Re: Getting old is not for sissies

Liste des GroupesRevenir à rb tech 
Sujet : Re: Getting old is not for sissies
De : am (at) *nospam* yellowjersey.org (AMuzi)
Groupes : rec.bicycles.tech
Date : 02. Mar 2025, 17:10:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Message-ID : <vq1vt2$r25v$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/1/2025 8:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/1/2025 4:39 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 13:55:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
IIRC, hydrostatic transmissions are standard features on zero turn
mowers. But as you noted, the mechanical efficiency is lousy. That's not
a concern if you have a big enough engine and low enough use hours. It's
a huge concern for a cyclist.
>
True, but the huge concern is mostly for racing.  If you're using the
bicycle as a moving exercise machine, the added weight and increased
friction might even be considered beneficial.  It's like the weights
on barbells where light weight is not a concern.  For competitive
fixie racing, maybe the governing organization should specify a
minimum allowable bicycle weight, which might inspire technical
innovation instead of shaving grams off the bicycle weight.
 I think that level of inefficiency would be a concern of most cyclists, and very few actually race. It would take a lot of fun out of riding.
 I once worked on a bicycle belonging to a friend that had a quite rare (at least, at the time) 5 speed Sturmey-Archer geared hub. IIRC, there were two shift cables, one going to each side. Anyway, as I remember when shifted to its lowest gear it seemed extremely sluggish. Unlike the equivalent low gear on a derailleur bike, it really didn't seem much easier going uphill in that gear. Instead it just seemed slower. And as I recall, that was a not uncommon complaint about that particular hub.
 I understand the desire for exercise. But I think almost everyone prefers to get their exercise while moving farther or faster, not by slogging along slowly. If that were acceptable, we'd all be riding solid tires.
 
Odd symptom and no logical reason for it IMHO.
The S-5 gearbox (went through several variants) is basically an AW three speed design with dual sun gears. With no left side change, it's a three speed (+26.6% high, direct drive, -21.1% low).
When the left side is changed, the sun gear clutch slides over to the other gear set, giving -33.3% super low, direct drive and +50% high.
The gear sizes being different from an AW (-25% low, direct drive, +33% high), the five model notably gives a faster high gear but not a lower low gear.
Since everything is in the same oil bath* and rolling on the same bearing adjustment*, overall efficiency should vary only in the relative losses of gear diameter which is a small difference.
* can be correct or deficient
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Date Sujet#  Auteur
28 Feb 25 * Getting old is not for sissies82AMuzi
28 Feb 25 +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Shadow
28 Feb 25 i`- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1AMuzi
28 Feb 25 +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies77Frank Krygowski
28 Feb 25 i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies76AMuzi
28 Feb 25 i +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies69Catrike Ryder
28 Feb 25 i i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies68AMuzi
28 Feb 25 i i `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies67Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i  `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies66AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies26Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   i+* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   ii`- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies23AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   i +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies4Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   i i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   i i `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   i i  `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   i `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies18Jeff Liebermann
1 Mar 25 i i   i  +- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   i  `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies16Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i   i   +- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   i   `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies14Jeff Liebermann
2 Mar 25 i i   i    +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies7Frank Krygowski
2 Mar 25 i i   i    i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies6AMuzi
2 Mar 25 i i   i    i `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies5AMuzi
2 Mar 25 i i   i    i  `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies4Frank Krygowski
2 Mar 25 i i   i    i   `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3AMuzi
2 Mar 25 i i   i    i    `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Frank Krygowski
2 Mar 25 i i   i    i     `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1AMuzi
3 Mar 25 i i   i    `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies6Zen Cycle
3 Mar 25 i i   i     `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies5Jeff Liebermann
3 Mar 25 i i   i      +- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1AMuzi
3 Mar 25 i i   i      `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3Zen Cycle
4 Mar 25 i i   i       `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Roger Merriman
4 Mar 25 i i   i        `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Zen Cycle
1 Mar 25 i i   +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies12Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i   i+* Re: Getting old is not for sissies10AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   ii`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies9Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i   ii +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies6Roger Merriman
1 Mar 25 i i   ii i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies5Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i   ii i `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies4Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   ii i  `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   ii i   `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   ii i    `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   ii `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i   ii  `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i   i`- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i   +- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Roger Merriman
1 Mar 25 i i   `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies26zen cycle
1 Mar 25 i i    +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies24AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i    i+- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i    i+* Re: Getting old is not for sissies21Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i    ii+* Re: Getting old is not for sissies17Roger Merriman
1 Mar 25 i i    iii`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies16Frank Krygowski
2 Mar 25 i i    iii `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies15Roger Merriman
2 Mar 25 i i    iii  `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies14Frank Krygowski
2 Mar 25 i i    iii   +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Frank Krygowski
2 Mar 25 i i    iii   i`- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
3 Mar 25 i i    iii   `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies11Roger Merriman
3 Mar 25 i i    iii    `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies10Frank Krygowski
3 Mar 25 i i    iii     `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies9Roger Merriman
3 Mar 25 i i    iii      +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3Zen Cycle
4 Mar 25 i i    iii      i`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Roger Merriman
4 Mar 25 i i    iii      i `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Frank Krygowski
3 Mar 25 i i    iii      `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies5Frank Krygowski
4 Mar 25 i i    iii       `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies4Roger Merriman
4 Mar 25 i i    iii        `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3Frank Krygowski
4 Mar 25 i i    iii         `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Roger Merriman
4 Mar 25 i i    iii          `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Catrike Ryder
1 Mar 25 i i    ii`* Re: Getting old is not for sissies3AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i    ii `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Frank Krygowski
1 Mar 25 i i    ii  `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1AMuzi
1 Mar 25 i i    i`- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Roger Merriman
1 Mar 25 i i    `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Frank Krygowski
28 Feb 25 i `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies6Roger Merriman
28 Feb 25 i  +- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1zen_cycle
28 Feb 25 i  `* Re: Getting old is not for sissies4AMuzi
28 Feb 25 i   +* Re: Getting old is not for sissies2Zen Cycle
1 Mar 25 i   i`- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1AMuzi
28 Feb 25 i   `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Roger Merriman
28 Feb 25 +- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Zen Cycle
28 Feb 25 `- Re: Getting old is not for sissies1Mark J cleary

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal