View Single Post
Old 10-09-07, 05:56 AM
  #14  
Mike T.
All-round nice guy.
 
Mike T.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 448

Bikes: Kish road bike, Seven mtb, Marinoni road and track bikes.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Sogood, so what's your suggestion of how we should state our gear sizes? And how do you propose to get the whole of the English speaking cycling world to change to your method?

I don't understand the "hands" measurement in horse circles. "15 hands" means nothing to me but I'm sure 5' would, compared to a 5' 5" horse. But if I got into horses I'll bet the "hands" measurement would make sense in time.

Yes I'm sure 48 div by 16 (which equals 3) would make sense in time and just as much sense as 48 div by 16 x 27 (which equals 81) but Gear Inches has been around for a little while (like a hundred years) and almost everyone who's really into cycling understands it.

Sorry if you don't agree with the majority of the English speaking cycling world. We're happy with the present system but then I'm happy with Imperial measurement even though I live in Canada and some stuff is measured in Metric. Try going to the lumberyard and asking for a ten foot 2x4 in metric. Hell a 2x4 doesn't even measure 2x4 but we ALL know how relative that is to a 2x6 that doesn't measure 2x6 either.
Mike T. is offline