New hub from shimano

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??

http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>
> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html

Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and carbon
fiber composite rims. ;)

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
BEER IS FOOD

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[M-gineering]

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>
> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>
Now by the looks of it all we now need is a retrofitkit to get rid of
the aluminium axle ;)

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Peter Cole]

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>
> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>

"Shimano introduces an optimized Dura-Ace freehub FH-7850 and four new
wheel sets that carry this new rear hub. The titanium freehub body is
now compatible with 8, 9 and 10 speed cassettes. "

Oooh, titanium! *And* compatibility!

"Furthermore it features a quicker pawl engagement"

Finally! I'll be able to shave that millisec off the coast to sprint
transition!

" and the sealing performance has been improved by 400%."

Jeepers, that sounds like a lot!

"The four, new Dura-Ace wheel sets carry the new rear hub and they also
have an upgraded appearance with a sharp edged hub design"

Anti-squirrel, I guess.

" and red spoke nipples."

Be still my heart.

"All Dura-Ace wheelsets have radial lacing in the front wheel and the
rear wheel has a cross over spoke pattern at both sides to increase
torsional rigidity."

Solved that pesky torsional rigidity problem. Frankly, they had me at
red spokes.

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Aug 18, 6:45 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com"
<pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>
> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___in...

Found out the new freehub cannot be retrofitted to the 7800/7810
hub..what a surprise.

BUT I found this out from shimano, AUSTRALIA...wouldn't it be nice if
shimano, USA had a contact email.

[A Muzi]

> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
> low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and carbon
> fiber composite rims. ;)

The heck with Peter.
We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
wheel sales for us.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[jim beam]

M-gineering wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>
>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>
>>
> Now by the looks of it all we now need is a retrofitkit to get rid of
> the aluminium axle ;)
>

has anyone had a problem with the 7800 hub?

[M-gineering]

jim beam wrote:
> M-gineering wrote:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>
>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>
>>>
>> Now by the looks of it all we now need is a retrofitkit to get rid of
>> the aluminium axle ;)
>>
>
> has anyone had a problem with the 7800 hub?

Yes, as in selling Ultegra hubs where previously you would have made
more money with DA ;) (there is a whole bunch of cogsets which won't fit
for starters)
--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Aug 18, 8:51 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
> > M-gineering wrote:
> >> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
> >>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> >>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>
> >>>http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___in...
>
> >> Now by the looks of it all we now need is a retrofitkit to get rid of
> >> the aluminium axle ;)
>
> > has anyone had a problem with the 7800 hub?
>
> Yes, as in selling Ultegra hubs where previously you would have made
> more money with DA ;) (there is a whole bunch of cogsets which won't fit
> for starters)
> --
> /Marten
>
> info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

We've had a few with FH/pawl problems, sticking down..maybe that has
something to do with changing the design...I think a poor copy of
Campag's hubs...plus the bonded to the axle cone..cone/axle sold as an
assembly...$50.

Not the smoothest hub either, even after overhauling..7700 was much
better, hopefully 7850 will be too.

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Andrew Muzi mused:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>
>
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
>> low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and
>> carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>
> The heck with Peter.
> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
> wheel sales for us.

Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo than
the OEM wheels?

Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the spoke
that is being tensioned?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
BEER IS FOOD

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Aug 18, 1:06 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> > Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> >> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> >> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
> >>http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___in...
>
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
> > Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
> > low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and carbon
> > fiber composite rims. ;)
>
> The heck with Peter.
> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
> wheel sales for us.
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

WTF Andy, I think the new hub is a good thing....more wheels built for
us as well. 7700 hubs were getting hard to find.

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Aug 18, 1:06 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> > Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> >> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> >> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
> >>http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___in...
>
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
> > Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
> > low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and carbon
> > fiber composite rims. ;)
>
> The heck with Peter.
> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
> wheel sales for us.
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I get it..too early this morning after a busy week.....'interesting'
to see 2 of the 'players' go at it again tho...just missing one other
and it would be complete.

[Michael Press]

In article
<46c73cf4$0$8096$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<sunsetss0003@invailid.com> wrote:

> Andrew Muzi mused:
> >> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> >>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> >>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
> >>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
> >
> >
> > Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
> >> low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and
> >> carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
> >
> > The heck with Peter.
> > We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
> > wheel sales for us.
>
> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo than
> the OEM wheels?

Properly spelled frou-frou.

The word frou-frou is first recorded in English in the
early 1870s. Its original sense was 'a rustling, as of
silk on a woman's dress'. An example that the Oxford
English Dictionary cites from 1871: "With a frou-frou
of soft silk she arose." This sense also appears as a
verb--"frou-frouing skirts," for example.

The current sense, 'elaborate or frilly decoration, as
on women's clothing', is also found for the first time
in the 1870s.

The word frou-frou is a borrowing from French, in which
it is first found in the 1730s. It is ultimately of
imitative origin--the word is supposed to sound like
the rustling of silk.

--
Michael Press

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium
>>> and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>
>> The heck with Peter.
>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
>> wheel sales for us.
>
> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo than
> the OEM wheels?
>
> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
> steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the spoke
> that is being tensioned?
>

of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

jim beam wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium
>>>> and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>
>>> The heck with Peter.
>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
>>> wheel sales for us.
>>
>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo than
>> the OEM wheels?
>>
>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
>> steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the
>> spoke that is being tensioned?
>>
>
> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!

So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
recommended buying them "out of box"?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
BEER IS FOOD

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[fart bell]

"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@innvalid.com> wrote in message
news:46c759fe$0$20193$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
> jim beam wrote:
> > Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >> Andrew Muzi mused:
> >>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> >>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
> >>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
> >>>>>
http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news
/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
> >>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium
> >>>> and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
> >>>
> >>> The heck with Peter.
> >>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
> >>> wheel sales for us.
> >>
> >> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo than
> >> the OEM wheels?
> >>
> >> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
> >> steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the
> >> spoke that is being tensioned?
> >>
> >
> > of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>
> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>

LOL pwned

> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> BEER IS FOOD
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>
>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
>>>> wheel sales for us.
>>>
>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo than
>>> the OEM wheels?
>>>
>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
>>> steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the
>>> spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>
>>
>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>
> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>

only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't worry
about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff to see if
the bull****ters know what they're talking about.

how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?
did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
>>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
>>>>> wheel sales for us.
>>>>
>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo
>>>> than the OEM wheels?
>>>>
>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
>>>> steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the
>>>> spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>
>>>
>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>
>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>
>
> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't worry
> about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff to see if
> the bull****ters know what they're talking about.

Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load, but
would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?

> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?

I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not reliable.

> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?

How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an engineer?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“twisting may help if yawl can chew gum and walk.” - gene daniels

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
>>>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>
>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo
>>>>> than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>
>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0), stainless
>>>>> steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the rim at the
>>>>> spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>
>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>
>>
>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't worry
>> about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff to see if
>> the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>
> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load, but
> would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?

suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at home
rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.

>
>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?
>
> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not reliable.

so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and credentials
/are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks anodizing
causes rim cracking? or that bike bearings don't brinell? or that
elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike bearings? or
that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made fatigue
proof? or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
what a joke.


>
>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>
> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an engineer?
>

how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun from
the comfort and safety of his sofa? the guy that feels qualified to
condemn stuff he's never used?

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
>>>>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo
>>>>>> than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the
>>>>>> rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>>
>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>>
>>>
>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't worry
>>> about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff to see if
>>> the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>>
>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load, but
>> would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>
> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at home
> rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.

Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring myself?

Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes missing
being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could always scramble
the image of his head to protect his anonymity.) Come on "jim", show us
that this wheel works!

>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?
>>
>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
>> reliable.
>
> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and credentials
> /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks anodizing
> causes rim cracking?

Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?

> or that bike bearings don't brinell?

We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads with a
hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that would happen on
a bicycle in use).

> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike bearings?

Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology. What "jim beam" has
done is a mystery.

> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made fatigue
> proof?

Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are "stress
relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue is no longer a
PRACTICAL concern?

> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?

No effect, or no significant effect?

> what a joke.

Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant, and
add unnecessary complication to the problem.

>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>>
>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
>> engineer?
>
> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun from
> the comfort and safety of his sofa?

It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)

> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?

I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
components, that I have no wish to waste my limited financial resources
on them (assuming such stuff would even fit my bikes).

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Twisting may help if yawl can chew gum and walk.” - gene daniels

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:

> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and credentials
> /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks anodizing
> causes rim cracking? or that bike bearings don't brinell? or that
> elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike bearings? or
> that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made fatigue
> proof? or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
> what a joke.

Why don't you just make this into a sig? Save yourself a lot of typing.

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder
>>>>>>>>>> if the
>>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>>>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
>>>>>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo
>>>>>>> than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
>>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the
>>>>>>> rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>>>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't
>>>> worry about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff to
>>>> see if the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>>>
>>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load,
>>> but would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>>
>> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at home
>> rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.
>
> Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring myself?
>
> Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes missing
> being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could always scramble
> the image of his head to protect his anonymity.) Come on "jim", show us
> that this wheel works!

but the ball's in your court big guy - you say it doesn't work. you'll
hardly "injure yourself" in the parking lot - from which you will not
progress if all you say is true.

>
>>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?
>>>
>>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
>>> reliable.
>>
>> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and credentials
>> /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks anodizing
>> causes rim cracking?
>
> Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?

so you /accept/ that dye penetrant proves anodizing causes rim cracks???
wow dude, you really need to get off that sofa some time.


>
>> or that bike bearings don't brinell?
>
> We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads with a
> hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that would happen on
> a bicycle in use).

buy a headset and try it yourself, sofa king.

>
>> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike bearings?
>
> Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology.

he has? when? he alludes to owning a book on bearing design, but
doesn't appear to have cracked it open or he wouldn't have made such
basic mistakes.

> What "jim beam" has
> done is a mystery.

a mystery indeed.


>
>> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made
>> fatigue proof?
>
> Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are "stress
> relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue is no longer a
> PRACTICAL concern?

well, since he does no testing, no analysis and makes fundamental
mistakes in materials theory, there's not much else he /can/ say to
convince the gullible sofa pilots of this world.


>
>> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
>
> No effect, or no significant effect?

what does it say in the book tom? you know, the section where spoke
gauge is disregarded in the math.


>
>> what a joke.
>
> Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
> insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant, and
> add unnecessary complication to the problem.

not true big guy. if you want to disregard something, you state what it
is and why you're disregarding it. you don't just go ahead and ignore
it. people think you don't know what you're doing if you make mistakes
like that. and guess what...


>
>>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>>>
>>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
>>> engineer?
>>
>> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun
>> from the comfort and safety of his sofa?
>
> It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)
>
>> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?
>
> I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
> components,

you can form that opinion from the futon?

> that I have no wish to waste my limited financial resources
> on them (assuming such stuff would even fit my bikes).
>

craigslist. get all kinds of stuff cheap. since you evidently have the
time on your hands, use it productively. report your results. or is
that harder than just sitting on your ass just punching keys?

