Re: Suspension losses

Am Sun, 12 Jan 2025 21:05:47 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:

On 1/12/2025 3:33 PM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:

Am Sat, 11 Jan 2025 19:46:50 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
 

To me, a big advantage is the ability to _look_ at a mechanical device
and _see_ what's wrong....

 

That, and the fact I can often affect a repair.

 
I prefer devices that don't need repair over their lifetime.

>
The weakness I see with that is the assumption that "lifetime" is
defined as "the amount of time it works." if something stops working,
its lifetime is over! Throw it out!

That's far too simplistic.

It depends.  For my purposes, I indeed prefer bicycles that may need
repairs and modifications over their lifetime, for various reasons. I
change over my lifetime, so do my bicycles.  But there are limits. Want
it cheap, longlived, lightweight and functional? Choose any two.

>
As I said, I hate the Kleenex ethic - "It's no good any more, just throw
it away."

A strawman isn't getting any more pretty, over time. You won't find many
complex products, machines, vehicles or components with an unlimited
lifetime.  Product lifetime has to be planned. There is innovation,
innovation means change.  There are technical limits. So far, I haven't
heard about bicycle tires that tolerate heavy use over a lifetime of 40
years, as you ask for.  To be precise, I don't know of any that I would
like to use or that I would risk using.

But I still prefer devices that don't need repair over their lifetime,
because all relevant components have an expected lifetime large enough
for the expected combined lifetime to exceed a large planned lifetime. 

Sometimes that goal is hard or expensive to archive. Take the example
above, tires.  If some necessary component has a limited lifetime,
standardize its interface, make it replaceable and guarantee that
replacements will remain available for the lifetime of the product.

Nothing stops people from repairing defective components, within limits.
But that isn't the point. I guess even you don't use retreaded tires on
your car, anymore. You probably won't repair a worn chain or chainring.

Anyway, I see no reason why the wireless shifting of our bikes shouldn't
outlive a similar purely mechanical one, simply because it produces less
mechanical stress. Of course, SRAM or Shimano might artificially limit
the lifetime of those products. Software and forced updates make that
easier than it should be.  But nothing prevents them from doing that on
the mechanical side, either.  There is no reason to blame a technology
for that, just because you don't like it.

>

Don't know.  We use devices like the blue one in the following picture.
<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/W%C3%A4rmflasche1.jpg>
and better isolating blankets. No electricity necessary. :-)

>
:-) But you imply that _I'm_ the one insufficiently modern?

 
No. I doubt that "being modern" is a reasonable benchmark or measure.
This cuts both ways. :-)
 

A few lights in our house are switched by set of 2 x 3 inexpensive
wireless sockets including two remote controls, that I bought eleven
years ago. I've still to replace the batteries. Two of the sockets are
still spares, I have a replacement cell for the remote controls stored
which might live even longer. Standard type, used in garage openers and
burglar alarms, too. Selecting a channel and paring one of the four
buttons of a remote control with one or more of the sockets is as easy
as pie, using a line of dip switches inside those devices.  Quite
similar to pairing switches and derailleur on our bicyles.
>
While I avoid having essential functionality in my house depend on
wireless connections, I enjoy having the option, for certain use cases,
though.

>
Yuck.

I really enjoy that I don't have to walk down two stairs just for the
light I forgot to switch of in the living room.  There have been other
occasions when I was very happy to be able use a lamp whose switch I
could not reach.

 
You don't have a single remote control in your house? Not even for the
TV? That's rare.

>
I've got more remotes than I want.

We aren't using those that came with our TV and those from our stereo
system and amplifier, either.  Our TV actually is a large monitor
connected to a PC serving both as a DVB-T receiver and for internet
streaming - viewing public television programs, that is. The monitor has
an IR remote, but the remote control in use for the TV is just a
wireless keyboard with a touchpad from Logitech.  In the living room, to
play a CD, listen to the radio, or play music from my cell phone,
laptop, etc., I simply walk to the closet where the amplifier is
located.  If I'm lazy, I just use the phone and the BT connection to the
amplifier.

The TV's power button and channel
changing buttons are not even visible. They're hidden and practically
un-labeled on the back edge of the device, so a remote is necessary to
even turn it on.

There was a similar problem with our TV, too many separate components. I
solved that by using a power strip combined with a separate central
switch at an easy to reach location.  Powering on/off needs two actions:
central switch plus a button on the PC, powering off is done via
keyboard and central switch.  That way, all that stuff doesn't consume
standby power, when not in use.

I pump the TV sound through our stereo amplifier, which
has its own remote (whose volume control seems to have stopped working),
the CD/DVD player has a separate remote, etc. etc. If we had a friend
house sit for us, I'd have to write a manual on how to run the system.

