Dork Disk.............(always? never? sometimes?).........
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 164
Bikes: Jamis Icon Pro
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I just bought my first road bike this year and thought about leaving it on. Adjusted the limit screws and after 2 weeks, I realized I am never in the granny gear anyway so took it off. I like the cleaner look without it.
#102
Mostly Harmless
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Chittenango, NY
Posts: 56,592
Bikes: Have two wheels
Mentioned: 169 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13714 Post(s)
Liked 4,530 Times
in
2,506 Posts
#103
Falls Downalot
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 3,103
Bikes: Now I Got Two
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I missed all the post-menopausal ranting, am I too late to join in here?
#104
elcraft
My commuter bike sports both reflectors and a plastic dork disc- really cheap insurance against the absurd possibility that my chain gets thrown over the largest cog. Even though I have my derailleur limit screws properly set, strange things can sometimes be thrown into the chain during the unlit, MUP part of my ride. Imagine trying to wrestle your chain out of the spokes in the dark of an unlit road or path? The reflectors actually add some additional visibility for the scary drivers on the commute. Hey, even the yellow pedal reflectors can add an additional thing for drivers to see. Dorky they may seem, but many people are conditioned to recognize a bicycle by these types of reflectors! If I only rode a road bike during daylight hours, yeah, these "dorky" things would probably be removed......
#109
Vain, But Lacking Talent
Roopull, if it is a PERFECTLY maintained bike as you insisted, there is zero reason for a chain in the spokes. That said, there are hundreds upon hundreds of bikes that leave legitimate bike shops (and like ALL of them from wally world) that could possible put a chain in the spokes because they were never properly set in the first place. This is why you see so many search results for the problem.
At the shop I work at, it is standard practice for a "make ready" (final check before the recently purchased bike leaves our doors) to include TRYING to put the chain into the spokes. Not just with the shifter, but by actually physically pushing on the derailleur while it is in the granny gear. Once this is done, the ONLY way you could put a chain in the spokes is by bending the derailleur hanger in a minor fall or a simple tip over in the parking lot, or by changing wheelsets where the base of the freehub is slightly more outboard of the previous wheelset. ALL of this can be avoided with simple maintenance, care and common sense. Why do you think it's never happened to you in 25 years?
Yes it is primarily looks, and yes it would be cheap insurance to keep it on. But people who enjoy a sleek road bike tend to appreciate sleek lines and prefer to not have it. Both ways are fine, really. But don't make up excuses. It reminds me of people who rationalize that helmets are more dangerous because of the extra weight your head carries creates more potential energy (I for real read this on these forums). You don't have to wear a helmet, either. I really don't care, but I get flustered when people start making insane rationalizations.
At the shop I work at, it is standard practice for a "make ready" (final check before the recently purchased bike leaves our doors) to include TRYING to put the chain into the spokes. Not just with the shifter, but by actually physically pushing on the derailleur while it is in the granny gear. Once this is done, the ONLY way you could put a chain in the spokes is by bending the derailleur hanger in a minor fall or a simple tip over in the parking lot, or by changing wheelsets where the base of the freehub is slightly more outboard of the previous wheelset. ALL of this can be avoided with simple maintenance, care and common sense. Why do you think it's never happened to you in 25 years?
Yes it is primarily looks, and yes it would be cheap insurance to keep it on. But people who enjoy a sleek road bike tend to appreciate sleek lines and prefer to not have it. Both ways are fine, really. But don't make up excuses. It reminds me of people who rationalize that helmets are more dangerous because of the extra weight your head carries creates more potential energy (I for real read this on these forums). You don't have to wear a helmet, either. I really don't care, but I get flustered when people start making insane rationalizations.
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,139
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
Roopull, I'm not debating the looks factor here, I'm talking specifically about your argument that, "a PERFECTLY tuned bike" could suddenly send a chain into the spokes by hitting a bump or catching debris.......
........ But do not make up bull**** excuses that have zero merit in reality ....
........ But do not make up bull**** excuses that have zero merit in reality ....
I believe that happens. Not often.... but in real life. I've had my derailleur knocked out of whack in a crash. And I would guess most cyclists have. Maybe I am wrong. But on the bikes I ride daily nether disk is really noticeable. Not really any more than a chains width taller than the biggest cog.... very thin and transparent.
The reflectors are a different story. They are noticeable (and that is why they are there). I can't argue that they are attractive ether. But I ride a lot on urban streets and code does require the front and rear reflector.
That guy that posts about using a kick stand. Well...... that's just wrong. We have to uphold SOME standards!
It doesn't bother me what it's called. I don't even care if anyone (or no one) likes the looks of my bike. I know there are some popular trends with dress, hair, tattoos, and bicycle appearance. I am a pretty accepting guy... I even tolerate people who keep filthy bicycles with ratty handlebar tape.
I also accept that ouchies are a part of cycling that can not be avoided. But I never encourage or advocate behavior that might increase the odds of wrecks.
Last edited by Dave Cutter; 07-20-14 at 10:22 PM.
#112
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Roopull, if it is a PERFECTLY maintained bike as you insisted, there is zero reason for a chain in the spokes. That said, there are hundreds upon hundreds of bikes that leave legitimate bike shops (and like ALL of them from wally world) that could possible put a chain in the spokes because they were never properly set in the first place. This is why you see so many search results for the problem.
I did say I don't actually know for certain how this is happens. As for it being a perfectly tuned bike, my buddy literally takes his bike to the shop to be tuned every couple of hundred miles. Fortunately, the LBS owner tolerates him well enough & doesn't charge him for half the work he does. I've had this guy work on my bike, and aside from not tuning brakes to my tastes, he does a great job. It was after one of these tune ups that his chain made it into the spokes. I wasn't on the ride, and I don't know how it happened, but it did. So, it most certainly didn't happen out of neglect or some bozo twirling screws without a clue.
Dave Cutter, the guy who posted directly after you posits some good theories as to some possibilities.
As for what annoys me about the "remove the dork disc" mentality, you hit the nail on the head.
Yes it is primarily looks, and yes it would be cheap insurance to keep it on. But people who enjoy a sleek road bike tend to appreciate sleek lines and prefer to not have it. Both ways are fine, really. But don't make up excuses.
That's exactly my point... if someone wants to remove a safety feature because it looks bad to their eye, I get it. That's fine, but don't go telling people to remove it and pretending like it's anything but vanity/fashion/style/whatever. Aside from saving a few grams, I cannot fathom a practical reason to ever remove one of these. At least you & a few others are honest about it & not being condescending. It's the condescending snotty crap that steers so many people away from cycling... this attitude that if you don't do things the way you're supposed to do them, then you're an idiot, even if the way you're supposed to do things is idiotic.
Wait, does this mean I have to take off BOTH my kickstands?
#115
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 614
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#116
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 33,004
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene '04; Bridgestone RB-1 '92
Mentioned: 325 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11971 Post(s)
Liked 6,652 Times
in
3,485 Posts
Ok that's enough beating up on one guy. Buh bye!
Hold your ground Roopull . . . basically if the pros used dork disks, they'd be all for it.
Hold your ground Roopull . . . basically if the pros used dork disks, they'd be all for it.
__________________
See, this is why we can't have nice things. - - smarkinson
Where else but the internet can a bunch of cyclists go and be the tough guy? - - jdon