Two Things

I'm free! Finally I am free!

 Freedom For Cooks Crank:

Back in 2003 when I first put together my Campstove Green Karate Monkey, I used a Cooks Brothers crank set in the build. I set it up with a Big Cheese chain ring and ran the bike single speed for years afterward with this set up.

I actually wore out one Big Cheese ring and put on another, only to find that when it wore out as well, that hidden chain ring bolt was frozen together. I suppose several Winter's of use might do something like that. Hmm...

I freely admit I am not a BMX parts hound so I was at a bit of a loss as to whether or not the spider could come off this drive arm. It had an M8 bolt holding the spider to the crank arm, so I removed this, (and promptly lost it), then I found out the spider was peened on at the spindle and well.....

So now I had a real pickle. I couldn't get the ring off and I lost a "special bolt". Okay, so I bailed on this crank at the time and went with a 180mm White Industries single speed crank I had purchased with a square taper interface. This is the crank set on the bike currently.

Every once in awhile over the ensuing years I would fiddle with the Cooks crank and see if I could find a suitable M8 bolt or if I could remove the chain ring bolt. I guess last week was finally the time for release of trapped chain rings because I was able to finally get the dang nut apart!

Well, at least now I could clean up the arms and start searching again for a suitable M8 bolt amongst my massive stash of fasteners I have saved up over the years. The cleaning part went well. The arms are in decent shape and the spider still looks really nice. At least for a part that is likely 35+ years old and went through several Iowa Winters and gravel miles.

But finding a bolt? This was not as successful. I could find a ton of metric thread fasteners which would turn in three times and bind, indicating they had the wrong thread pitch. This took a while to get through all my fasteners so I ended up wasting a lot of time on this, but I know now I don't have a bolt for this crank arm.

I got to wondering, perhaps Cook Brothers used a SAE thread pitch on this bit, since it was produced in the U.S.A. This would make sense, but I just am not knowledgeable on these enough to say if this is the case or not. I also do not have SAE fasteners. I am a bicycle mechanic, after all!

One good thing came out of all of this though. In searching for the M8 fastener I found my lost Wahoo Elemnt ROAM. It was underneath a bunch of computer mounts in a bowl on the bench. Why? Uh.....I probably figured all the computer stuff should go in this bowl here while I was cleaning up one day and then I likely promptly forgot about it. This would totally track with me. Anyway, I found the Wahoo, so wahoo!   

SILCA SAGA

You may remember my ordering a gauge for my SILCA pump recently? Well, I did receive a package from SILCA. It was curiously light, and my red flags started to wave as I walked back from the mailbox. Hmm.... Something seems wrong here.

Well, as I opened up the bubble pack envelope, I saw the box inside and I knew immediately something was for certain way off. I opened up the box to find.......a spanner wrench?!

What?!

How...... I..... This was really weird! I mean, I could see sending out the wrong gauge, but a spanner wrench? This was super odd.

That's not a gauge!

 

Now that is a gauge!

I sent a quick email to SILCA and their answer was that someone must have been in a hurry in the shipping department and got their wires crossed. An actual gauge would be on the way pronto. 

Finally I have the gauge! And my Pista Plus pump is back in service again. I must say SILCA was very prompt and responsive during this entire process. I always received communication within an hour of sending an email and shipments were made ASAP. I have to say SILCA wins the customer service award from Guitar Ted Productions. I've not ever had such great, prompt, and courteous service from any company I've dealt with over the years. 

Yes, they made a mistake, but they rectified it and all is well. Now, back to pumping up tires....

Old Idea Reborn: Cane Creek Cranks

The original Sweet Wings crank set in CroMoly

I saw an image on Twitter and I had to do a double take. Wait a minute! I checked the calendar. Yep! It is 2018 alright! I thought I was swept back to 1996 for a minute there. I look at the image on Twitter again...... Nope! It's 1996 again! 

Ah! The 1990's and mountain biking. You could hardly keep up with all the "new" tech that was burbling up out of garages, failed military contract company's materials technology, and whatever color anodization was in vogue at the moment. It was a seemingly ever flowing stream of "the new".