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Aug 18, 8:21 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
>
>
> > "jim beam" wrote:
> >> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
> >>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder
> >>>>>>>>>> if the
> >>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
> >>>>>>>>>>http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___in...
>
> >>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
> >>>>>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
> >>>>>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>
> >>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
> >>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
> >>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>
> >>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo
> >>>>>>> than the OEM wheels?
>
> >>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
> >>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the
> >>>>>>> rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>
> >>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>
> >>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
> >>>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>
> >>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't
> >>>> worry about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff to
> >>>> see if the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>
> >>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load,
> >>> but would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>
> >> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at home
> >> rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.
>
> > Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring myself?
>
> > Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes missing
> > being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could always scramble
> > the image of his head to protect his anonymity.) Come on "jim", show us
> > that this wheel works!
>
> but the ball's in your court big guy - you say it doesn't work. you'll
> hardly "injure yourself" in the parking lot - from which you will not
> progress if all you say is true.
>
>
>
> >>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?
>
> >>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
> >>> reliable.
>
> >> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and credentials
> >> /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks anodizing
> >> causes rim cracking?
>
> > Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?
>
> so you /accept/ that dye penetrant proves anodizing causes rim cracks???
> wow dude, you really need to get off that sofa some time.
>
>
>
> >> or that bike bearings don't brinell?
>
> > We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads with a
> > hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that would happen on
> > a bicycle in use).
>
> buy a headset and try it yourself, sofa king.
>
>
>
> >> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike bearings?
>
> > Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology.
>
> he has? when? he alludes to owning a book on bearing design, but
> doesn't appear to have cracked it open or he wouldn't have made such
> basic mistakes.
>
> > What "jim beam" has
> > done is a mystery.
>
> a mystery indeed.
>
>
>
> >> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made
> >> fatigue proof?
>
> > Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are "stress
> > relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue is no longer a
> > PRACTICAL concern?
>
> well, since he does no testing, no analysis and makes fundamental
> mistakes in materials theory, there's not much else he /can/ say to
> convince the gullible sofa pilots of this world.
>
>
>
> >> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
>
> > No effect, or no significant effect?
>
> what does it say in the book tom? you know, the section where spoke
> gauge is disregarded in the math.
>
>
>
> >> what a joke.
>
> > Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
> > insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant, and
> > add unnecessary complication to the problem.
>
> not true big guy. if you want to disregard something, you state what it
> is and why you're disregarding it. you don't just go ahead and ignore
> it. people think you don't know what you're doing if you make mistakes
> like that. and guess what...
>
>
>
> >>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>
> >>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
> >>> engineer?
>
> >> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun
> >> from the comfort and safety of his sofa?
>
> > It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)
>
> >> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?
>
> > I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
> > components,
>
> you can form that opinion from the futon?
>
> > that I have no wish to waste my limited financial resources
> > on them (assuming such stuff would even fit my bikes).
>
> craigslist. get all kinds of stuff cheap. since you evidently have the
> time on your hands, use it productively. report your results. or is
> that harder than just sitting on your ass just punching keys?


FWIW, lil' Tom seems to have slipped a few gears and is now nuttier
than a Christmas fruitcake. Debating anything with him is pointless,
IMO.

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder
>>>>>>>>>>> if the
>>>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new
>>>>>>>>>> Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite,
>>>>>>>>>> scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less foo-foo
>>>>>>>> than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
>>>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect the
>>>>>>>> rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>>>>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't
>>>>> worry about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff
>>>>> to see if the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>>>>
>>>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load,
>>>> but would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>>>
>>> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at home
>>> rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.
>>
>> Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring
>> myself?
>>
>> Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes
>> missing being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could always
>> scramble the image of his head to protect his anonymity.) Come on
>> "jim", show us that this wheel works!
>
> but the ball's in your court big guy - you say it doesn't work. you'll
> hardly "injure yourself" in the parking lot - from which you will not
> progress if all you say is true.

Still my money. Buy me an upright road bicycle and I will try the
experiment.

>>>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net btw?
>>>>
>>>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
>>>> reliable.
>>>
>>> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and credentials
>>> /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks anodizing
>>> causes rim cracking?
>>
>> Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?
>
> so you /accept/ that dye penetrant proves anodizing causes rim cracks???
> wow dude, you really need to get off that sofa some time.

Did I say that? No.

Do you disagree that a sharp notch, such as a crack in the anodizing
layer, produces a stress concentration?

FYI, I have personally run comparison 4-point bending tests on notched,
large radius notched and sharp radius notched aluminium alloy beams, so
I do not have to take Jobst's or anyone else words on the effect.

>>> or that bike bearings don't brinell?
>>
>> We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads with a
>> hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that would happen
>> on a bicycle in use).
>
> buy a headset and try it yourself, sofa king.

We are talking about headsets in bicycles, not one hit with hammers -
who has their headset impacted the way Carl Fogel did, in real world use?

Please send me an upright bicycle I can destructively test by bashing
the front wheel at high speed to see if this causes brinneling of the
headset bearing races.

>>> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike bearings?
>>
>> Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology.
>
> he has? when? he alludes to owning a book on bearing design, but
> doesn't appear to have cracked it open or he wouldn't have made such
> basic mistakes.
>
>> What "jim beam" has done is a mystery.
>
> a mystery indeed.

Yes, the life of a sock puppet is poorly documented.

>>> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made
>>> fatigue proof?
>>
>> Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are
>> "stress relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue is
>> no longer a PRACTICAL concern?
>
> well, since he does no testing, no analysis and makes fundamental
> mistakes in materials theory, there's not much else he /can/ say to
> convince the gullible sofa pilots of this world.

And where is "jim beam's" real world testing. Since he is anonymous, how
can we confirm that his/her/its testing is not imaginary?

>>> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
>>
>> No effect, or no significant effect?
>
> what does it say in the book tom? you know, the section where spoke
> gauge is disregarded in the math.
>
>
>>
>>> what a joke.
>>
>> Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
>> insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant, and
>> add unnecessary complication to the problem.
>
> not true big guy. if you want to disregard something, you state what it
> is and why you're disregarding it. you don't just go ahead and ignore
> it. people think you don't know what you're doing if you make mistakes
> like that. and guess what...

By "jim beam's" approach, we could just get rid of engineering. Why not
approach every problem as one of physics and chemistry, doing the
analysis at the most fundamental level? So what if the problems are too
complicated to solve - we would want to ignore anything, no matter how
insignificant, would we?

>>>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>>>>
>>>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
>>>> engineer?
>>>
>>> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun
>>> from the comfort and safety of his sofa?
>>
>> It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)
>>
>>> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?
>>
>> I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
>> components,
>
> you can form that opinion from the futon?
>
>> that I have no wish to waste my limited financial resources on them
>> (assuming such stuff would even fit my bikes).
>>
> craigslist. get all kinds of stuff cheap.

Most of the foo-foo stuff would not work on my bikes, since it is
intended for upright road bikes.

> since you evidently have the
> time on your hands, use it productively. report your results. or is
> that harder than just sitting on your ass just punching keys?

And what value should we put to "results" posted by a sock puppet? When
you argue with a real person who has a reputation at stake, who should I
find more credible?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Bill Sornson]

HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TYVM.

