when will cycling be perfected?
>>2079127bout 30 years ago
about a century ago
>>2079133>gets mogged by the slightest inclines
>>2079134bicycles are just not meant for steep inclines bro. just walk it up. its like saying about a can opener, "it doesnt blend well" if you need to ride up some mountains take a motorcycle
>>2079136>bicycles are just not meant for steep inlines
>>2079128This. Not even joking. Building bikes with old components makes you realise that companies gave half a fuck and wanted shit to last. I am using 40 year old shifters as if they were new. Today everything is cucked, electronic, 5 million different, non-interchangeable proprietary components, built to last a year or two, un-repairable outside of a professional bike shop. Cycling was great, take the 90s mtb pill and friction-shift your way to the promised land brother.
Only the gearing is yet to be perfected>single gearUnusable in hilly cities like istanbul>derailleur (especially modern 9+ speed ones)Practically a consumable in dusty desert environments such the sahara where dust turns the cassette into a grinding disc (my usecase)>hub gearingThe affordable grease-lubricated ones like Alfine/Nexus do not like high torque (standing on pedals), and the expensive Rohloff will start leaking once subjected to +40 deg.c temperatures of the sahara (my usecase)>Pinion gearboxRequires a specially-built frame that can't even be used with a standard BB if the gearbox failed catastrophicly>hypothetical 7-speed derailleur with a totally enclosed chain+derailleur Could potentially last the longest thanks to thick, widely spaced sprockets and a thick chain, but there is no cover solution for such a system.The best think currently availabe is a Nexus/Alfine 7-8 speed with an enclosed chain (for utilitarian desert usage)
>>2079127other anons itt are right, you have to ask "perfected for what?" What fred ragers don't understand is nobody is denying newer bikes are faster (well, maybe some people are but they're probably trolling which, in their defense, is not hard to do.) But to get there you have to put up with some amount of fussiness, expense, repairability etc. and this is all on a brutal diminishing returns curve, especially the expense. By now it's also easy to run an old bike and cherry pick the technologies you want at a price a serious rider over 14 can afford, e.g. freehub, indexing, light tires. If you insist on dick brakes pretty much any type of frame or fork known to man is available with bosses now. No doubt they will find ways to continue to make bikes faster but diminishing returns is a bitch, if your standard of "perfect" is "most efficient energy transfer" then the answer is probably "never," but you might get close enough to the asymptote that you can safely stop giving a fuck, hell we might already be there. And a lot of freds arguing that angle are in bad faith, because certain features of race bikes are arguably retrogressive and trickle down to the consumer from race regulations.
nevercurrent cutting-edge material research has given us cobalt-aluminum nanolaminates being bandied about as ten times stronger than steel. while you're still riding around on your ludditemobile I'll be riding a 5lb class-3 pedelec cruzbike recumbent with 36" wheels that weigh less than a pound total
>>2079144>>Pinion gearboxNever had one fail in over 20,000 miles of usage. Sounds like either the operator's a complete retard or it grenaded because he bought a temu version.
>>2079143>Today everything is cucked, electronic, 5 million different, non-interchangeable proprietary components, built to last a year or two, un-repairable outside of a professional bike shop.Skill issue, literally. I have cable operateed GRX using good ol' bb86, a toddler could build that shit.
>>2079177you are still relying on a proprietary mechanical piece of equipment that the bike literally cannot function without in case of failure, that is supported by a small company in germany that may not even be around when it does eventually fail (rendering the entire frame unusable).sorry i just can't sleep soundly in the 3rd-world knowing my workhorse relies on such a system.
>>2079181okay, and?
>>2079134>being a leglette
>>2079144>>2079127cycling was perfected with the 3×7 drivetrain>widely spaced sprockets>wider stronger chain>extremely tolerant of abuse and neglect >massive range for mountain climbing, loaded touring, and road racing>cheap
>>2079222>3x7Freehub or freewheel?
three geared army bike, need no more. simple, robust and just works. even a conscript can service it.
>>2079252looked into this shit out of curiosityhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_army_bicycle>The MO-05 was introduced as a single-speed bicycle with a rear coaster brake and a rod-operated front spoon brake>The basic MO-05 weighed a hefty 52 lbs (23.6 kg) when empty>Riders had to be quite fit, as some soldiers were expected to carry up to 70 lbs (31.8 kg) of equipment with only a single gear>be 100y ago serving in the famously flat country of switzerland>be in bike corps>mfw brass says to go anywhere
Already did anon!!
>>2079127Needs a roof, four wheels, and strong assist
>>2079319amazon-sama... I kneel...
>>2079222>wider stronger chainimplying a wider chain is inherently stronger>too stupid to understand how chains failIf anything a wider chain might end up being slightly weaker. While failures in the field tend to be suprisingly often different from failures under lab conditions and no good explanation for the discrepancy exists (except in BMX) it is still the side plate that takes the tension, this is evident from simple geometrical reasoning but also lab tests: The sideplates break. Thicker and wider sideplates of the same material and temper break at a higher load. Wider or narrower chains perform equal for all intents and purposes with their counterpart sharing the same sideplate. And no cyclist can physically break a new and defect free chain.