Of course, we didn't have Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, or the internet, (at least schlubs like us didn't), back in the 1990's. We had monthly periodicals. You might remember them as "magazines". Ya know........print media? Yeah, and it refreshed at a rate of once a month. It was really something else. We had a lot of time to do other stuff back then. Not like today where you are checking social media every half a second when you aren't answering push notifications between surfing the innergoogles and trying to eat lunch. Or something..........

Anyway, the Sweet Wings cranks were something that was the answer to a lot of our brainstorming about cranks and bottom brackets back in the old Advantage Cyclery days. My old boss, Tom, actually pretty much conceptually figured out two piece crank sets and outboard bearing bottom brackets one day while we were musing on the deficiencies of square taper crank/bottom bracket designs of the day. I never forgot that conversation, especially when Sweet Wings came about. They were the two piece design done right, not like Bullseye cranks, and they were light. At least for that time they were. A titanium version was teased back then, but I am not sure they saw the light of day before Sweet Wings kind of passed from the scene.

Cane Creek's eeWing Cranks in Titanium

Apparently, in the years that have since passed since those halcyon days of yore, Cane Creek picked up a brake design from a guy with a company called "Edwards Emnginerring". The brake was some CNC'ed masterpiece dubbed the "eeBrake". ("ee" for Edwards Engineering) Apparently this is the design source for the Sweet Wings crank idea, and so now we see in 2018 what you could call a modernized version of Sweet Wings dubbed "eeWing Cranks" by Cane Creek.

You can go read all the amazing hoopla about them here. They really are not a whole lot different than they were over 20 years ago. Same basic concept with some tweaks on the finer details. The big thing is the interface of the two parts of the crank arms. Instead of the splined interface of yore, Cane Creek has gone with a Hirth Joint, which is similar to how Campy road cranks are joined. Of course, the new eeCrank is made from Titanium, fully realizing Edwards Engineering's intentions for the design way back when.

So, why? 400 grams and a thousand bucks? Well..........yeah. You can spin this a thousand ways to Sunday and the fact is that these are insanely expensive crank arms. Cool? High tech? Yes. Better than high end carbon cranks? Probably. At least you shouldn't pull pedal spindle inserts out of these, like I've seen with a certain carbon crank a time or three. And 400 grams is pretty dang light, so......

Anyway, what is old is new again, only better. You could say that about a lot of current bicycle technologies. I just find the eeCrank intriguing as I did over 20 years ago when I saw its ancestor, the Sweet Wing crank. It's a really great idea, but it is just too danged expensive. So, in a way, that hasn't changed in the years since I was a younger shop rat than I am today!

Old Idea Reborn: Cane Creek Cranks

The original Sweet Wings crank set in CroMoly

I saw an image on Twitter and I had to do a double take. Wait a minute! I checked the calendar. Yep! It is 2018 alright! I thought I was swept back to 1996 for a minute there. I look at the image on Twitter again...... Nope! It's 1996 again! 

Ah! The 1990's and mountain biking. You could hardly keep up with all the "new" tech that was burbling up out of garages, failed military contract company's materials technology, and whatever color anodization was in vogue at the moment. It was a seemingly ever flowing stream of "the new".

Of course, we didn't have Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, or the internet, (at least schlubs like us didn't), back in the 1990's. We had monthly periodicals. You might remember them as "magazines". Ya know........print media? Yeah, and it refreshed at a rate of once a month. It was really something else. We had a lot of time to do other stuff back then. Not like today where you are checking social media every half a second when you aren't answering push notifications between surfing the innergoogles and trying to eat lunch. Or something..........

Anyway, the Sweet Wings cranks were something that was the answer to a lot of our brainstorming about cranks and bottom brackets back in the old Advantage Cyclery days. My old boss, Tom, actually pretty much conceptually figured out two piece crank sets and outboard bearing bottom brackets one day while we were musing on the deficiencies of square taper crank/bottom bracket designs of the day. I never forgot that conversation, especially when Sweet Wings came about. They were the two piece design done right, not like Bullseye cranks, and they were light. At least for that time they were. A titanium version was teased back then, but I am not sure they saw the light of day before Sweet Wings kind of passed from the scene.

Cane Creek's eeWing Cranks in Titanium

Apparently, in the years that have since passed since those halcyon days of yore, Cane Creek picked up a brake design from a guy with a company called "Edwards Emnginerring". The brake was some CNC'ed masterpiece dubbed the "eeBrake". ("ee" for Edwards Engineering) Apparently this is the design source for the Sweet Wings crank idea, and so now we see in 2018 what you could call a modernized version of Sweet Wings dubbed "eeWing Cranks" by Cane Creek.

You can go read all the amazing hoopla about them here. They really are not a whole lot different than they were over 20 years ago. Same basic concept with some tweaks on the finer details. The big thing is the interface of the two parts of the crank arms. Instead of the splined interface of yore, Cane Creek has gone with a Hirth Joint, which is similar to how Campy road cranks are joined. Of course, the new eeCrank is made from Titanium, fully realizing Edwards Engineering's intentions for the design way back when.

So, why? 400 grams and a thousand bucks? Well..........yeah. You can spin this a thousand ways to Sunday and the fact is that these are insanely expensive crank arms. Cool? High tech? Yes. Better than high end carbon cranks? Probably. At least you shouldn't pull pedal spindle inserts out of these, like I've seen with a certain carbon crank a time or three. And 400 grams is pretty dang light, so......

Anyway, what is old is new again, only better. You could say that about a lot of current bicycle technologies. I just find the eeCrank intriguing as I did over 20 years ago when I saw its ancestor, the Sweet Wing crank. It's a really great idea, but it is just too danged expensive. So, in a way, that hasn't changed in the years since I was a younger shop rat than I am today!

Strange Magic

So far.....

Surly 1X1 Update:

It has been plenty busy around here of late, but I have scraped up a few bits and have found time to install them on the 1X1 bequeathed to me by former Europa employee, Brian.

Here's the parts listing so far:

• Super ancient Shimano cantilever brakes. Probably "Deer Head" era ones, and someone painted one set flat black. Hey, they'll work! 
• Mountain Goat "Goat Horns" bull moose style chrome plated bar/stem combo. I thought a product named "Goat Horns" was appropriate here. 
• Some old Ergon grips in white that I've had around since '08 or so on sevearl different bikes. 
• Bontrager seat post. It's long enough, silver enough, and darn it! I like it!
• Black Salsa Cycles Lip-Loc seat binder. 
• Black Mavic 221 rims laced to black Shimano Parallax LX hubs courtesy of El Presidente' Ari of the Slender Fungus
• NOS Panaracer Magic tires in the cream color with skin walls. 
• Ergon SM-3 saddle in black.
• A pair of Shimano Exage cantilever brake levers. Circa '93. Bought from Dave's Closeouts at Frostbike ages ago. Actually, I think they were free.

That's it so far. I have to find a 118mm bottom bracket, then I can install my '90's ere LX square taper cranks and Surly ring with a 16T cog I am buying from a friend. Grab some old binned chain, cable up the brakes, and that will be that.

Stay tuned!

Strange Magic

So far.....

Surly 1X1 Update:

It has been plenty busy around here of late, but I have scraped up a few bits and have found time to install them on the 1X1 bequeathed to me by former Europa employee, Brian.

Here's the parts listing so far:

• Super ancient Shimano cantilever brakes. Probably "Deer Head" era ones, and someone painted one set flat black. Hey, they'll work! 
• Mountain Goat "Goat Horns" bull moose style chrome plated bar/stem combo. I thought a product named "Goat Horns" was appropriate here. 
• Some old Ergon grips in white that I've had around since '08 or so on sevearl different bikes. 
• Bontrager seat post. It's long enough, silver enough, and darn it! I like it!
• Black Salsa Cycles Lip-Loc seat binder. 
• Black Mavic 221 rims laced to black Shimano Parallax LX hubs courtesy of El Presidente' Ari of the Slender Fungus
• NOS Panaracer Magic tires in the cream color with skin walls. 
• Ergon SM-3 saddle in black.
• A pair of Shimano Exage cantilever brake levers. Circa '93. Bought from Dave's Closeouts at Frostbike ages ago. Actually, I think they were free.

That's it so far. I have to find a 118mm bottom bracket, then I can install my '90's ere LX square taper cranks and Surly ring with a 16T cog I am buying from a friend. Grab some old binned chain, cable up the brakes, and that will be that.

Stay tuned!

Meeting In The Middle?

Less "fat"- more "mtb".

