. >> Long story short-- I got a longer stem, flipped it (downward), and dropped >> it down until I got the balance of downhill and uphill handling >> characteristics I wanted. I also moved my saddle forward a bit. The basic >> idea was to move weight forward and down w/o losing too much downhill >> awesomeness. My stem was stock 70 mm and I'm now riding a 100. I kept the >> same degree of rise as the original (7 degrees?) and then moved the stem >> down a spacer at a time until I liked it. I also read somewhere that Grant >> thought that longer chain stays helped w/ climbing, so I moved the wheel >> back in the dropout, but I moved it back because I like the way it turns >> better with shorter stays. Anyway, I think with a little tweaking you can >> get it to feel the way you like. All the best, >> Nils >> >> >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >>> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >>> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >>> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >>> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >>> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >>> >>> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >>> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >>> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >>> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >>> can climb anything. >>> >>> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >>> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >>> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >>> knobbies. >>> >>> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >>> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >>> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >>> learn how to climb on this new bike. >>> >>> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >>> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >>> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >>> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >>> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >>> >>> -- >>> -- Anne Paulson >>> >>> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I bought the Krampus frame and had it build up, so I don't know anything about the stock build. But the Jones bars have a lot of advantages. For downhill, I like the wide bar-end position. I also like the wide position for just boppin' along. If I want to move a little forward, I can just "choke up" the bar ends, moving my hands about three inches in and forward, and still have access to the brake levers. And if I want to move more forward, I stick my thumbs inside the loop and grab. Definitely a lot of hand positions. Plus, having the loop part works well for strapping things onto the bars for camping. On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Nils Eng wrote: > That makes sense to me-- you're moving weight forward. I'm super curious > about that Jones bars. Would you mind giving some of your impressions? > I'm especially curious about how they feel compared to the monster whammy > bar that came with it. Hope your "tweaks" continue to work! > > > On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: > >> >> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >> >> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >> can climb anything. >> >> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >> knobbies. >> >> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >> learn how to climb on this new bike. >> >> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >> >> -- >> -- Anne Paulson >> >> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >> >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Anne Paulson It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
My experience with the Jones Loop Bar is quite similar. I changed to the Loop Bar on my 9:ZERO:7 snow bike this winter and it quickly became clear that pegging my grip at the bar ends wasn't going to work. That position resulted in little front end control climbing but also a distinct lack of front wheel grip on slippery descents . Choking up-- really using the entire bar-- made a huge difference. I'm seldom on the ends unless i'm just cruising along on the flat and that's on well consolidated snow. I've yet to try them in the dirt but I'll give them and the 3.8 Knards a try soon. Over all I'm quite impressed with the bar. On Monday, April 28, 2014 9:20:46 PM UTC-4, Anne Paulson wrote: > > I bought the Krampus frame and had it build up, so I don't know anything > about the stock build. But the Jones bars have a lot of advantages. For > downhill, I like the wide bar-end position. I also like the wide position > for just boppin' along. If I want to move a little forward, I can just > "choke up" the bar ends, moving my hands about three inches in and forward, > and still have access to the brake levers. And if I want to move more > forward, I stick my thumbs inside the loop and grab. Definitely a lot of > hand positions. > > Plus, having the loop part works well for strapping things onto the bars > for camping. > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Nils Eng > > wrote: > >> That makes sense to me-- you're moving weight forward. I'm super curious >> about that Jones bars. Would you mind giving some of your impressions? >> I'm especially curious about how they feel compared to the monster whammy >> bar that came with it. Hope your "tweaks" continue to work! >> >> >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >>> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >>> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >>> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >>> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >>> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >>> >>> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >>> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >>> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >>> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >>> can climb anything. >>> >>> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >>> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >>> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >>> knobbies. >>> >>> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >>> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >>> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >>> learn how