How is a "rear-freewheel" system any more bell-bottom-resistant?

ROBE30,
Right $50 is about $30 too much.
This sorta' points out the problem with buying a bike with an "adequate steel" frame ve Chrome Moly steel. The price for a bike in riding shape should be about $40 for a cheapo steel frame vs maybe $100-$150 for Chrome Moly. Unfortunately sellers of a nice looking bike-good shape, but with cheapo steel-usually want $70 or so because it is "vintage etc". For about double that, you get a bike with a frame-chromo-that is worth upgrading if you want to someday-and will be easier to sell someday.

Take your time-lotta' bikes out there. It is Usually best to buy the best used bike you can afford with no defects, or repairs needed.A good frame can be upgraded, no point in upgrading a plain steel frame(silk purse, sow's ear).
Luck
Charlie

The momentum of the bike working through the chain could cause an injury to foot, leg, or ankle, or cause a fall. When the rear freewheels, the momentum to continue only comes from the chain, crankset, freewheel, and your legs, and the worst that happens is you tear your pants.

The rear sprockets do freewheel, though. It's a safety feature. Each sprocket has a couple of spring loaded pawls. They turn stiffly because they are sandwiched together with nylon bushings and don't have a bearing to ride on, but they will turn. They are retained on the hub by a spring and circlip so the pressure clamping them together doesn't get too high to allow movement.

What is more important is that you find a bicycle that fits you properly; otherwise, you won't ride it.
A comfortable bike with hi-ten steel frame, steel wheels and a one piece crank is preferable to a full carbon, Campy Record dream machine that feels like a torture device.

I would recommend you go to a nice bike shop that'll spend some time finding the right bike for you and your needs. And they make sure the bike fits you just right.

They are retained on the hub by a spring and circlip so the pressure clamping them together doesn't get too high to allow movement


I don't know about that as I removed mine off the hub using a standard Shimano splined hub tool.

I avoid steel bikes like the plague. Certainly there is a cult of those that love steel, and they repeat the mantra 'steel is real'. I think if you say it long enough you start to believe it.

However, even the best steel bike leaves something to be desired. A classic Klein or Cannondale give such an incredible ride that's its impossible to compare to a vintage (or modern) steel bike. It would be like comparing your grandfathers truck to a Maserati.

Its not a popular perspective, but the reality is that aluminum, carbon, and titanium just build 'better' bikes than steel. The reason so many boutique builders work with steel is because its cheap. The skill level required to braze lugged steel bikes can not be compared to learning to TIG weld. Sure lugs are aesthetically pleasing, but they just don't build into epic bikes. A bike's soul is the frame and the wheelset. Starting with steel is starting with a compromise.

I don't avoid 27" wheels. These wheels have a 630mm BSD as opposed to the 622mm BSD on 700c wheels. It ain't much, but on frames over 66cm, of which plenty exist with 27" wheels, the difference in wheel size makes everything a little more proportional. After Continental stopped making the Top Touring 2000 tires in 27" my opinion is a little more qualified, but you can still get smart Schwalbe Marathons, Panaracer Paselas, and Michelin World Touring tires in 27". You can still get Continentals in 27" but they are more road race tires not the old touring tires I prefer for building up 'country' bikes.

Other bikes to avoid. At all costs avoid a bonded Vitus, whether it be an aluminum or carbon tubed bike. Every restoration and vintage expert I've ever seen comment on these has advised that the bikes not be ridden (at all) but only collected due to safety issues. Which is sad because they usually come with epic Mavic kit. These were great bikes, and very few are actually out on the road, and even fewer probably should be. Obviously the Viscount 'death' fork.

What else to avoid? Any vintage bike with an vintage alloy handlebar. Almost nothing can be as catastrophic as a complete loss of steerage on a bike at speed. Aluminum bars should be treated as 'schedule replacement' components on your bike just like your chain, rings, and cogs. The aluminum fatigues and after so many cycles they will fail. Its isn't a matter of if, but a matter of when.