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder
>>>>>>>>>>>> if the
>>>>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the
>>>>>>>>>>> new Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy
>>>>>>>>>>> composite, scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less
>>>>>>>>> foo-foo than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
>>>>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect
>>>>>>>>> the rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>>>>>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't
>>>>>> worry about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff
>>>>>> to see if the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load,
>>>>> but would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>>>>
>>>> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at
>>>> home rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.
>>>
>>> Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring
>>> myself?
>>>
>>> Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes
>>> missing being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could always
>>> scramble the image of his head to protect his anonymity.) Come on
>>> "jim", show us that this wheel works!
>>
>> but the ball's in your court big guy - you say it doesn't work.
>> you'll hardly "injure yourself" in the parking lot - from which you
>> will not progress if all you say is true.
>
> Still my money. Buy me an upright road bicycle and I will try the
> experiment.

but you can get them free of craigslist - money is no excuse.


>
>>>>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net
>>>>>> btw?
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
>>>>> reliable.
>>>>
>>>> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and
>>>> credentials /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that thinks
>>>> anodizing causes rim cracking?
>>>
>>> Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?
>>
>> so you /accept/ that dye penetrant proves anodizing causes rim
>> cracks??? wow dude, you really need to get off that sofa some time.
>
> Did I say that? No.

it's what you imply if you accept jobst's b.s.


>
> Do you disagree that a sharp notch, such as a crack in the anodizing
> layer, produces a stress concentration?

so what's the orientation of the crack then bill? if rim cracking
ignores anodizing crack orientation, and it does, clearly [to anyone
that knows fatigue and fracture mechanics at any rate] the anodizing is
not the cause.


>
> FYI, I have personally run comparison 4-point bending tests on notched,
> large radius notched and sharp radius notched aluminium alloy beams, so
> I do not have to take Jobst's or anyone else words on the effect.

see my comment on orientation big guy. notch your beams lengthwise,
then tell me how much 4-point loading stress gets concentrated at the root.


>
>>>> or that bike bearings don't brinell?
>>>
>>> We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads with
>>> a hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that would
>>> happen on a bicycle in use).
>>
>> buy a headset and try it yourself, sofa king.
>
> We are talking about headsets in bicycles, not one hit with hammers -
> who has their headset impacted the way Carl Fogel did, in real world use?

er, so how much resistance to a blow did fogel's headset have when
rested on a straw mat?


>
> Please send me an upright bicycle I can destructively test by bashing
> the front wheel at high speed to see if this causes brinneling of the
> headset bearing races.

craigslist.


>
>>>> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike
>>>> bearings?
>>>
>>> Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology.
>>
>> he has? when? he alludes to owning a book on bearing design, but
>> doesn't appear to have cracked it open or he wouldn't have made such
>> basic mistakes.

what? no repost? why not make something up rather than be at a loss
for words?


>>
>>> What "jim beam" has done is a mystery.
>>
>> a mystery indeed.
>
> Yes, the life of a sock puppet is poorly documented.

as is the life of a sofa king.


>
>>>> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made
>>>> fatigue proof?
>>>
>>> Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are
>>> "stress relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue is
>>> no longer a PRACTICAL concern?
>>
>> well, since he does no testing, no analysis and makes fundamental
>> mistakes in materials theory, there's not much else he /can/ say to
>> convince the gullible sofa pilots of this world.
>
> And where is "jim beam's" real world testing. Since he is anonymous, how
> can we confirm that his/her/its testing is not imaginary?

eh? what's wrong with this picture? we have a guy claiming they can
eliminate fatigue from a material with no endurance limit, contrary to
all known materials science, yet he publishes no graphs, no analysis, no
testing, no numbers, but with the use of the magic word "practical", you
swallow that b.s? and the fact that he evidences a gross
misunderstanding of deformation theory [confusing strain aging and
non-strain aging materials] doesn't concern you?

bottom line, you may not know enough to know you're being bull****ted
bill, but that sure doesn't give you the right to criticize because you
can't be bothered to go to the library and borrow bona-fide materials
texts on the subject. i've even cited if you can be bothered to google.

>
>>>> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
>>>
>>> No effect, or no significant effect?
>>
>> what does it say in the book tom? you know, the section where spoke
>> gauge is disregarded in the math.

no witty repost?


>>
>>
>>>
>>>> what a joke.
>>>
>>> Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
>>> insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant, and
>>> add unnecessary complication to the problem.
>>
>> not true big guy. if you want to disregard something, you state what
>> it is and why you're disregarding it. you don't just go ahead and
>> ignore it. people think you don't know what you're doing if you make
>> mistakes like that. and guess what...
>
> By "jim beam's" approach, we could just get rid of engineering. Why not
> approach every problem as one of physics and chemistry, doing the
> analysis at the most fundamental level?

why not indeed. removes the scope for frauds and impostors.


> So what if the problems are too
> complicated to solve - we would want to ignore anything, no matter how
> insignificant, would we?

not knowing stuff is different to ignoring it. people ignore things
through ignorance, stupidity or fraud - it doesn't suit their purpose.


>
>>>>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>>>>>
>>>>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
>>>>> engineer?
>>>>
>>>> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun
>>>> from the comfort and safety of his sofa?
>>>
>>> It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)
>>>
>>>> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?
>>>
>>> I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
>>> components,
>>
>> you can form that opinion from the futon?
>>
>>> that I have no wish to waste my limited financial resources on them
>>> (assuming such stuff would even fit my bikes).
>>>
>> craigslist. get all kinds of stuff cheap.
>
> Most of the foo-foo stuff would not work on my bikes, since it is
> intended for upright road bikes.

so, you can't/won't use it, but you have an opinion? even though you
can pick up stuff for free and get real hands-on experience? tom,
you're ridiculous.


>
>> since you evidently have the time on your hands, use it productively.
>> report your results. or is that harder than just sitting on your ass
>> just punching keys?
>
> And what value should we put to "results" posted by a sock puppet? When
> you argue with a real person who has a reputation at stake, who should I
> find more credible?
>

because that's a strawman akin to arguing existence of the emperor's
clothes. "only a fool would question the great and wonderful stanford
alumni - you won't disclose your credentials so you must be wrong".

thing is tom, i don't /need/ to show credentials - everything is done
for me already. open "the book". we then find that "stress relief
theory" makes no account of known fatigue factors such as material,
surface finish, work hardening [increasing dislocation density],
environment or even miner's cumulative damage rule. and it dismisses
more basic fundamentals such as physical configuration [j-bend elbows]
that even the most rudimentary engineer should address. instead, we
find a work zooming in on just one potential component, that of residual
stress, with no attempt to quantify, enumerate or even test samples.
amazing really since there is more than a century of very well
documented research on this subject.

you want to go ahead and accept a credentials decoy argument? i'll go
ahead and witness gullibility of disturbing proportion.

