Lend me your brains

At 90+, there's definitely a high chance of dementia.

ba-dum, tish!

One very important thing to bear in mind is the strength of the pawls inside the freewheel....the amount of force your legs can produce when driving a freewheel will be nothing compared to the force of effectively turning it into a fixed cog and completely locking it up every time you skid.

On a normal freewheel that kind of force is never there because the wheel will just keep spinning faster and the pressure on the pawls will never really get past a certain point.
The pressure on the pawls when forcing it to effectively 'lock up' ,especially from the kind of speeds you're hoping to achieve will be increased by a very significant amount.

Good point Scott - and one I had not thought of, I will bear this is mind.

Ok think about it you have a ratio for speed on the right. you still have to over come this to even think about the freewheel acting.

If you are saying that I would have to overcome the force of the 'ratio for speed on the right' to engage the second gearing in reverse on the other side - (I hope I have read you right) - then this is not the case as the moment I start to back pedal the 'force' of the right hand drive crank/chain/cog disappears as that side now freewheels.

The force I would be fighting would be the inertia of the rear wheel only - and the whole point of this enterprise is that I would elect to fight that inertia with a lower gearing.

plus. the different ratios, both on the same BB axle try to turn at different rates? think bout it.

Yes you should ! ;P

Don't worry, the two crank arms will turn at the very same rate.

Apart from stuff that's been mentioned already...

• Why such a HUGE difference between ratios? 42/23 is too low. You can get major acceleration from a standing start closer to 60".
  
  

The figures where arbitrary, not based on much other that the lowest tooth freewheel and the highest tooth freewheel I can easily get my hands on - actual ratios would be worked out when all the various factors have been weighed up.

• Surely having ratios with matching teeth counts will put you in the right ballpark for starters:
  
  

48 -> 42 = -6
15 -> 23 = +8 ... so using a 21 would match.

Yep, this is kind of where I had arrived, with matched ratios.

However, **where are you going to find a freewheel with more than 18t?

They are not difficult to get, the lowest I can find is 15t and the highest 23t, I threw these numbers in as a starting point using the extremes of what I can get my hands on, but like I say if the maths dictate it I can back them off somewhat.

**A 42/18 would give you a snappy gear on which to accelerate, and a smoother transition to your 'track' gear.

eg:

42 -> 46 = +4
18 -> 14 = -4

Giving you approx 61"/87", with same number of chain links each side.

Might be a good starting point, thanks for the numbers ! :)

ACS Claw freewheels come in 20t and are good quality.

Yeah, I have heard good reviews of the ACSs, good quality and not too expensive - they actually go up to 22 tooth.

(but as BMMF has said, I might not even need such a large cog for a decent light gear)

fit a brake

Get the tube/bus.

So you would have a freewheel click-click-clicking away all the fucking time driving you slowly insane?

Not particularly, as the lighter gear would be turned by the hub and the chain (but not at it's own ratio) it would turn with the drive of the bike but drift out of sync (do your own maths here) but very slowly and click though it's pawls.

It's just fucking pointless. Buy a brake to help you stop or ride a lower gear. Fair enough you like high gears but 90+ is retarded.

Do you want to fight me, greased up and naked, in Trafalgar square ?

At 90+, there's definitely a high chance of dementia.

Classy, you should be the host of a quick fire fixed gear radio quiz show ! :)

Do you want to fight me, greased up and naked, in Trafalgar square ?
A number of points.

Firstly, what type of grease are we talking, if it's the old shit holding your headset together I'm not down. However, if it's a bathtub of new lithium grease I'd liekly be persuaded. Get a TV crew down and I'm definitely in.

Secondly, I stand by my point, you may slay people on the flat but what about traffic lights, round abouts, people forcing you to stop by walking into the road. You're acceleration is not only killing your knees but it must be painfully slow.
Seriously, coming from a brakless and high(ish) GI background (81 to be precise) I have to advocate learning to spin. Seriously, I ride far faster on my 74GI brakeless bike that I ever did on anything else. This is purely down to keeping everything fluid, flowing through traffic and having the acceleration behind me to get to top speed.
I was riding my polo bike (50.1) GI for nearly two solid weeks and learning to spin fast on that has made me capable of spinning faster on a higher geared bike.

