the 'there's no such thing as a stupid question' bike maintenance thread

woody33

Thanks for the reply, I wipe with a cloth or baby wipe alright, but I'd like to get between the links a bit more. I'll see what I can do with a couple of toothbrushes.

a_squirrelman

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Hi,
I have an issue where the chain won't go back up on to the higher chain ring. What I don't understand is that if I hop off the bike, lift the back wheel and pedal by hand it immediately jumps up to the higher one, which makes no sense to me.
Any advice on what could be the issue? I have two chain rings and my gf has the exact same issue on her newish bike, where she has three chain rings, and she can't get from the smallest to middle one.
Thanks!

Anyone?

saccades

Tony04 wrote: »

I guess a 50t set up with an 10t (I'd imagine if 1x is going mainstream it's going to be microspline that will do it) 50 t cassette would work. So you have you 5:1 ratio to grind away on flats and 1:1 ratio as your granny gear.

But I still cant see this working;
Big range cassettes are heavy to save weight you see aluminium rings being used on the mtb but these wear quicker, you can get away with this on the mtb as they're very scarcely used because you already have the smaller 30-36t chainring on the front.

On a road bike your going to be using the high cogs alot
presuming you have a big chainring so you'll have to use steel rings unless you want to pay to change your cassette alot.
The deore 12 speed cassette, all steel, weighs about 600 grams so youd probably have to have something similar on the road bike also your rd is going to be heavier because of the higher range, so you acctually wouldnt be saving weight, when you think about it.

Also on a road bike a 500% range cassette is going to be very jumpy and hard to find the right gear so I dont think it will take off.

Even though it's much more a pain to maintain I think for the wide choice of gears I'll be sticking with 2x.

Even for the maintenance benefits the cassette mightnt be as mainstream and therefore harder and more expensive to change

Saying that I did spin the other day around ncd when I didnt shift down on the small chainring although equally did 50k with 1000+ elevation the next day that I wouldnt of completed without the little ring

This is all stuff I thought and was said on MTB forums before I bought the new MTB with 1x12. Possibly for racing on the flat the gaps between are too wide but for everything else the 500% range works. It isn't cheap but the SRAM cassette I have is 450g compared to duraace 180g. Once you remove the shifter elements, extra ring and front derailleur the weights are in line with each other. The longevity has impressed me so far, it's coated in something that's working.

As I said, it really works for my cycling (commute and weekends in the Wicklow mountains doing 60 to 90km). Racing, probably not if you are the type that swaps cassettes to fit the course.

cletus

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Anyone?

I would have said to check cable tension on the front derailleur. I'm not sure why the gears would change with no weight on the bike vs. with weight, but that could be a red herring.

I'd go with checking cable tension first, then look at indexing the derailleur

*edit* Thinking about it, the issue with shifting while the wheel is off the ground could simply be less pressure on the drivetrain, meaning less force required to derail the chain. Either way, check tension

dahat

Can a short cage take 11/30 with the same chain running 11/28? Upfront its 52/36.

8valve

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Anyone?

Have seen this with a few bikes; changes up to the big ring on the workstand no problem but won't shift up when being ridden under pressure.


What has worked for me is increasing cable tension gradually (if you have an inline tensioner fitted to the cable) and giving the outer limit screw no more than a quarter turn to allow the front mech travel further out by a teeny-weeny (very technical term lol) amount more, but not so much as to allow the chain to run out off the big chainring and get fouled up on the cranks and risking damage/twisting of the front mech cage...little bit of faffing/trial and error required; seek pro help if you don't feel confident.



Also, take pedalling pressure off the pedals (but still rotating forward, obviously!)when changing up to the big ring.

Tony04

dahat wrote: »

Can a short cage take 11/30 with the same chain running 11/28? Upfront its 52/36.

16 + 19 = 35 = max short cage capacity on 11 speed shimano derailleurs so that should be fine. Ideally youd want to lengthen your chain by a link, how long have you had the chain? it might need replacing anyway

CramCycle

I presume there is no real issue with mixing mineral oil brands in brakes?

8valve

No issue, once its mineral oil with mineral oil.


Proprietary brake fluid can't be mixed with mineral oil.


I've seen a guy online who ran his brake system using baby oil with no major issue!

loyatemu

put a new cassette and chain onto my bike, first time doing either job - both cassettes are Shimano 10 speed

the new cassette came with 2 spacers on the inside (i.e. behind the largest ring), a thin one that was the equivalent of the one I took off, so I put that one on. The other was a thicker spacer with some notches in it that I couldn't have used even if I wanted to as the last ring of the cassette wouldn't have fitted on. So what is it for? Putting a 10 speed onto an 11 speed hub?

8valve

loyatemu wrote: »

put a new cassette and chain onto my bike, first time doing either job - both cassettes are Shimano 10 speed

the new cassette came with 2 spacers on the inside (i.e. behind the largest ring), a thin one that was the equivalent of the one I took off, so I put that one on. The other was a thicker spacer with some notches in it that I couldn't have used even if I wanted to as the last ring of the cassette wouldn't have fitted on. So what is it for? Putting a 10 speed onto an 11 speed hub?