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> TYVM.

Hey, we are just honoring Andres Muro's request to have arguments with
"jim beam". ;)

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> On Aug 18, 1:06 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I wonder if the
>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___in...
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the new Shimano
>>> low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy composite, scandium and carbon
>>> fiber composite rims. ;)
>> The heck with Peter.
>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom handbuilt
>> wheel sales for us.
>> --
>> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> I get it..too early this morning after a busy week.....'interesting'
> to see 2 of the 'players' go at it again tho...just missing one other
> and it would be complete.

So Peter, tell us how you like the new rims and complete wheel sets.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[andresmuro@aol.com]

On Aug 19, 8:03 am, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<sunsetss0...@innvalid.com> wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > TYVM.
>
> Hey, we are just honoring Andres Muro's request to have arguments with
> "jim beam". ;)
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovini
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

I was just about to thank you guys for providing some amusement. I
went to bed late last night and didn't get up for the morning Sunday
ride. Instead, I am enjoying a cup of coffee and reading the exchange.
I wish that Tim, Jobst, etc would join in. So, guys, please keep it
up. Thank you all for a lovely morning,

Andres

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:

> thing is tom, i don't /need/ to show credentials - everything is done
> for me already. open "the book".

Why don't you? You've obviously never read it.

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wonder if the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the
>>>>>>>>>>>> new Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy
>>>>>>>>>>>> composite, scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less
>>>>>>>>>> foo-foo than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
>>>>>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect
>>>>>>>>>> the rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought you
>>>>>>>> recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't
>>>>>>> worry about the little details tom - i just mess about with stuff
>>>>>>> to see if the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static load,
>>>>>> but would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>>>>>
>>>>> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at
>>>>> home rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.
>>>>
>>>> Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring
>>>> myself?
>>>>
>>>> Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes
>>>> missing being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could
>>>> always scramble the image of his head to protect his anonymity.)
>>>> Come on "jim", show us that this wheel works!
>>>
>>> but the ball's in your court big guy - you say it doesn't work.
>>> you'll hardly "injure yourself" in the parking lot - from which you
>>> will not progress if all you say is true.
>>
>> Still my money. Buy me an upright road bicycle and I will try the
>> experiment.
>
> but you can get them free of craigslist - money is no excuse.

Do you mean free FROM Craigslist? That would be a used bicycle? How
would I know what condition the spokes were in without expensive
testing? They could be ready to fail from fatigue.

>>>>>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the net
>>>>>>> btw?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
>>>>>> reliable.
>>>>>
>>>>> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and
>>>>> credentials /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that
>>>>> thinks anodizing causes rim cracking?
>>>>
>>>> Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?
>>>
>>> so you /accept/ that dye penetrant proves anodizing causes rim
>>> cracks??? wow dude, you really need to get off that sofa some time.
>>
>> Did I say that? No.
>
> it's what you imply if you accept jobst's b.s.

Only in the logic of beamian world.

>> Do you disagree that a sharp notch, such as a crack in the anodizing
>> layer, produces a stress concentration?
>
> so what's the orientation of the crack then bill? if rim cracking
> ignores anodizing crack orientation, and it does, clearly [to anyone
> that knows fatigue and fracture mechanics at any rate] the anodizing is
> not the cause.

Who's Bill?

Demonstrate why forming the rim into a hoop from a straight extrusion
could NOT produce a crack in the anodizing that would be stresses by the
spoke/nipple pulling on the rim.

>> FYI, I have personally run comparison 4-point bending tests on
>> notched, large radius notched and sharp radius notched aluminium alloy
>> beams, so I do not have to take Jobst's or anyone else words on the
>> effect.
>
> see my comment on orientation big guy. notch your beams lengthwise,
> then tell me how much 4-point loading stress gets concentrated at the root.

Where have you proved that cracks could NOT occur in the anodized layer
at an orientation that would be loaded?

>>>>> or that bike bearings don't brinell?
>>>>
>>>> We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads with
>>>> a hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that would
>>>> happen on a bicycle in use).
>>>
>>> buy a headset and try it yourself, sofa king.
>>
>> We are talking about headsets in bicycles, not one hit with hammers -
>> who has their headset impacted the way Carl Fogel did, in real world use?
>
> er, so how much resistance to a blow did fogel's headset have when
> rested on a straw mat?

I have no idea, since there was no instrumentation to measure the effect.

>> Please send me an upright bicycle I can destructively test by bashing
>> the front wheel at high speed to see if this causes brinneling of the
>> headset bearing races.
>
> craigslist.

Will I find a bicycle with a brand new headset? What would testing on a
used headset of unknown history prove?

>>>>> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike
>>>>> bearings?
>>>>
>>>> Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology.
>>>
>>> he has? when? he alludes to owning a book on bearing design, but
>>> doesn't appear to have cracked it open or he wouldn't have made such
>>> basic mistakes.
>
> what? no repost? why not make something up rather than be at a loss
> for words?

What real world work has "jim beam" done in the field. Oh, never mind,
how can a sock puppet prove experience.

>>>> What "jim beam" has done is a mystery.
>>>
>>> a mystery indeed.
>>
>> Yes, the life of a sock puppet is poorly documented.
>
> as is the life of a sofa king.

Snappy retort there, "jim".

>>>>> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made
>>>>> fatigue proof?
>>>>
>>>> Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are
>>>> "stress relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue is
>>>> no longer a PRACTICAL concern?
>>>
>>> well, since he does no testing, no analysis and makes fundamental
>>> mistakes in materials theory, there's not much else he /can/ say to
>>> convince the gullible sofa pilots of this world.
>>
>> And where is "jim beam's" real world testing. Since he is anonymous,
>> how can we confirm that his/her/its testing is not imaginary?
>
> eh? what's wrong with this picture? we have a guy claiming they can
> eliminate fatigue from a material with no endurance limit, contrary to
> all known materials science, yet he publishes no graphs, no analysis, no
> testing, no numbers, but with the use of the magic word "practical", you
> swallow that b.s? and the fact that he evidences a gross
> misunderstanding of deformation theory [confusing strain aging and
> non-strain aging materials] doesn't concern you?