As I look at what is going on with off road bicycles, I see a lot of things being tried. It is almost as crazy as it was in the early to mid 90's when so many small manufacturers were putting out dual suspension ideas and components were being turned out of small machine shops at rates none of us could keep up with at the time.

This is almost the case again, only now it isn't about which suspension design is going to end up being "best", but what wheel size, and even more than that, how wide and voluminous a tire are we going to end up with. 

Fat bikes are part of this, but so are the 29+ and the 27.5+ bikes. Big, voluminous tires on wider rims are all the rage now. Regular 2.4" tires, which were considered huge only 5-6 years ago, are now seen as "ho-hum" skinnies. Even I have caught myself looking at 3.8"-4.0" fat bike tires and thinking they were "small". Then I remember when I built up the Snow Dog in 2011 and thought those 3.8" Larrys were humongous!

So, what the heck is going on here? Do we really need these monster truck tires? I've been having several interesting conversations with folks in different parts of the cycling world that have given me a lot to think about. Here's where I think all this is coming from and going to......

29+: Fat and TALL!!

First of all, choices in what you can have in tires, widths of those tires, and in the rims you can mount them to have never been better. You had one choice in the 90's that was wide enough to get you by for mountain biking, and nobody thought twice about it. The reason? No choices. It was simply ludicrous to entertain thoughts of differing wheel sizes and widths of tires when there simply was zero chances you'd ever see it in your lifetime. Or so we thought......

If there was one thing that 29"ers existence did for mountain biking, it was to show the mtb tribes that there might be better alternative wheel and tire sizes to consider. Several years later, the 27.5er size was floated, then fat bikes rose to prominence, and it was on from that point. Surly has been a rabble rouser in the alt tire size scene with its 27.5 sized 26 inch based tires and of course, the 29+ tires which debuted on the Krampus.

Things in the mtb world tend to be cyclical with regard to vast choices. It seems you see tons of innovations and then a weeding out process. For instance, has anyone seen any Allsop stems or Boulder Defiants lately? I rest my case...... well, not really! 

This just to point out the folowing: Expect the tire sizes to weed out to something "in the middle". Fat bikes and 29+ are on the extremes. XC sized rubber in 27.5"er and 29"er sizes is on the conservative end. Somewhere in between I feel things will settle out, and that "somewhere", in my opinion, is 27.5+. 

Vee Tire Trax Fatty 27.5 X 3"

Already we are seeing fat bikes being pushed as "mountain bikes", which they can be. However; do you really need a huge, 3.8" tire that requires a special frame, and what is more, a really wide bottom bracket?

What if you could get some of those "fat bike benefits" in a slightly lighter, more traditional bike dimension friendly package? Fat tires have inherently attractive qualities for the off roader. Volume means lower air pressures which gain you comfort, traction for days, and stability which bodes for more confident, faster railing of terrain. However; fat bike tires, rims, and their dimensions push the weight limits and biomechanic boundaries a bit too far for some folks. Not to mention the special designs for frames and suspension bits.

29+ showed us that going slightly skinnier was a great idea to cut down on the "fat" and super wide bottom brackets. However; the huge diameter of these wheels, (something over 31" in most cases), is ponderous and just too big for a lot of people to have a bicycle designed around them. Enter B+/27.5+ tires and wheels.

Understanding that 29"er wheels have already had every conceivable type of mtb designed around their diameter, the 29-ish diameter size of the 27.5+ wheel is an easier thing to accommodate for. It would fit a wider slice of the mtb populace than 29+, and it can be had in 2.8"-3.0" widths already. Many current 29"er hardtails already exist which would work with the wheel size and full suspension designs could be executed without too much trouble going forward.

Plus sized benefits with fat bike tire traits in a package that is already somewhat familiar to current mountain bikers? Sounds like a plan to me.

Meeting In The Middle?

Less "fat"- more "mtb".

As I look at what is going on with off road bicycles, I see a lot of things being tried. It is almost as crazy as it was in the early to mid 90's when so many small manufacturers were putting out dual suspension ideas and components were being turned out of small machine shops at rates none of us could keep up with at the time.

This is almost the case again, only now it isn't about which suspension design is going to end up being "best", but what wheel size, and even more than that, how wide and voluminous a tire are we going to end up with. 