Most cassettes will come with a spare spacer, which fits nearest the spokes, so that you can ensure a secure fit of the cassette on the freehub body; also helps align the new sprockets so that your indexing is identical to when the old cassette was fitted to the wheel.



You are absolutely correct in fitting the same width spacer as the one you removed.


Complete the following to finish the job:
1.Run through all your gears with the bike on a workstand to verify that your indexing is still correct.
2. Make a cuppa/open a beer.
3. Stand back and admire your awesomeness at having completed the job.

loyatemu

yeah indexing seems fine.

I screwed up the routing of the chain through the deraileur, and didn't notice until after I'd secured the quick link and oiled the thing (thinking that was the reason it sounded rough). Naturally this was when I discovered my bike tool set (which did include a chain breaker and cassette tool) did not include a set of quick link pliers. Cue several sweary minutes trying to detach the oily quicklink with the pliers on my Leatherman (I managed in the end).

Effects

loyatemu wrote: »

I discovered my bike tool set (which did include a chain breaker and cassette tool) did not include a set of quick link pliers. Cue several sweary minutes trying to detach the oily quicklink with the pliers on my Leatherman (I managed in the end).

I cut a small section from a cheap wire hanger, and bend it to suit, then use the pliers to apply the force. Works well.

CormacH94

Are headsets a standard configuration?

I.e, I have two forks I want to be able to swap between the one bike (One fork is fully slammed, one has a lot of length for touring) but I need a crown race for the relaxed fork.

The steerer is 1 1/8 - Does this mean I only need any 1 1/8 crown race or is better to match to the brand/model currently on the slammed fork?

8valve

CormacH94 wrote: »

Are headsets a standard configuration?

I.e, I have two forks I want to be able to swap between the one bike (One fork is fully slammed, one has a lot of length for touring) but I need a crown race for the relaxed fork.

The steerer is 1 1/8 - Does this mean I only need any 1 1/8 crown race or is better to match to the brand/model currently on the slammed fork?

Safer to match brands; also make sure you get the correct diameter/bearing angle also.

Weepsie

Swapping out a chainset question

Knowing from the outset an ultegra triple was a terrible idea for a tourer, I still pushed on for the completist in me.

Thinking of swapping it out for a Deore XT FC 8000. Chsinline would go from 45mm to 50mm.

Besides having to lower the derailleur, and possibly take a few links out of chain, what else am I needed to account for then?

It's a 52/39/30 to a 48/36/26.

magicbastarder

Weepsie wrote: »

Knowing from the outset an ultegra triple was a terrible idea for a tourer

why so?

Weepsie

With fully loaded pannier, and the bike is hefty enough too, I think lower gearing would be better.

I've limited by rear cog to a 30t too by going the ultegra route. No grand plans just yet, but if I do decide to do a few long solo days I think I'll appreciate the different gears.

a_squirrelman

8valve wrote: »

Have seen this with a few bikes; changes up to the big ring on the workstand no problem but won't shift up when being ridden under pressure.


What has worked for me is increasing cable tension gradually (if you have an inline tensioner fitted to the cable) and giving the outer limit screw no more than a quarter turn to allow the front mech travel further out by a teeny-weeny (very technical term lol) amount more, but not so much as to allow the chain to run out off the big chainring and get fouled up on the cranks and risking damage/twisting of the front mech cage...little bit of faffing/trial and error required; seek pro help if you don't feel confident.



Also, take pedalling pressure off the pedals (but still rotating forward, obviously!)when changing up to the big ring.

Thanks cletus and 8valve. Cable tension was the issue, and with no outer screw on this ancient bike I had to move the cage out a mm or two as well. Took some messing about but as a total noob I managed nonetheless.
Cheers!

8valve

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Thanks cletus and 8valve. Cable tension was the issue, and with no outer screw on this ancient bike I had to move the cage out a mm or two as well. Took some messing about but as a total noob I managed nonetheless.
Cheers!

Happy to hear you got it sorted.


It's only by experience that we learn stuff like this and this thread is a great way to share knowledge amongst us, that we've all accumulated over the years.

magicbastarder

i've a pair of aksiums on a bike that's been out in all weathers and was my commuting bike; the spokes are showing it a little with a bit of rust appearing through the anodising. is it even worth trying to clean them/treat them?
it's not nearly enough to worry about the strength of the spokes themselves; and they're disc wheels, so not something where the decision is automatically made to replace them if the rims wear through.

8valve

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've a pair of aksiums on a bike that's been out in all weathers and was my commuting bike; the spokes are showing it a little with a bit of rust appearing through the anodising. is it even worth trying to clean them/treat them?
it's not nearly enough to worry about the strength of the spokes themselves; and they're disc wheels, so not something where the decision is automatically made to replace them if the rims wear through.