Well, I have not accepted Jobst's hypothesis on "stress relief" as being
the absolute truth, since no one seems to have done the proper testing
to confirm or deny. However, the method of "squeezing spokes" appears to
work in the real world, so continuing the practice seems reasonable.

> bottom line, you may not know enough to know you're being bull****ted
> bill, but that sure doesn't give you the right to criticize because you
> can't be bothered to go to the library and borrow bona-fide materials
> texts on the subject. i've even cited if you can be bothered to google.

Again, who is "Bill"?

By the way "jim", if you check the archives, I have NOT always agreed
with Jobst Brandt in the past, since he has been wrong in a couple of
areas where I have more expertise than he does.

>>>>> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
>>>>
>>>> No effect, or no significant effect?
>>>
>>> what does it say in the book tom? you know, the section where spoke
>>> gauge is disregarded in the math.
>
> no witty repost?

What should I post that has been posted before?

>>>>> what a joke.
>>>>
>>>> Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
>>>> insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant,
>>>> and add unnecessary complication to the problem.
>>>
>>> not true big guy. if you want to disregard something, you state what
>>> it is and why you're disregarding it. you don't just go ahead and
>>> ignore it. people think you don't know what you're doing if you make
>>> mistakes like that. and guess what...
>>
>> By "jim beam's" approach, we could just get rid of engineering. Why
>> not approach every problem as one of physics and chemistry, doing the
>> analysis at the most fundamental level?
>
> why not indeed. removes the scope for frauds and impostors.

And makes many real world problems to difficult to solve. Something
"jim" would realize if he had been a practicing engineer.

BTW "jim", some of us are financially liable or even criminally liable
if our work is not correct. Pretty good incentive to get it right, eh?

>> So what if the problems are too complicated to solve - we would want
>> to ignore anything, no matter how insignificant, would we?
>
> not knowing stuff is different to ignoring it. people ignore things
> through ignorance, stupidity or fraud - it doesn't suit their purpose.

Any if ignoring something produces an acceptably small error, why waste
time analyzing it?

>>>>>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
>>>>>> engineer?
>>>>>
>>>>> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun
>>>>> from the comfort and safety of his sofa?
>>>>
>>>> It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)
>>>>
>>>>> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?
>>>>
>>>> I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
>>>> components,
>>>
>>> you can form that opinion from the futon?
>>>
>>>> that I have no wish to waste my limited financial resources on them
>>>> (assuming such stuff would even fit my bikes).
>>>>
>>> craigslist. get all kinds of stuff cheap.
>>
>> Most of the foo-foo stuff would not work on my bikes, since it is
>> intended for upright road bikes.
>
> so, you can't/won't use it, but you have an opinion? even though you
> can pick up stuff for free and get real hands-on experience? tom,
> you're ridiculous.

Lets see: road bicycle wheels and rims - no use.
Tubulars - not made in the sizes and widths I use.
Road bicycle handlebars, stems, seat posts, saddles - not much use on a
'bent, eh?
Fancy cranks and bottom brackets - possibly, but a couple of bikes use
oversize chain rings and the others use MTB chain rings.
Hubs - possibly in a few instances if they were 32 or 36-hole.

>>> since you evidently have the time on your hands, use it
>>> productively. report your results. or is that harder than just
>>> sitting on your ass just punching keys?
>>
>> And what value should we put to "results" posted by a sock puppet?
>> When you argue with a real person who has a reputation at stake, who
>> should I find more credible?
>>
>
> because that's a strawman akin to arguing existence of the emperor's
> clothes. "only a fool would question the great and wonderful stanford
> alumni - you won't disclose your credentials so you must be wrong".

[Yawn] I have questioned Jobst Brandt in the past - DAGS.

> thing is tom, i don't /need/ to show credentials - everything is done
> for me already. open "the book". we then find that "stress relief
> theory" makes no account of known fatigue factors such as material,
> surface finish, work hardening [increasing dislocation density],
> environment or even miner's cumulative damage rule. and it dismisses
> more basic fundamentals such as physical configuration [j-bend elbows]
> that even the most rudimentary engineer should address. instead, we
> find a work zooming in on just one potential component, that of residual
> stress, with no attempt to quantify, enumerate or even test samples.
> amazing really since there is more than a century of very well
> documented research on this subject.

Unfortunately for you "jim", whether the theory is right or not, the
practice appears to work in the real world.

> you want to go ahead and accept a credentials decoy argument? i'll go
> ahead and witness gullibility of disturbing proportion.

I still am curious of what "jim" is so afraid of that he/she needs to
hide his/her real identity. To a rational observer, his/her stalking of
Brandt goes beyond factual disagreement.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Gary Young]

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 07:06:21 -0700, jim beam wrote: <snip>
> because that's a strawman akin to arguing existence of the emperor's
> clothes. "only a fool would question the great and wonderful stanford
> alumni - you won't disclose your credentials so you must be wrong".
>
> thing is tom, i don't /need/ to show credentials - everything is done
> for me already. open "the book". we then find that "stress relief
> theory" makes no account of known fatigue factors such as material,
> surface finish, work hardening [increasing dislocation density],
> environment or even miner's cumulative damage rule. and it dismisses
> more basic fundamentals such as physical configuration [j-bend elbows]
> that even the most rudimentary engineer should address.

You really haven't read the book, have you? Jobst gives plenty of
deference to the importance of materials. For instance, on the first page
of his introduction to the 3d edition, he talks about how spoke
manufacturers had improved their game since the earlier editions, with a
consequent reduction in the number of spoke failures.

The book doesn't explain the importance of materials at length, but then
it doesn't purport to. Much of the focus of the book is on the things the
individual wheel builder can do to make strong wheels. As a practical
matter, most of us can't make our own spokes, but we do have control over
which of the available spokes, rims, and hubs we buy; and how we lace and
tension our wheels. Focusing on the things we control does not mean that
we necessarily deny the importance of the things we can't control.

The only explanation I can come up for why you consistently
mischaracterize Jobst's book is that you seem unable to deal with the idea
that a single thing -- spoke failure -- can have more than one cause.
(You're not the only one -- Carl Fogel sometimes falls into this error as
well.)