Fat bikes are part of this, but so are the 29+ and the 27.5+ bikes. Big, voluminous tires on wider rims are all the rage now. Regular 2.4" tires, which were considered huge only 5-6 years ago, are now seen as "ho-hum" skinnies. Even I have caught myself looking at 3.8"-4.0" fat bike tires and thinking they were "small". Then I remember when I built up the Snow Dog in 2011 and thought those 3.8" Larrys were humongous!

So, what the heck is going on here? Do we really need these monster truck tires? I've been having several interesting conversations with folks in different parts of the cycling world that have given me a lot to think about. Here's where I think all this is coming from and going to......

29+: Fat and TALL!!

First of all, choices in what you can have in tires, widths of those tires, and in the rims you can mount them to have never been better. You had one choice in the 90's that was wide enough to get you by for mountain biking, and nobody thought twice about it. The reason? No choices. It was simply ludicrous to entertain thoughts of differing wheel sizes and widths of tires when there simply was zero chances you'd ever see it in your lifetime. Or so we thought......

If there was one thing that 29"ers existence did for mountain biking, it was to show the mtb tribes that there might be better alternative wheel and tire sizes to consider. Several years later, the 27.5er size was floated, then fat bikes rose to prominence, and it was on from that point. Surly has been a rabble rouser in the alt tire size scene with its 27.5 sized 26 inch based tires and of course, the 29+ tires which debuted on the Krampus.

Things in the mtb world tend to be cyclical with regard to vast choices. It seems you see tons of innovations and then a weeding out process. For instance, has anyone seen any Allsop stems or Boulder Defiants lately? I rest my case...... well, not really! 

This just to point out the folowing: Expect the tire sizes to weed out to something "in the middle". Fat bikes and 29+ are on the extremes. XC sized rubber in 27.5"er and 29"er sizes is on the conservative end. Somewhere in between I feel things will settle out, and that "somewhere", in my opinion, is 27.5+. 

Vee Tire Trax Fatty 27.5 X 3"

Already we are seeing fat bikes being pushed as "mountain bikes", which they can be. However; do you really need a huge, 3.8" tire that requires a special frame, and what is more, a really wide bottom bracket?

What if you could get some of those "fat bike benefits" in a slightly lighter, more traditional bike dimension friendly package? Fat tires have inherently attractive qualities for the off roader. Volume means lower air pressures which gain you comfort, traction for days, and stability which bodes for more confident, faster railing of terrain. However; fat bike tires, rims, and their dimensions push the weight limits and biomechanic boundaries a bit too far for some folks. Not to mention the special designs for frames and suspension bits.

29+ showed us that going slightly skinnier was a great idea to cut down on the "fat" and super wide bottom brackets. However; the huge diameter of these wheels, (something over 31" in most cases), is ponderous and just too big for a lot of people to have a bicycle designed around them. Enter B+/27.5+ tires and wheels.

Understanding that 29"er wheels have already had every conceivable type of mtb designed around their diameter, the 29-ish diameter size of the 27.5+ wheel is an easier thing to accommodate for. It would fit a wider slice of the mtb populace than 29+, and it can be had in 2.8"-3.0" widths already. Many current 29"er hardtails already exist which would work with the wheel size and full suspension designs could be executed without too much trouble going forward.

Plus sized benefits with fat bike tire traits in a package that is already somewhat familiar to current mountain bikers? Sounds like a plan to me.

Project Two-Six

Yes, it is a full moon, and you aren't seeing things. The title says "Project Two-Six". There is a good reason for that, so read on, if you dare!

Old. Reliable. Works.

The deal here is that I was asked to test something out. A pair of tires, to be exact. The tires in question were available at one time in 700c size, but stock was out and not likely to become available in a timely manner for the purposes of this test. (Not that it matters so far, but read on....)

The question was asked: "Don't you have a townie to put the other size tire on?" Well, I said that I had an old Schwinn that I had "Xtracycled", maybe that would work? And the deal was on. Tires were sent out, and I would put them on the old Xtracycle. Or would I?