>>2079330this is true, but most people who compare these things say the many-speed chains wear out faster. True I can't really test that myself but I have a hard time imagining it's coming from Big Five Speed. Maybe with everything narrower, the bushings spread the wear less, or the plates are in contact with sprockets more. Or maybe they actually got around to making the plates thinner. Can't be assed to look it up
>>2079333It is correct that they wear out faster. This goes for the cogs and chainwheels and the chain.But the wear rate has nothing to do with the chains strength. Multi speed chains and cogs / chainwheels simply wear faster because the bearing surfaces (rollers, pins, sprocket) are narrower / less surface area.
>>2079333>>2079358Yes there's bearing surfaces which will wear out faster too but the simple answer is because of rpm. Higher rpm means higher duty cycling so extra wear is put on the entire drivetrain just from spinning. The positive side however is that cassettes last longer than a single freewheel or fixed gear sprocket as the cassette spreads the load over multiple sprockets. It's give and take, singlespeed chains can last a very very long time and cassettes are much more expensive to replace
>>2079372erm, no? Idk why on /n/ everyone always insists on stating engineering related falseisms.>extra wear feom spinningI really don't want to go there right now, perhaps read up on tribology and simply think about the issue at hand real quick. It will come to you that a bearing (roller on pin specifically) can be literally wear-free and it has nothing (within reasonable limits) to do with velocity, frequency of cyclic loading o algo.>casettes last longerOn one hand this isn't necessarily true and on the other hand a kind of moot point. I'd be mostly with you if we agree that the casette and cog share identical material properties and width. The later premise makes the comparisson absurd because cassettes working with 1s chains aren't being made AFAIK. But then it still depends alot on the user. Additionally you have the issue that the load does not 'spread evenly' across cogs in a cassette as the wear rate is proportional to the mismatch between chain lengthening and cog wear. They are literally being loaded harder to keep up with the chain stretching. >Single speed chains last a long timeNo appreciable difference in my experience.
>>2079381nta but everything i read online seems to support that 7-speed cassettes and chains, last longer WHILE NEGLECTED than 10-11 speed ones.the sprockets are thicker and the spaces between them are wider >https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Bicycles/Maintenance_and_Repair/Gear-changing_Dimensions#Cog-set_Stack_Widthif you have any research that proves that 9+ speed drivetrains are actually more durable, then please share because i'm interested. Shimano claims that their modern 9-speed CUES with Linkglide is actually more durable than their older Hyperglide stuff but i don't believe them
>>2079396>sprockets are thickercorrect that was one of my points>7s vs 10-11soddly specific but that's not exactly what this discussion is about, we were talking 1s vs Ns really>the spaces between them are widerI really don't get what this pertains toWhat I am saying tho is:Yes, a wider sprocket or cog needs more material removed to wear the same amount, thus more work goes into doing so up to the same amount of wear when compared to a system using narrower ones.This neglects a very important piece which I believed was universal and basic knowledge:Wear on sprockets / cogs and chainrings is mostly a function of chain wear. If the chain maintains the design pitch you will have many teeth on each sprocket engaging and meaningfully transmitting force. This also means pressure on each tooth is shared and thus lower. The roller never slides but always rolls along the tooth (hence the name) and ideally maintains the lubricating fluid film to the bushings under load, resulting in insignificant friction.The distance between holes in the sideplates grows eventually. This is the weakness of the chain. The pin sideplate interface is not lubricated and subject to wear. This means the chains pitch grows and the chain will not stretch enough under load to distribute the load to sufficiently many teeth as above anymore. This means only few teeth are now loaded much higher which also means the lubrication between roller and bushing might even fail. So the roller will not roll anymore but slide and will do so under high pressure. Add grit and you will be wearing a cog / sprocket/ cheinwheel to exactly where it's apparent pitch will again match that of the lengthened chain.And all this leads to N sprockets perhaps wearing slower than a single otherwise identical cog but not by a rate 1 over N but much faster, perhaps equally fast. Because the rate at which the chain lengthens influences or even dictates the rate at which the cogs wear, even if used periodically.
Already happened
>>2079435go away>>>/o/ wasn't enough, now even your containment thread isn't enough
>>2079439What are you cunthurt about?
>>2079451just read the tread title
>>2079465You got your answer.
>>2079466riding motorbikes is not cycling if you stick to accepted semantic concepts
>>2079467That's clearly a bicycle you imbecile.
>>2079468are you too stupid to spot the motor? The dead man switch doesn't make a motorcycle, which is a bicycle with a motor, a bicycle.BicycleBicycle + motor - > MotorcycleMotorcycle + dead man switch - > Bicycle???
>>2079466I guess I sort of get where these guys are coming from with bikes like this but they take it too far. "Wait, [slack geo, low gears, big tires, swept bars, standover] good actually, let's do that" ok I'm with you so far. But playa unless you made that bike so your 60 year old aunt could tow her own car to the shop with it you just swung all the way the fuck past the mean you were trying to revert to. And what does it cost??
I don't know whether any of you shitposters actually have a jones but it's the best bike I've ever owned
>>2079477Imbecile detected, look closer
>>2079497Best bike ever made, you have to be a true patrician to understand the ethos of Jones.
