I just picked up a used set of Mavic Ellipses. I just now went to take off the cog and swap it out, upon reinstallation of the lockring, I notice Formula etched into its side. My questions are, how close in thread pitch is the Mavic French threaded lockring to standard ones? Am I safe to continue using this lockring? Should I try to find a Mavic one at this point? The threads don't look amazing but it threads on nicely with no binding.

French lockring threading is 33mm x 1mm, which is totally different from English, which is 1.29" x 24TPI. So either that Formula lockring is French threaded, or the hub threads are totally boogered up now.

Assuming the formula lockring reads 1.29 and threads on without binding like you say, I would continue using 1.29 lockrings and not revert to the proper french threaded one. Doing so will most likely further damage the threads than they already are.

Yeah, a friend of mine bought a used set of Ellipses on eBay about two years ago and they came with a Dura Ace lockring threaded on. I checked out the threads and they weren't stripped so the lockring basically re-cut the threads, turning French to English. I installed a cog, re-tightned the lockring and he's still riding them without any issues.

Not to beat a dead horse, but in light of this previous (lively) discussion, I thought I'd pass along this recent topical blog post by Jan Heine:

https://janheine.wordpress.com/2016/...nt-stick-well/

Thanks for the link Leegf.

The horse has definitely been flogged, but I'll still comment on the following.

He lost me when he said slick tires don't have as much grip in dry conditions as treaded tires.

He lost me when the "Slick" he tested was a treaded tire with the tread pattern shaved off. The compound of the tire he used was HARD (he says as much) to survive as a "fine ridge" tread pattern (his words). Once the ridges are shaved off you are left with a HARD slick, utterly defeating the purpose of a smooth and conforming contact patch. The author himself explains this, yet is surprised by the phenomenon of landing on his ass. That is not a fair comparison to a purpose built slick. His test results immediately became worthless. Silly, actually.

He lost me when he said that slick tires can't be made from soft rubber because they'll wear out too quickly.

Comparing to motorcycles...

No, they are not. Bicycles just have weaker engines than motorcycles.

So do motorcycles. Corner entry and full lean at the apex (the important part of this grip test) are nearly identical to motorcycles. Motorcycles are off throttle at those points, just like a bicycle. A casual bicyclist will finish his braking before a corner, then lean in and coast through it. A casual motorcyclist does the same thing. A racing bicyclist will wait as long as possible before braking, apply the brakes and stay on them as he leans and turns, decelerating all the way to the apex, where he picks the bike up and begins accelerating. A racing motorcyclist does the same.

Hard acceleration of a motorcycle on corner exit should not even enter this debate because this is not where bicycle grip suffers. Bicycles, just like motorcycles (again) begin applying power in harmony with the transition of bringing the bike from leaned to upright. Motorcycles can't wack the throttle open at full lean because the abrupt power delivery will cause a break in grip resulting in a crash. Bicyclists cant begin cranking out the power at full lean due to pedal strike and the resulting crash. Both vehicles are forced to wait to apply power until they have transitioned off the side of the tire and are approaching a more upright position.

The similarities are enormous and shouldn't be discounted.

Completely incorrect. See above.

With regard to overall tire design and their "thinking" behind it. In the image below, please pay attention to the center tread pattern. His comment is...

Say WHAT? They use fine longitudinal ribs as a wear indicator. The center seems to be designed in 100% contrast to their own theory of how grip is achieved. Those ribs are running in the exact wrong direction for purposes of straight line braking grip. The ridges are in line with road imperfections instead of against them to create the (myth) bite. You'd be riding on the crest of the ridges with no benefit (as claimed for cornering). They reduce the contact patch by ~50% and you can bet that braking performance suffers big time.

Now lets look at the herringbone pattern on the sides. The claim that forward facing arrow ridges improves cornering grip fascinates me. Mostly because it completely contradicts itself.

According to the image a rider begins to lean over and transition to the side of the tire where he is provided with superior cornering grip by the forward facing ridges. Yet when he leans over farther, and needs even more grip, he transitions to the part of the tire with rearward facing ridges. Each tread pattern is reacting to road surface imperfections in completely different ways. The opposite actually. And providing two different grip levels. If one ridge angle (direction) is awesome, surely the other sucks. How is this an "Optimized Tread Pattern"?

LMAO.



Oy vey. Even though the bike travels in only one direction and the load is always transmitted to the road surface in the same direction?

I don't consider myself cynical about modern marketing and advertising. It is what it is. Companies need to sell their product. I'm not banging my keyboard in anger, trying to "win" an argument. Quite the opposite really. I sit here chuckling at the continued (relentless for decades) efforts by manufactures to convince us that their tread patter is better than the other Brand's tread pattern.

The author of the article is SELLING a product. He is selling a tire with an "Optimized Tread Pattern". Of course he is going to tell us that slicks suck. Of couse he crashed on slicks. Of course he is going to resolve the mystery of why slicks work on cars and motorcycles but magically fail on bicycles. I'm OK with that. I think it's hogwash, and funny, but more power to him for having the balls to peddle snake oil in 2016.

I'm 100% with Jobst Brandt on this particular issue.

^ Now that m'f'er would lean a bike.

asdfas;kng;lakdnlgaknlkhbngdlkns'alfnbljsnl;ajbsf;kbv;kabcvk;jfbjlbvljcnljnx ,cjn ,ljxnclknslkdm

qft

You have provided no scientific evidence to support your point.

What is a good online source for interesting stem caps?

mash

KustomCaps - Laser-Etched Custom Bicycle Headset Caps in 10 anodized colors. Your bike wants one.

Welcome to Bikelangelo -

Niner Y.A.W.Y.D. Top Cap can mount a bottle cap on the top (I have one on my touring bike and I love it and every so often change the cap to something else fun I have drank)

also as someone else pointed out MASH SF has some interested stuff

don't buy the beavis and butthead one. I'm the only one dumb enough to do that.

They do custom engraving on their caps.

https://www.purelycustom.com/product...eadset-screws/

Actually, I am leaning toward the HTFU ones, given that would bug the chit out of some folks.

Thanks, everyone, for the great links!

Did you score and pick up chicks tho?

1/8 cog, 1/8 lockring and 3/32 chainring, safe?

duh. and so many nachos.

Yes, you can have a mixmatch of chainring/cog sizing in 3/32 and 1/8th....the only thing you need to care about is your actual chain size itself. 1/8th only

Anyone have a simple table showing the differences in HEIGHT between 23/25/28/32/35 tires? I'm not talking about circumference or widths, but just the physical height difference of say going from a 25mm tire to a 32mm tire.

Just hard to find that info. For example...you're running a 25mm tire and there is plenty of width in the rear triangle for a 32mm/fatter tire, you're just not sure about the actual height difference interfering with the brake bridge.

There are some rough assumptions used for gearing calculations but that won't be accurate enough for your requirements.
Tire size can vary a lot with tire brand and many tires don't actually measure true to their nominal size.
Wheel width with have an effect on tire shape, same tire on a wider rim will be wider and have less height.

If you are mounting the larger tire on the same rim it may be a little taller than expected because the tire may be rounder in cross section. Unfortunately there is no easy calculation because the variables.

In many cases the height limitation is rear brake or the brake bridge as you point out and this varies too.

If you are trying to mount a specific tire on a specific frame, there is a very good chance someone here can tell you if it will work.

I've always imagined tire sizing as a circle that would expand concentrically (more or less) on the OD of the rim according to the size (width) of the tire. That said, theoretically, a 1mm increase in width would increase the diameter by approximately 2-3mm. It's probably way more complicated than that.

Maybe you just need a little teepee for your bunghole?

are you threatening me?!