Enter in an old, ancient, long forgotten project I started almost ten years ago. Of course, the Xtracycle is a 26"er, and at the time of the question about the tires, I thought it was the only 26"er I had left in my possession. However; then I recalled that old, forgotten project bike. Hmm.......maybe this is what I need to finally get that thing back together. I had all the old parts in boxes yet. Should be simple. But, I can't leave well enough alone!

You see, this bike, another old Schwinn, was a geared mountain bike I got that I had stripped down to bare metal, had powder coated, and then I had designs on really doing a "custom-modified" restoration. Kind of a hot rodded version of the stock bike.

But that was all out the window now. This was going to become a "winter time commuter bike", or so I thought.  I had intended on not putting derailleurs on this bike, and keeping it single speed seemed the right thing to do. However; after two failed attempts at single speeding rear wheels for the project, (One had a stuck on freewheel, the other a sealed bearing set up with an off-set axle), I decided a 1 X 5 would be okay.

So out came an old SunTour top mount, a MounTech rear derailleur, and SunTour 5 speed rear freewheel. Everything going on this bike, sans the grips, tires, handle bar, and tubes, is older than 1990. Probably older than 1988! I may end up putting on some fenders though, so there will be another newer part. But this will be pretty vintage stuff all around, for the most part.

Stay tuned for the final build, which should appear soon. Now, back to that test I mentioned. The tires are Continental's Top Contact Winter tires. These are "stud killers", supposedly. The idea is sort of like those Bridgestone "Blizzak" car tires. Very sticky-soft rubber with tons of working edges to grip ice and snow covered surfaces. So.......I am sure you see what the problem is! 

Since there hasn't been much of a winter, (yet), this test may be still born before it starts. But, there still is plenty of time for something of a winter to happen, so I will get this together and test ride it to de-bug anything needing de-bugging. Hopefully "Project Two-Six" will see the light of day before the weekend.

Project Two-Six

Yes, it is a full moon, and you aren't seeing things. The title says "Project Two-Six". There is a good reason for that, so read on, if you dare!

Old. Reliable. Works.

The deal here is that I was asked to test something out. A pair of tires, to be exact. The tires in question were available at one time in 700c size, but stock was out and not likely to become available in a timely manner for the purposes of this test. (Not that it matters so far, but read on....)

The question was asked: "Don't you have a townie to put the other size tire on?" Well, I said that I had an old Schwinn that I had "Xtracycled", maybe that would work? And the deal was on. Tires were sent out, and I would put them on the old Xtracycle. Or would I?

Enter in an old, ancient, long forgotten project I started almost ten years ago. Of course, the Xtracycle is a 26"er, and at the time of the question about the tires, I thought it was the only 26"er I had left in my possession. However; then I recalled that old, forgotten project bike. Hmm.......maybe this is what I need to finally get that thing back together. I had all the old parts in boxes yet. Should be simple. But, I can't leave well enough alone!

You see, this bike, another old Schwinn, was a geared mountain bike I got that I had stripped down to bare metal, had powder coated, and then I had designs on really doing a "custom-modified" restoration. Kind of a hot rodded version of the stock bike.

But that was all out the window now. This was going to become a "winter time commuter bike", or so I thought.  I had intended on not putting derailleurs on this bike, and keeping it single speed seemed the right thing to do. However; after two failed attempts at single speeding rear wheels for the project, (One had a stuck on freewheel, the other a sealed bearing set up with an off-set axle), I decided a 1 X 5 would be okay.

So out came an old SunTour top mount, a MounTech rear derailleur, and SunTour 5 speed rear freewheel. Everything going on this bike, sans the grips, tires, handle bar, and tubes, is older than 1990. Probably older than 1988! I may end up putting on some fenders though, so there will be another newer part. But this will be pretty vintage stuff all around, for the most part.

Stay tuned for the final build, which should appear soon. Now, back to that test I mentioned. The tires are Continental's Top Contact Winter tires. These are "stud killers", supposedly. The idea is sort of like those Bridgestone "Blizzak" car tires. Very sticky-soft rubber with tons of working edges to grip ice and snow covered surfaces. So.......I am sure you see what the problem is! 

Since there hasn't been much of a winter, (yet), this test may be still born before it starts. But, there still is plenty of time for something of a winter to happen, so I will get this together and test ride it to de-bug anything needing de-bugging. Hopefully "Project Two-Six" will see the light of day before the weekend.