They tend to get a bit of surface rust when they're used in all weathers.


If it's only cosmetic, you could give them a quick rub down with a red scotchpad and a blowover with an aerosol can of satin black automotive paint, to make them pretty again...masking the rims and discs/hubs could be a bit of a chore!


The main fault I'm seeing with modern Mavics over the last decade is that the hubs/bearings are genuinely great for longevity, but the rims wear/become concave from the brake pads and also, the nipples, without exception, are absolute barstewards for welding themselves onto the spokes...to the point that I would recommend twice a year that every Mavic wheel owner should soak their nipples with penetrating fluid (Oooooh Matron!) and give each nipple a quarter turn clockwise then back a quarter turn anticlockwise to prevent them seizing and maintain tension!


I'm still riding Mavic hubs (on original sealed bearings) from the 80s/90s on MA40/GP4/Open4 CD rims with no signs of wear on anything, bar rim anodising wear from brake pads.
In the case of Mavic, the old saying ''They don't make em like they used to'' certainly rings true...

swarlb

8valve wrote: »

They tend to get a bit of surface rust when they're used in all weathers.


If it's only cosmetic, you could give them a quick rub down with a red scotchpad and a blowover with an aerosol can of satin black automotive paint, to make them pretty again...masking the rims and discs/hubs could be a bit of a chore!


The main fault I'm seeing with modern Mavics over the last decade is that the hubs/bearings are genuinely great for longevity, but the rims wear/become concave from the brake pads and also, the nipples, without exception, are absolute barstewards for welding themselves onto the spokes...to the point that I would recommend twice a year that every Mavic wheel owner should soak their nipples with penetrating fluid (Oooooh Matron!) and give each nipple a quarter turn clockwise then back a quarter turn anticlockwise to prevent them seizing and maintain tension!


I'm still riding Mavic hubs (on original sealed bearings) from the 80s/90s on MA40/GP4/Open4 CD rims with no signs of wear on anything, bar rim anodising wear from brake pads.
In the case of Mavic, the old saying ''They don't make em like they used to'' certainly rings true...

I bought a used set of Mavic hubs and pedals from one of the Kas mechanics on the Nissan Classic (obviously) a long time ago. They still run as smoothly as they did when I first used them, and God knows how many miles had been on them at that stage.
There was a saying about Campagnolo derailleurs back in the 70's, that they 'shifted poorly' say when compared to Shimano or even Suntour of the day.
However... they would continue to shift poorly.... 'Forever'

JMcL

8valve wrote: »

The main fault I'm seeing with modern Mavics over the last decade is that the hubs/bearings are genuinely great for longevity, but the rims wear/become concave from the brake pads and also, the nipples, without exception, are absolute barstewards for welding themselves onto the spokes...

This. Just after having to ditch a rear Ksh1tium which had spokes continually twisting, working loose, and seized nipples so no amount of elbow grease wouldn't shift them. Even tried swearing at them. Didn't work.

Replaced them with 2nd hand Aksiums which might be a case of once bitten, but I only need them to see me through the rest of the year til BTW time comes round again

8valve

JMcL wrote: »

This. Just after having to ditch a rear Ksh1tium which had spokes continually twisting, working loose, and seized nipples so no amount of elbow grease wouldn't shift them. Even tried swearing at them. Didn't work.

Replaced them with 2nd hand Aksiums which might be a case of once bitten, but I only need them to see me through the rest of the year til BTW time comes round again

Don't forget to lube your nipples!:D

JMcL

8valve wrote: »

Don't forget to lube your nipples!:D

Twice a day to be on the safe side :-)

dave_o_brien

swarlb wrote: »

I bought a used set of Mavic hubs and pedals from one of the Kas mechanics on the Nissan Classic (obviously) a long time ago. They still run as smoothly as they did when I first used them, and God knows how many miles had been on them at that stage.
There was a saying about Campagnolo derailleurs back in the 70's, that they 'shifted poorly' say when compared to Shimano or even Suntour of the day.
However... they would continue to shift poorly.... 'Forever'

A bike mechanic I used to work with used to say that Shimano wore out, Campy wore in.

magicbastarder

i've heard that comment before a couple of times. it sounds neat, but i'd love to know what they mean by that. campagnolo reverses the direction of entropy?

dave_o_brien

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've heard that comment before a couple of times. it sounds neat, but i'd love to know what they mean by that. campagnolo reverses the direction of entropy?

Yeah, exactly.

I think the reputation was that well used campy felt better, crisper and more reliable than well used shimano. New, not much between them.

My experience is that either have really impressive durability for anything but the cheapest of groupsets.

Tony04

dave_o_brien wrote: »

A bike mechanic I used to work with used to say that Shimano wore out, Campy wore in.

What about Sram ? Campy and shimano are at another level.

The thing I love about shimano is how they make all their parts serviceable, apart from maybe the tourney group. Also shimano mtb stuff is rock solid.

Shame campagnolo has lost its market share over the years all the same