Leonard Zinn says replace after four years of use, or one year of use if racing. Zinn has a background in physics, is the tech guy at Velonews, and builds his own components and bikes out of steel, aluminum, magnesium, and ti. Trust his opinion, he isn't just trying to get you to buy more bars.

Any bar that has hit the ground, either the bike falling over, or laying the bike down should be replaced in my book. The small diameter of vintage bars makes them especially suspect considering modern oversized stuff (less prone to failure).

I'd avoid anything that isn't equipped with a slant parallelogram derailleur. Until Suntour's pantent expired Campagnolo, Shimano, Huret, and Mavic were producing derailleurs that shifted much more poorly than the Suntour stuff. In looking to a vintage build know what it is, and why you want it. I don't have a problem with a vintage/classic bike being your only ride, but know what you have. With vintage stuff there are very real compromises...

I'm a huge Mavic buff, but I wouldn't recommend that anyone use the old Mavic brakesets. For my 'tout Mavic' build I'm using modern Mavic SSC brake calipers. I was pleasantly suprised to see that so many people preferred them to Dura-Ace and Campy Record calipers. Essentially a vintage bike should be avoided if it can't be ridden safely.

There is a boundary where keeping it period correct has to give way to safety. I think handlebars, brakesets, and tires are often overlooked on these bikes. I think that is a dangerous gamble. A blowout or a loss of steering on a technical descent or on a busy road could cost you your life.

To me that is the thing to avoid most of all...

Not entirely true. Columbia brazed frames without using a fillet or lugs for decades. But, they use an internal sleeve insert at the joints - so kind of like an internal lug. This was actually the way to build a bike up until external lugs became popular in the 1920s. External lugs caught on because they look pretty - Gormully & Jeffries pioneered external lugs and their copywriting of the time advised that external lugs made it easier for a buyer to examine the brazing of a frame (it does).

I personally like the super clean joins on the Columbia frames, even if there is a lot of excess brazing material left over on the inside of the frame...

Murray also brazed their frames, but they didn't sleeve all joints, only some such as the joints at the bottom bracket were sleeved. However for both companies, the tubes actually have to pass into eachother at the joints, unlike the butt welded frames from Huffy where the join is sometimes soley made to the exterior surface of the tubes.

Just so you know:
http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q...s/P1010534.jpg
This is what an internally sleeved, brazed Columbia frame joint looks like. So sharp you could cut your hair on it.

It's a moot point though, since I'll admit a ten speed Columbia is nearly as heavy as a Schwinn Varsity (about nine hundred and twenty five thousand tons) so not what you should be looking for.



Reread the original post. Then come up with any logical reason a steel framed bike would fail to provide what he wants.

Thanks for showing us how to spot the cranks. Now I have another one-just what is the problem with cottered cranks?

The cotter can wear out. The cranks can wear out. The cotter can wear out, causing the cranks to wear out, ruining the cotter and the cranks. They're usually heavy. They're usually on the cheapest bikes (unless you go waaayyy back into the 1950s, then they were on the best bikes too).

When they're in good condition, they work. When they're in bad condition they wobble, have slop, make noise, etc. In my opinion, worse than one piece ashtabula cranks - unless you happen across cranks in excellent pristine condition.

Thanks for the info on the vintage alloy bars. I wouldnt have thought about that, but that would really ruin your day. As far as the cottered cranks go, I had a set on an old Hutch BMX that I had when I was a kid and they were a PITA. They would always loosen up on me and I actually took some gutter material and made a shim to "fix" it.

You removed the sprockets with a splined hub tool? Don't think so. You may have removed the entire cluster assembly but not the sprockets.

Then this: "The aluminum fatigues and after so many cycles they will fail. Its isn't a matter of if, but a matter of when."

Huh? Boutique builders are making high end steel bikes, but cutting corners using "cheaper" steel tubes? If they knew better they would be using aluminum?

A lot of those internally lugged bikes got rebadged and you can't always tell who made it.

