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 : 03. Mar 2025, 20:27:05
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Message-ID : <vq4vq8$1ecks$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/3/2025 1:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 11:09:15 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
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:
>
On 3/1/2025 1:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 07:43:22 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
On 2/28/2025 5:52 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
I was thinking about fixies just the other day on my ride and thought
maybe I could set up a fixie on the Catrike. Then I considered how
often I coast. Keeping my legs moving the whole ride is not something
I want to do.
>
>
I thought about your comment this morning.
>
While almost everything humans can imagine is possible when
time and money have no value, there's no practical
straightforward way to make a Catrike fixed gear.
>
Hardly straightforward, but certainly possible.  Remove the gears,
chain and sprockets and replace them with a hydraulic gear pump, two
hydraulic hoses, and a hydraulic motor on the wheels.  This is nothing
new.  There are motor vehicles and construction equipment that use a
hydraulic pump at the engine, T junction, and a hydraulic motor on
each wheel.
>
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.
>
The UCI weight limit of 6.8 Kg applies to all types of bikes, track
bikes (aka fixies) included
 I assume that applies only to UCI sanctioned bicycle races.
Oddly, I haven't seen any bicycle-like exercise machines being sold on
the basis of them being light weight.  Probably the same for moving
bicycle-like exercise machines (i.e. trainers).
 Note:  The discussion was initially about adapting fixie technology to
a tricycle (Catrike).  Andrew commented:
 "While almost everything humans can imagine is possible when
time and money have no value, there's no practical
straightforward way to make a Catrike fixed gear."
 I then provided a possible solution using hydraulics and mentioned
that weight would be "a huge concern, especially in racing".  From
that point on, the comments assumed that such a hydraulic drive train
would be used on racing bicycles and that it would not be a good idea
because if would be unsuitable for racing.  It might be best if we
simply not consider racing to be a suitable use for a hydraulic fixie
bicycle.
  
Much agreed on that last point.
I still think, especially regarding hydraulic drive, "...there's no practical straightforward way to make a Catrike fixed gear."
Possible? Sure.
--
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