If I said that the most important factor in a good meal is fresh
ingredients, would you take that to mean that it doesn't matter what
recipe one follows? Presumably not. Yet when it comes to spoke
failures, you come across as a farmer who takes offense at the cookbook
writer for daring to suggest ways of using fresh vegetables to best effect.
Writing a cookbook does not mean denigrating farming.

My point is that there's nothing inconsistent in saying that both
materials (good ingredients) and building technique (a good recipe)
contribute to the desired outcome.

So what exactly is your beef about Jobst's book and its treatment of
materials? That it doesn't teach how to make good spokes? No, it certainly
doesn't. But again, it makes no pretense of doing so and goes out of
its way to point to the importance of good materials.

(One caveat -- I don't want to create the impression that Jobst's book is
pure practice and no theory. I do think it's fair to say, however, that a
good portion of it can fairly be characterized as a cookbook for making
good wheels.)

> instead, we
> find a work zooming in on just one potential component, that of residual
> stress, with no attempt to quantify, enumerate or even test samples.
> amazing really since there is more than a century of very well
> documented research on this subject.
>
> you want to go ahead and accept a credentials decoy argument? i'll go
> ahead and witness gullibility of disturbing proportion.

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Muzi mused:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great news..at least they are 'listening", I guess. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wonder if the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freehub can be retro-fitted to a 7800 hub??
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/publish/content/cycle/seh/nl/en/news___info/news/new_dura-ace_freehub.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gee Peter, I thought you would have been excited about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> new Shimano low spoke count (16/20 F/R) carbon-alloy
>>>>>>>>>>>>> composite, scandium and carbon fiber composite rims. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The heck with Peter.
>>>>>>>>>>>> We're quite excited, these things generate lots of custom
>>>>>>>>>>>> handbuilt wheel sales for us.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Replacement wheels for customers who want something less
>>>>>>>>>>> foo-foo than the OEM wheels?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Can one even build a wheel with "16 butted (2.0-1.5-2.0),
>>>>>>>>>>> stainless steel spokes" without a special fixture to deflect
>>>>>>>>>>> the rim at the spoke that is being tensioned?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> of course!!! wow, jobstian fud swallowed hook, line & sinker!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So how many low-spoke wheels have you built "jim"? I thought
>>>>>>>>> you recommended buying them "out of box"?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> only 16 spoke from what used to be a 32 spoke wheel. but don't
>>>>>>>> worry about the little details tom - i just mess about with
>>>>>>>> stuff to see if the bull****ters know what they're talking about.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Like the wheel with missing spokes that can support a static
>>>>>>> load, but would not work if the bicycle were actually moving?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> suppositional bull****. you go ahead and try that experiment at
>>>>>> home rather than just piss and moan from a position of ignorance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would I want to destroy a perfectly good rim and risk injuring
>>>>> myself?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why doesn't "jim beam" post a video of the wheel with the spokes
>>>>> missing being ridden on YouTube (or the equivalent)? (He could
>>>>> always scramble the image of his head to protect his anonymity.)
>>>>> Come on "jim", show us that this wheel works!
>>>>
>>>> but the ball's in your court big guy - you say it doesn't work.
>>>> you'll hardly "injure yourself" in the parking lot - from which you
>>>> will not progress if all you say is true.
>>>
>>> Still my money. Buy me an upright road bicycle and I will try the
>>> experiment.
>>
>> but you can get them free of craigslist - money is no excuse.
>
> Do you mean free FROM Craigslist? That would be a used bicycle?

yes, a used bicycle /from/ craigslist. craigslist is lower case. look
it up.


> How
> would I know what condition the spokes were in without expensive
> testing? They could be ready to fail from fatigue.

er, you wanted to show that the reduced spoke wheel will collapse didn't
you? you don't need to worry about fatigue for that experiment, so
don't get your squirming evasive panties in a bunch.



>
>>>>>>>> how much other stuff do you believe from what you read on the
>>>>>>>> net btw?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I consider the source - anonymous sock puppets are generally not
>>>>>>> reliable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> so self-proclaimed "experts" that announce their name and
>>>>>> credentials /are/ reliable? like jobst brandt? the guy that
>>>>>> thinks anodizing causes rim cracking?
>>>>>
>>>>> Citations that anodizing does NOT cause rim cracking?
>>>>
>>>> so you /accept/ that dye penetrant proves anodizing causes rim
>>>> cracks??? wow dude, you really need to get off that sofa some time.
>>>
>>> Did I say that? No.
>>
>> it's what you imply if you accept jobst's b.s.
>
> Only in the logic of beamian world.
>
>>> Do you disagree that a sharp notch, such as a crack in the anodizing
>>> layer, produces a stress concentration?
>>
>> so what's the orientation of the crack then bill? if rim cracking
>> ignores anodizing crack orientation, and it does, clearly [to anyone
>> that knows fatigue and fracture mechanics at any rate] the anodizing
>> is not the cause.
>
> Who's Bill?
>
> Demonstrate why forming the rim into a hoop from a straight extrusion
> could NOT produce a crack in the anodizing that would be stresses by the
> spoke/nipple pulling on the rim.

ok, two mistakes.

1. the assumption that all rims are hooped after anodizing - they're not.
2. even if they were, anodizing cracking would /still/ be perpendicular
to rim cracking - which follows the extrusion axis!!!



>
>>> FYI, I have personally run comparison 4-point bending tests on
>>> notched, large radius notched and sharp radius notched aluminium
>>> alloy beams, so I do not have to take Jobst's or anyone else words on
>>> the effect.
>>
>> see my comment on orientation big guy. notch your beams lengthwise,
>> then tell me how much 4-point loading stress gets concentrated at the
>> root.
>
> Where have you proved that cracks could NOT occur in the anodized layer
> at an orientation that would be loaded?

google the photo evidence i've previously posted!!! cracking is
strictly following extrusion axis regardless of any potential anodizing
crack orientation.

and a dye penetrant test /still/ does not prove any connection!!!

>
>>>>>> or that bike bearings don't brinell?
>>>>>
>>>>> We only have your word for that (and "Dear Carl" imposing loads
>>>>> with a hammer on a cheap headset that are unlike anything that
>>>>> would happen on a bicycle in use).
>>>>
>>>> buy a headset and try it yourself, sofa king.
>>>
>>> We are talking about headsets in bicycles, not one hit with hammers -
>>> who has their headset impacted the way Carl Fogel did, in real world
>>> use?
>>
>> er, so how much resistance to a blow did fogel's headset have when
>> rested on a straw mat?
>
> I have no idea, since there was no instrumentation to measure the effect.

how much resistance do you /expect/ a straw mat to impart compared to a
steel frame?