Instead of trying to find a mechanical way ouit of your failings why don't you just do some training?

A number of points.

Firstly, what type of grease are we talking, if it's the old shit holding your headset together I'm not down. However, if it's a bathtub of new lithium grease I'd liekly be persuaded. Get a TV crew down and I'm definitely in.

Lithium works for me, standard rules no ball kicking, no gouging, everything else goes - winner gets to ride the looser twice around Trafalgar square in a televised victory lap of humiliation.

Secondly, I stand by my point, you may slay people on the flat but what about traffic lights, round abouts, people forcing you to stop by walking into the road. You're acceleration is not only killing your knees but it must be painfully slow.

Slay people on the flat - agreed. :)

Roundabouts - ? not sure of your point here ?

People walking into the road - this system would make it easier to stop.

Knee death - no problems, coming up for 20 years of high(ish) gearing, not to say the future does not hold a wheelchair for me, but generally speaking high ratios don't cause me grieve - but I do agree that it can be problematic for some.

Acceleration painfully slow - surprisingly not really, you certainly have a valid point and it is slower than a lower gearing, but it has never been problematic.

Seriously, coming from a brakless and high(ish) GI background (81 to be precise) I have to advocate learning to spin.

I agree 100% - spinning would be more efficient and most probably faster over all, more the pity I am not particularly good at spinning, never have been.

Instead of trying to find a mechanical way ouit of your failings why don't you just do some training?

Instead of doing some training why don't you find a mechanical way out of your failings ?

?

I think you have not read my original post, or read it and not understood what I am aiming to do.

Agreed, always an option.

aha, you'd be using two frewwheels. pardon!
somehow i assumed without a doubt in my mind you's be using fixed one side and frewheel the other.

your plan could work then, in theory, but the design is not so elegant.

Have you considered a coaster brake ? if they do them for rear sprockets ? im sure they do somewhere.

Lithium works for me, standard rules no ball kicking, no gouging, everything else goes - winner gets to ride the looser twice around Trafalgar square in a televised victory lap of humiliation.
Slay people on the flat - agreed. :)
Roundabouts - ? not sure of your point here ?
People walking into the road - this system would make it easier to stop.
Knee death - no problems, coming up for 20 years of high(ish) gearing, not to say the future does not hold a wheelchair for me, but generally speaking high ratios don't cause me grieve - but I do agree that it can be problematic for some.
Acceleration painfully slow - surprisingly not really, you certainly have a valid point and it is slower than a lower gearing, but it has never been problematic.
I agree 100% - spinning would be more efficient and most probably faster over all, more the pity I am not particularly good at spinning, never have been.
Instead of doing some training why don't you find a mechanical way out of your failings ?

1.No ball kicking, gouging etc. Fuck taht. If we don't come away bloodied and ruined there's simple no point.
2.You're agreeing with me agreeing with you?
3.You have to slow down at roundabouts if you don't have right of way. It's another acceleration thing. Jackass.

1. I wasn't discussing easier to stop. It was another shit acceleration issue. Jackass.
   
2. Wheelchair, at least you can get Phil hubs.
   
3. Acceleration. I've said enough. Jackass.
   
4. If you're no good at spinning, don't just write it off as something you can't do. Learn, put some goddamn effort in.
   
5. If I wanted a mechanical advantage over training I'd have missed the purpose of cycling fixed. First of all I'd buy gears. Second of all. I like cycling, any riding is training.
   
6. I
   
7. Hate
   
8. Not
   
9. Finishing
   
10. On
    
11. A
    
12. Prime
    
13. Number
    
14. CUNT.
    

1.No ball kicking, gouging etc. Fuck taht. If we don't come away bloodied and ruined there's simple no point.

Ok, balls and eyes it is.

2.You're agreeing with me agreeing with you?

Yes, I agree that a higher gear can allow a higher speed on the flat (if you have the legs for it).

3.You have to slow down at roundabouts if you don't have right of way. It's another acceleration thing. Jackass.

Ok, I see, the acceleration point made again and in a different way.