This can actually be automated quite easily for devices with IR remote
controls. However, it does require a little programming and soldering
work.

>
A couple years ago we were given a Christmas gift of battery powered LED
"candles." The could change colors - by use of a remote! Why should a
candle need a remote?

Because you don't want to need a ladder to reach the point where it
stands, just to operate the on/off switch?

>
Same for a ceiling fan. Ours change speed by use of a pull chain. I'll
never lose the pull chain. I would certainly misplace a remote.

I've seen many such fans, radiant heaters and the like, where the pull
chain or drawstring had been lost or damaged. But I have rarely
misplacted an IR remote, simply because there is no point in moving it
out of the room where the controlled device is located.

>

I still have a box of old, but still working IR remote controls,
from devices that broke many years ago.  I collected these to control
gadgets like this one
<https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/basteleien/microcontroller/ws2812/DSC_3564-DSC_3566_fused.JPG>
Can you guess what this blinkenlight does?

>
Nope.

It plays Mastermind faster and better than I do. 

>

Parts a an IR receiver, a PIC 12F1840 microcontroller, a stripe of eight
RGB LED, and a remote control from a CD Player that broke long before
2014, when I built that gadget.  The aforementioned $1.50 controller
(single quantity, digikey) does everything from IR decoding to
controlling the LED stripe.
 
Somewhat later, I built something larger using a different part (an
ESP8266) for illuminating the house bar of one of our kids, using about
one meter of densely placed RGB LED, controlled via WIFI, doing a whole
series of different colorful light effects. Extendable with new effects
by uploading short LUA snippets, of course. :-) I was told that it was
used again at a New Year's celebration, so obviously it is still
working.

>
There's a part of me that wishes I had your skills and knowledge. I
occasionally dream up little electronic projects that I lack the
knowledge to design or build. I've thought about educating myself, but
soon realized there are many other things I'd prefer to learn.

I got the basic skills and knowledge while we programmed mainframes
using IBM ASM F assembler, in my job. Doing it minimalistically on the
bare metal as I like it is even easier, nowadays, with 8-bit
microcontrollers - if you have grown up with that stuff.  But there are
alternatives, Arduino comes to mind. I don't like it, but understand how
and why it is popular.    

>

My wife still uses an almost as old bicycle for everyday rides around
the corner.  Didn't have to strip and power coat it, because it came
that way, when she bought it.
 
But like me, she is glad that I build two road bikes in 2023, using
wireless electronic shifting that you dislike so much. Without, she
wouldn't have been able to do some of those very enjoyable tours
throughout the region that we did in 2023 and in 2024.

>
Can you explain? It's hard for me to visualize a tour that would
_require_ electronic shifting.

Southwest of our home begins a low mountain range called Eifel. After
retirement, I started to ride my bike into that region, as far as I
could and enjoyed that very much. But I have limits and so has my wife.
I could motivate her to accompany me on some of those tours, but
couldn't motivate her to try some of the steeper or longer ones.  This
was one of the reasons to build new bikes in 2023.

The following route (shown by the web version of brouter, a routing tool
used for example in the OsmAND app for Android phones) is a very scenic,
but steep segment/shortcut, which is part of a handfull of roundtrips
that I have done and enjoyed, with my old bike.  Unfortunately, it was
just a bit too hard for her with her old bike.

<https://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=14/50.5165/6.9122/standard&lonlats=6.910437,50.510777;6.91813,50.518292&profile=fastbike>

Doing a 12% hill at our age with insufficient gears and a prissy
gearshift is dangerous, especially if you don't have prior experience.
Even worse, if you have got a a bad experience by trying and failing, as
she had.

So designing the new bike wasn't only about low enough gears. Simple,
fast and reliable shifting was at least as important. An electronic SRAM
eTAP AXS mullet with a small chainring delivered exactly that. 1 x 12,
10-52 on the back, initially 40 in front, now 32 teeth. Operated by just
pushing one of two switches.

I could do without, but frankly, I enjoy it too!

The following collage shows her riding up to and through Winnen with the
new bike.  A few days later she asked me: what about trying it again?

<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20230906/collage2.jpg>

The vast majority of my touring and
riding miles have been done without even index shifting.

We too didn't start cycling just recently, either. :-) But unlike  me,
she didn't get fat skin and thick calves by commuting in heavy traffic
and our long rides on vacation were rather easy. Not to mention, when we
did our first tours with Peugeot bicycles bought in 1978, we were young
and we mostly rode on the flat. A piece of cake, even with only 2 x 5
and without indexing.


--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions