EEG stat

and goodnight.

it's best, when proposing something new and different to concentrate on a group of enthusiasts that have little to lose by agreeing to it. experts, whether self-described or agreed to by consensus, have a LOT to lose by agreeing with an idea or proposition that runs contrary to their experience. probably because, if valid, would make obsolete part of their knowledge base and demand a relearning that they are loath to do, or at least bring into question basic principles that have contributed to their knowledge and status.

a reading of the history of scientific advancements makes this very clear. the most strident invective is often reserved for those with an original thought or idea from those with the most prestigious positions in support of the status quo.

read (pronounce with long e, like "reed") with straight face and monotone. :)

The most bizzare part of this is the idea that no one has ever done a 1x10 before.

It's been done on the mtb side, and there's a 1x11 group but that requires a specific freehub body..

Thread decaying. Abandon ship, gentlemen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVNzS17Mk_Y&sns=em

Exactly. Like the doctor who first proposed that doctors wash their hands after working on cadavers before working on live patients. He was puit in a mental institution.

^^^ Copernicus

Shrams - how do they work?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KbR5fyhRsU

Yea...we have some folks talking about the 'value of innovation' here. This is not innovation, it's devolution.

The value is in the idea of it, and the innovation is in asking the question that provokes the knee-jerk "what for?" I look at it this way: eight or nine speed is pretty common on city bikes and commuters. Mine is like that and I'm pretty satisfied with only eight gears. Why not add two more and bump the top end while keeping many of the advantages of a 1x8? It's a good idea. Impractical perhaps, but righteous.

Reminds me of Millar when their team boss opted to go 1x10 and he had a dropped chain which cost him the W.

Next thing you know, people will be getting rid of the cassette and RD and freehub! :D

Ditto this question. It sounded like GH went through some work to arrive at that positioning and product - so share.

The leading edge of the pulley is too squared, and chamfered on the sides of the tooth rather than more towards the top corner that first meets the chain. Second, the thickness of the tooth where the roller of the chain rests in is not adequate. Sram lower pulleys are slightly thinner than the upper ones, which I'd guess is part of their 10,000 CAD effort (aeroglide!) to reduce the racket of their notoriously noisy drivetrains. The best fix is to take an upper pulley and chamfer the whole damn thing yourself, but that takes practice and those things can be expensive. A second, almost as good fix is to take the original bum pulley, round off the leading corner a bit and then go back and give it a sharper edge. 220 wet or dry sandpaper at first, then smooth with 400-600.

Is good to first see if it needs all this worrying about. Put bike on stand, pedal at speed and tweak the chain about a bit, bounce it from side to side. On my new Wifli it took nothing for the pulley to dechain and then the chain would get sucked up into the cage. No way would I have ridden it like that, not worth the risk. If it seems that this happens so easily it makes your gut a little uncomfortable, then a fix is appropriate.

the one in photo is a ceramic xx lower wheel, kept as a spare. Its a bit overdone but illustrative.

Chainkeeper design and positioning is best explained in a short video and I can't upload those here.

In bold above is wrong...or you just can't explain why the two pulleys have different geometry.

I've got an idea! How about 2 x 5!!! 2 chainrings and 5 cogs in the back. It gives you 10 gears. Why hasn't anyone thought about that!

We'll be there. Likely the only Orange and Yellow tandem with Zipp 808's.

Brilliant!

I run a 50/39/24 crankset and a 48/38/22T crankset and with an N-Gear jump stop, I never drop the chain either.

I don't lose 10 (extra) feet everytime I shift my front derailleur (at least not when I've tuned it correctly). And for my troubles, I get almost a factor of two in gear range.

All that being said, nicely done! This is what you wanted and it looks to be done nicely. :)

This concerned me earlier in the thread. I fear the can is open and the worms cannot be put back in.

One day, this will be the norm[shudder]:
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=308518

Jesus I could complicate an ice cube. If the sram pulley thing is a problem, JUST ORDER A G-D SET OF ULTEGRA WHEELS OFF AMAZON. The desired tooth profile/chamfering is what I am describing above. Mine are an awkward version of that.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xVNzS17...ure=g-high-fbc

Boy you can smell a stoker a mile away. But thank God they sit behind you, right?

bad joke. look forward to seeing you! I'm usually not too much of a strain to pick out.

Gerry, why does the 10 X 1 setup need a chain keeper. There is none on a 10 X 2 setup and the FD doesn't touch the chain except when front shifting. Why can't the chain just sit there all alone? Doesn't the RD manage the chain sufficiently?

Robert

I'm not Gerry but my 1x9 started out with no guard, and would drop the chain off the front. It wasn't common, but if I was rapidly accelerating and banging down through multiple cogs, the chain would fall off the outside. This was with an unramped unpinned Surly chain ring. I ended up having to put a bash guard to the outside.

It never once dropped a chain to the inside, or fell when shifting to larger cogs. Only on fast shifts to smaller cogs, 3 or four in succession, and much worse in wet weather. I can't explain it.