>
>>> Please send me an upright bicycle I can destructively test by bashing
>>> the front wheel at high speed to see if this causes brinneling of the
>>> headset bearing races.
>>
>> craigslist.
>
> Will I find a bicycle with a brand new headset? What would testing on a
> used headset of unknown history prove?

dude, are you trying to be funny? you take a headset. you examine it.
then you perform the test. if you can see a difference before and
after, you have a result. or you can spend ~$12 and repeat fogel's test
on a new one. you want to make a point? cough up the dough.


>
>>>>>> or that elasto-hydrodynamic separation somehow "protects" bike
>>>>>> bearings?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, Jobst has done real world work in tribology.
>>>>
>>>> he has? when? he alludes to owning a book on bearing design, but
>>>> doesn't appear to have cracked it open or he wouldn't have made such
>>>> basic mistakes.
>>
>> what? no repost? why not make something up rather than be at a loss
>> for words?
>
> What real world work has "jim beam" done in the field. Oh, never mind,
> how can a sock puppet prove experience.
>
>>>>> What "jim beam" has done is a mystery.
>>>>
>>>> a mystery indeed.
>>>
>>> Yes, the life of a sock puppet is poorly documented.
>>
>> as is the life of a sofa king.
>
> Snappy retort there, "jim".

backatcha. your majesty.


>
>>>>>> or that materials without a fatigue endurance limit can be made
>>>>>> fatigue proof?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this Jobst's real claim, or is his claim that one spokes are
>>>>> "stress relieved" the endurance limit is high enough that fatigue
>>>>> is no longer a PRACTICAL concern?
>>>>
>>>> well, since he does no testing, no analysis and makes fundamental
>>>> mistakes in materials theory, there's not much else he /can/ say to
>>>> convince the gullible sofa pilots of this world.
>>>
>>> And where is "jim beam's" real world testing. Since he is anonymous,
>>> how can we confirm that his/her/its testing is not imaginary?
>>
>> eh? what's wrong with this picture? we have a guy claiming they can
>> eliminate fatigue from a material with no endurance limit, contrary to
>> all known materials science, yet he publishes no graphs, no analysis,
>> no testing, no numbers, but with the use of the magic word
>> "practical", you swallow that b.s? and the fact that he evidences a
>> gross misunderstanding of deformation theory [confusing strain aging
>> and non-strain aging materials] doesn't concern you?
>
> Well, I have not accepted Jobst's hypothesis on "stress relief" as being
> the absolute truth, since no one seems to have done the proper testing
> to confirm or deny. However, the method of "squeezing spokes" appears to
> work in the real world, so continuing the practice seems reasonable.

so you /do/ have testing proof? please share!!! seriously, i'd love to
see the numbers. or are you just making an ineffectual statement
evidencing being gullible to jobst's taking credit for the effect of
improved spoke materials?


>
>> bottom line, you may not know enough to know you're being bull****ted
>> bill, but that sure doesn't give you the right to criticize because
>> you can't be bothered to go to the library and borrow bona-fide
>> materials texts on the subject. i've even cited if you can be
>> bothered to google.
>
> Again, who is "Bill"?
>
> By the way "jim", if you check the archives, I have NOT always agreed
> with Jobst Brandt in the past, since he has been wrong in a couple of
> areas where I have more expertise than he does.

indeed. but that's not acceptable in areas where /i/ have expertise
though apparently.


>
>>>>>> or that spoke gauge has no effect on tensiometer deflection?
>>>>>
>>>>> No effect, or no significant effect?
>>>>
>>>> what does it say in the book tom? you know, the section where spoke
>>>> gauge is disregarded in the math.
>>
>> no witty repost?
>
> What should I post that has been posted before?
>
>>>>>> what a joke.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is a hint "jim". Engineers do not concern themselves with
>>>>> insignificant effects. Why? Well, because they are insignificant,
>>>>> and add unnecessary complication to the problem.
>>>>
>>>> not true big guy. if you want to disregard something, you state
>>>> what it is and why you're disregarding it. you don't just go ahead
>>>> and ignore it. people think you don't know what you're doing if you
>>>> make mistakes like that. and guess what...
>>>
>>> By "jim beam's" approach, we could just get rid of engineering. Why
>>> not approach every problem as one of physics and chemistry, doing the
>>> analysis at the most fundamental level?
>>
>> why not indeed. removes the scope for frauds and impostors.
>
> And makes many real world problems to difficult to solve. Something
> "jim" would realize if he had been a practicing engineer.

typical "engineer" bull****. one of the problems with you guys is this
bizarre attitude about science not being relevant. have you ever looked
down a microscope and witnessed how microscopic properties make
significant differences to macroscopic "engineering"? if not, then
you'll forever have this disconnect. "engineering" without proper
fundamentals is simply hackery.


>
> BTW "jim", some of us are financially liable or even criminally liable
> if our work is not correct. Pretty good incentive to get it right, eh?

of course. so you bother to learn about materials and how to use them
properly then, right?


>
>>> So what if the problems are too complicated to solve - we would want
>>> to ignore anything, no matter how insignificant, would we?
>>
>> not knowing stuff is different to ignoring it. people ignore things
>> through ignorance, stupidity or fraud - it doesn't suit their purpose.
>
> Any if ignoring something produces an acceptably small error, why waste
> time analyzing it?

because then it's been /determined/ to be insignificant, not simply
ignored!!!


>
>>>>>>>> did you see the one about the ww2 bomber found on the moon?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about the story of the ex-metallurgist who thought he was an
>>>>>>> engineer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> how about the guy that has opinions on every subject under the sun
>>>>>> from the comfort and safety of his sofa?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a futon. However, I should get a keyboard mount for my trike. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>> the guy that feels qualified to condemn stuff he's never used?
>>>>>
>>>>> I see enough examples of other people have problems with foo foo
>>>>> components,
>>>>
>>>> you can form that opinion from the futon?
>>>>
>>>>> that I have no wish to waste my limited financi