I feel you contradict yourself with these two points!:D Varsitys are heavy but very strong, durable bikes which often come in great colors and are appreciated by some as the classics they are. You rarely notice weight on a bike unless you do a lot of climbing, racing, or loading/unloading into a car or something.

You may have removed the entire cluster assembly but not the sprockets.

That is true...I assumed you meant the wheel hub

I'm sorry, but I have to sound the "excessively rarefied atmosphere of idiosyncratic personal preference" alarm.

Most of the used tenspeeds you encounter will be steel. it builds a fine bike.

Most of them will be built not from the ultra thin reynolds, columbus, tange, vitus, etc tubing which makes for a great ride, but from thicker stuff.

If you choose sensible 27X1-1/4 or 700x28c tires, you'll probabaly never know the difference. They'll be more puncture resistant and long lasting, and may actually roll easier than ultranarrow tires if you choose a fine sidewall and thin inner tube.

Totally agree about the fatigue, except that a lot of bikes got bought in the 70s and 80s and weren't used much, so they're probabaly not fatigued. Check the rims for wear-the bike might be nearly new.

P.S. If tig welding is so deluxe, why are automated tig welding machines churning out bikes for walmart?

I avoid people who dismiss steel like the plague.

In defense of cottered cranks....

Cottered cranks are old-fashioned, and they are (usually) steel, but they are not necessarily bad, or cheap.

As you said, once upon a time they were found even on the best bikes. Telling people to avoid all cottered cranks is just bad advice. Good advice would be more specific, such as: avoid any 'ten speed' bike with a cottered crank made after 1975 or so. Excellent three speed bikes still had cottered cranks well into the 80's

Cranks, by which I mean crank arms, do not wear out. Bearings wear out. Chain rings wear out, and aluminum ones wear out faster than steel.

If a crank arm and chain ring are swaged together, and the chain ring wears out, then the crank is worn out. It doesn't matter whether said crank is cottered and cotterless.

The advantage of Ashtabula cranks is that the crank arms and the spindle are made from a single piece of metal, and therefore cannot move relative to one another. On three-piece cranks, whether cottered or cotterless, there is a possibility that crank arms will move relative to the spindle if not attached properly, and in such cases the movement in question will damage the crank arms. It is a question of installation; and I have seen more cotterless cranks ruined by bad installation than cottered ones.

Certainly it is true that a lot of cheap nasty bicycles came with cottered cranks, and these are bikes to avoid. But the same can be said of bikes with cotterless cranks.

Bull.

My view as a cyclist:
I have never seen an aluminum alloy handlebar fail catastrophically in such a way as to result in a "complete loss of steerage". I've seen bars damaged... and even break... but you're just trying to scare people with talk of losing steering control at speed.

My view as a professional engineer:
It's all about failure modes. Aluminum alloy does not fail suddenly and catastrophically except when manufactured in a casting process. How many cast aluminum bars have you seen? An alloy handlebar under normal use will fail by bending or cracking, hence giving the user a warning that a total failure is coming. If your handlebars are bearing such a load that they fail so suddenly that you have no warning, then you're doing something wrong.

I don't care what credentials that Leonard Zinn has attached to his name, I think he's full of it on this issue... and I've been an engineer for almost 30 years. Does that count?

I think it best to avoid trolls.

Steel is only as good as the guy who builds with it.

All my road bikes are steel, and they all handle and feel different. My Masi, though, has by far the best ride quality.

This is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. What new bike company do you work for? A cracked carbon frame could cost you your life, too. I had a CAAD3 Cannondale R600, IT WAS THE WORST RIDING BIKE I EVER OWNED! A carbon fiber seat post made it even worse. You also suggest riding vintage aluminum bikes, but shun vintage handlebars. Too funny.,,,,BD:roflmao2:

This thread has brought up a rather heated debate btwn steel vs aluminum frames. Most of the stuff that is aluminum is more than I feel like spending so thats out. As far as Al bars spontaneously failing, I don't buy that. That comment mtn... made will make me look for signs of fatigue on the bars before I start riding the bike hard. I've never had Al spontaneously fail (I have 30+yo Al rims on my '67 bug and there are no issues), but it can bend and crack so its up to the operator to periodically inspect components. So what I've gained from this thread is that lugged frames tend to be stronger, cottered cranks have more maintenance issues, but can work fine and Al rims tend to stop better and are more desirable than steel. The only (right now) I'm still not sure of is some people seem to frown upon stem shifters vs DT shifters. Why? Compared to all the different car sites that I'm on, you guys/ girls have been the most helpful and friendly group I've come across. Thanks for all your help!:thumb:

There are a few separate issues here.

1. There is a style issue. Stem shifters are better than downtube shifters if you want to ride in an upright position; therefore wannabe racers and roadie snobs (yes, including myself, 30 years ago) tended to look down at them.

2. There is a price point issue. Stem shifters (along with cottered cranks, extensions on the brake levers, bolt-on axles, steel rims, and so on) tend to be (for lack of a better term) symptomatic of a cheap bikes. Even so, you may find them on very fine bicycles, including Schwinn Paramounts.

3. There is a mechanical issue. Comparing stem shifters with downtube shifters, downtube shifters are the simpler and more precise mechanism because there is less cable housing and fewer bends in the cable, therefore a more direct connection to the derailleurs. This is true, of course, but bogus since by the same logic, we would prefer stem shifters over bar end shifters, or brifters; and we don't.

4. On the other hand, there is also a size issue. Downtube shifters may be within easy reach on bicycles with small frames, but a tall rider on a tall framed bicycle has to reach much farther down. When I upgraded from stem shifters to downtube shifters, I really missed them!

5. Finally, there is the Campagnolo issue. Campagnolo never made stem shifters; therefore stem shifters must be bad.

There is also the issue that a stem shifter can seriously injure a gentleman if he goes over the bars!:eek:

Interesting point. Of all injuries caused when gentlemen fly over their bars, I wonder what proportion can be blamed on the stem shifters?

Yeah, that would prove to be QUITE the issue!:injured:
So stem shifters shouldn't be a deal breaker then?

I have had a steel bar fail on a three speed cruiser which I pedaled pretty hard. It did go soft and bent upward without totally breaking. I think it was too thin (light) and too wide, but it did fail and it was only about three years old.

Leonard Zinn specializes in bikes for guys who are too big for regular bikes. His estimates of how often to change may be geared for them.

An aluminum frame can fatigue. So can a steel one. However, it won't leave you without steering. More likely, it will just feel wobbly, then you'll stop and find a crack. That's a lot different than a handlebar. I broke a butt brazed joint on a cheap frame and rode home. Various forums occasionally have pictures of broken dropouts, seatpost clamps, etc. and it's more often on an aluminum frame.

A handlebar is a cantilever beam, so it flexes more. It also flexes both ways, which greatly amplifies fatigue.

An aluminum handlebar is not cast, of course, but if it is work hardened and beginning to crack, don't you think you just MIGHT be able to pull it apart with one more good heave during a sprint?

Of course, it's not too important to the present discussion because most used tenspeeds just haven't seen that much use.

It is not the proportion but the severity. Think of what those levers are pointing at.

I don't know how serious of an issue it is for guys who don't go hauling around at 20MPH, though.

Going over the bars is potentially a dangerous business; but if you're going fast enough to clear the bicycle entirely, the stem shifters won't be able to hurt you.

Deal breaker? No, not at all. I would regard them as a warning light, though. Stem shifters will in most cases indicate a bike at the lower end of the price scale, and the combination of stem shifters with cottered crank and steel rims would tend to confirm that diagnosis. So the thing to look for, if a bike has stem shifters, is contraindications, such as a forged cotterless crank, aluminum rims, leather saddle, etc. If you see a Reyonlds 531 sticker (for example), don't let the stem shifters slow you down.

http://www.company7.com/bosendorfer/...531_151113.jpg