to climb on this new bike. >>> >>> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >>> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >>> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >>> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >>> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >>> >>> -- >>> -- Anne Paulson >>> >>> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Have you got the long Jones loop, or the shorter one? When I was testriding, I tried the longer one, but didn't like it. The short one, OTOH, is excellent. So far, the bar-end position is working for me on descents, though maybe I just don't go down slippery descents. Usually I'm trying to get my weight back, not forward, on descents. On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:15 PM, John Philip wrote: > My experience with the Jones Loop Bar is quite similar. I changed to the > Loop Bar on my 9:ZERO:7 snow bike this winter and it quickly became clear > that pegging my grip at the bar ends wasn't going to work. That position > resulted in little front end control climbing but also a distinct lack of > front wheel grip on slippery descents . Choking up-- really using the > entire bar-- made a huge difference. I'm seldom on the ends unless i'm > just cruising along on the flat and that's on well consolidated snow. I've > yet to try them in the dirt but I'll give them and the 3.8 Knards a try > soon. Over all I'm quite impressed with the bar. > > > On Monday, April 28, 2014 9:20:46 PM UTC-4, Anne Paulson wrote: > >> I bought the Krampus frame and had it build up, so I don't know anything >> about the stock build. But the Jones bars have a lot of advantages. For >> downhill, I like the wide bar-end position. I also like the wide position >> for just boppin' along. If I want to move a little forward, I can just >> "choke up" the bar ends, moving my hands about three inches in and forward, >> and still have access to the brake levers. And if I want to move more >> forward, I stick my thumbs inside the loop and grab. Definitely a lot of >> hand positions. >> >> Plus, having the loop part works well for strapping things onto the bars >> for camping. >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Nils Eng wrote: >> >>> That makes sense to me-- you're moving weight forward. I'm super >>> curious about that Jones bars. Would you mind giving some of your >>> impressions? I'm especially curious about how they feel compared to the >>> monster whammy bar that came with it. Hope your "tweaks" continue to work! >>> >>> >>> On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: >>> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I can climb anything. But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the knobbies. What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to learn how to climb on this new bike. On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. -- -- Anne Paulson It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com. >>> >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> -- Anne Paulson >> >> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Ann
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I have the long one but I expect I'm much larger than you. (My Atlantis is a 68) I should have also mentioned that after trying the bar I changed very quickly to a longer stem with slightly less rise. I also seem to use a bit less front tire pressure with this bar but that varies considerably with snow conditions. In addition I have often decreased pressure in advance of tricky downhill sections to try to help with front wheel grip. If I get my weight back as much as I otherwise might.. I'm eating snow pretty quickly ..but of course my skills are pretty lame when it comes to any technical riding. It's a good thing snow is mostly soft. On Monday, April 28, 2014 11:01:29 PM UTC-4, Anne Paulson wrote: > > Have you got the long Jones loop, or the shorter one? When I was > testriding, I tried the longer one, but didn't like it. The short one, > OTOH, is excellent. So far, the bar-end position is working for me on > descents, though maybe I just don't go down slippery descents. Usually I'm > trying to get my weight back, not forward, on descents. > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:15 PM, John Philip > > wrote: > >> My experience with the Jones Loop Bar is quite similar. I changed to the >> Loop Bar on my 9:ZERO:7 snow bike this winter and it quickly became clear >> that pegging my grip at the bar ends wasn't going to work. That position >> resulted in little front end control climbing but also a distinct lack of >> front wheel grip on slippery descents . Choking up-- really using the >> entire bar-- made a huge difference. I'm seldom on the ends unless i'm >> just cruising along on the flat and that's on well consolidated snow. I've >> yet to try them in the dirt but I'll give them and the 3.8 Knards a try >> soon. Over all I'm quite impressed with the bar. >> >> >> On Monday, April 28, 2014 9:20:46 PM UTC-4, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >>> I bought the Krampus frame and had it build up, so I don't know anything >>> about the stock build. But the Jones bars have a lot of advantages. For >>> downhill, I like the wide bar-end position. I also like the wide position >>> for just boppin' along. If I want to move a little forward, I can just >>> "choke up" the bar ends, moving my hands about three inches in and forward, >>> and still have access to the brake levers. And if I want to move more >>> forward, I stick my thumbs inside the loop and grab. Definitely a lot of >>> hand positions. >>> >>> Plus, having the loop part works well for strapping things onto the bars >>> for camping. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Nils Eng wrote: >>> That makes sense to me-- you're moving weight forward. I'm super curious about that Jones bars. Would you mind giving some of your impressions? I'm especially curious about how they feel compared to the monster whammy bar that came with it. Hope your "tweaks" continue to work! On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: > > I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my > Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. > People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I > couldn't > balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding > at > 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously > steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. > > But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus > mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can > climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the > Krampus > (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, > I > can climb anything. > > But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's > frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the > Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the > knobbies. > > What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket > height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like > several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need > to > learn how to climb on this new bike. > > On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able > to go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and > that has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and > said, Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I > apply the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of > skidding. > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Ow
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Couple of suggestions from a mountain biker's perspective. Try a higher gear--click up just one. It sounds counter-intuitive, but the momentum of the big, heavy wheels and tires will actually roll you along better. Also, try moving your hands inward on the bars for stability. (assuming you have wide flat mtb-ish bars on there...) On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Anne Paulson wrote: > Just to clarify: this new bike is a ton of fun, and I'm liking it. I love > the Rohloff hub, I love the way the 3" tires stick to everything and roll > over anything, I love the way I can go downhill with confidence on trails I > wouldn't dream of descending on my Atlantis. It's just that I need to work > on the climbing. > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Anne Paulson wrote: > >> >> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >> >> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >> can climb anything. >> >> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >> knobbies. >> >> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >> learn how to climb on this new bike. >> >> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >> >> -- >> -- Anne Paulson >> >> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >> >> >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
Thank you. On Monday, April 28, 2014 7:20:46 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: > > I bought the Krampus frame and had it build up, so I don't know anything > about the stock build. But the Jones bars have a lot of advantages. For > downhill, I like the wide bar-end position. I also like the wide position > for just boppin' along. If I want to move a little forward, I can just > "choke up" the bar ends, moving my hands about three inches in and forward, > and still have access to the brake levers. And if I want to move more > forward, I stick my thumbs inside the loop and grab. Definitely a lot of > hand positions. > > Plus, having the loop part works well for strapping things onto the bars > for camping. > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Nils Eng > > wrote: > >> That makes sense to me-- you're moving weight forward. I'm super curious >> about that Jones bars. Would you mind giving some of your impressions? >> I'm especially curious about how they feel compared to the monster whammy >> bar that came with it. Hope your "tweaks" continue to work! >> >> >> On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC-6, Anne Paulson wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm a big fan of low, low gears. I have them on both my Atlantises; my >>> Roadeo has pretty low gears too considering I never carry much on it. >>> People always say to me, "I don't want lower gears because then I couldn't >>> balance." I never understood that. I don't have a bit of problem riding at >>> 2.5 mph for long periods of time when I'm climbing something ridiculously >>> steep on one of my Rivendell bikes. >>> >>> But now I understand. I thought when I bought my new Surly Krampus >>> mountain bike I'd be able to climb even steeper dirt roads than I now can >>> climb on my Atlanti. I thought, I have an absurdly low gear on the Krampus >>> (15.6 inches, something like that), I have all the traction in the world, I >>> can climb anything. >>> >>> But no. I'm finding that I climb *worse* on the Krampus. It's >>> frustrating. There are dirt sections that I have no trouble on with the >>> Atlantis, with smooth tires, that I can't climb on the Krampus with the >>> knobbies. >>> >>> What's going on here? Front-end geometry? Wheel weight? Bottom bracket >>> height? I'm beginning to think I should have bought the Surly ECR (like >>> several people recommended) instead of the Krampus. Or maybe I just need to >>> learn how to climb on this new bike. >>> >>> On the other hand, when I bought the bike I also thought I'd be able to >>> go down steep trails that I'm afraid to descend on the Atlantis, and that >>> has proved to be true. My husband took one look at my new bike and said, >>> Wow, you have better traction on that than you have on foot. When I apply >>> the brakes on a steep downhill, the bike *slows down* instead of skidding. >>> >>> -- >>> -- Anne Paulson >>> >>> It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to >> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > -- Anne Paulson > > It isn't a contest. Enjoy the ride. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
I've found this to be true as well. A few extra teeth in the back helps rather than hurts. I think the greater resistance forces my legs to push harder. -J -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Geometry, climbing, what's going on?
On Friday, April 25, 2014 9:42:01 PM UTC-7, Anne Paulson wrote: > > I've read that the gyroscope effect is not relevant for bikes-- didn't > someone build an anti-gyro bike, with a second wheel spinning in the > opposite direction, and discover that it was easy to steer? > Neither gyro nor trail is essential for a self-stablilizing single-track vehicle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nr7gxib4Pc -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