1. I wasn't discussing easier to stop. It was another shit acceleration issue. Jackass.
   
   

Ok, I understand, your argument against the system is based on a slower acceleration.

1. Wheelchair, at least you can get Phil hubs.
   
   

But are they NJS NHS certified ?

1. Acceleration. I've said enough. Jackass.
   
   

Understood, I thought you were making several distinct points.

1. If you're no good at spinning, don't just write it off as something you can't do. Learn, put some goddamn effort in.
   
   

Yes, sir.

1. If I wanted a mechanical advantage over training I'd have missed the purpose of cycling fixed. First of all I'd buy gears. Second of all. I like cycling, any riding is training.
   
   

Agreed, any riding is training. I like messing about with esoteric gearing systems. Try not to be so conformist.

1. CUNT.
   
   

Agreed.

haven't we been here b4.

newbie comes in asks for guidance. given guidance. then tells everyone to fuck off.

FAIL!

The Phil wheelchair hubs are unfortunately not NJS (as they're american) or NHS (as they're expensive). They are fucking lush though and I'm still trying to convince my mum to get a pair but her 18 spoke titanium wheels are preventing her interest.

haven't we been here b4.

newbie comes in asks for guidance. given guidance. then tells everyone to fuck off.

FAIL!
Yes Sir. He even failed when bitching at Scott Not Scot for his grammar. Incorrectly I might add.

haven't we been here b4.

newbie comes in asks for guidance. given guidance. then tells everyone to fuck off.

FAIL!

This is nonsense, who have I told to 'fuck off' ?

I am not a newbie, I have been here (on londonfgss.com) longer than yourself (under more than one name) - but should this have any bearing ? I think how long you have been here is irrelevant to what questions you should ask or how you should respond. ?

I have asked people to point out possible problems I might have implementing this, they have done just that, Scott himself pointed out a problem I had not thought of which I was grateful for (and said so).

If you would like me to blindly accept everything put forward out of respect to forum elders - and not enter into a conversation to bash out the finer details then you might be missing the point of these kinds of threads.

I am still confused how you can read a healthy debate with some sound points being made as simply me telling everyone to fuck off ?

Anyhow, no hard feelings I will leave it at that, no offense intended, some good points made so far, I will take it from there, time for this thread to die as I don't want to upset anyone else with my endless foul mouthed attacks on you.

:)

If you are saying that I would have to overcome the force of the 'ratio for speed on the right' to engage the second gearing in reverse on the other side - (I hope I have read you right) - then this is not the case as the moment I start to back pedal the 'force' of the right hand drive crank/chain/cog disappears as that side now freewheels.

The force I would be fighting would be the inertia of the rear wheel only - and the whole point of this enterprise is that I would elect to fight that inertia with a lower gearing.

Now this may well be bollocks as this thread has made my head hurt, but even assuming the mechanical side all works, will you really be any better off? Surely until you break traction & start the skid you will be going forward - you will never actually use the 'reverse' small gear, it is just to fight the inertia.

So I guess my point is: you're going along as usual & the point at which you need to break grip is the same and has to happen before the lower gearing can have an effect. You are not suddenly going forward with a low gearing to help start the skid. So how is it going to be any different?

Yes Sir. He even failed when bitching at Scott Not Scot for his grammar. Incorrectly I might add.

I thought I have been reasonably good humoured ? Not sure how you consider my (good humoured) correction of Scott's post in another thread (in which I called myself a pedant) as 'bitching' ?

If people here are so thinned skinned that they are getting upset and feeling insulted then I best bow out now, before I am lynched for some imagined transgression.

Thank you all for your input, it had been very useful.

the point is, why ask a forum for ideas, when everything you think is 'right'?!?

don't answer!

I thought I have been reasonably good humoured ?

If people here are so thinned skinned that they are getting upset and feeling insulted then I best bow out now.

Thank you all for your input, it had been very useful.
Thin skinned? Surely you mock? You've been great fun today but it still holds that you pulled up a long standing member, incorrectly, for his grammar whilst being on the forum less than a week.

Thanks to all for your input, much appreciated, apologies to anyone who feels that have been insulted (?).

Thread finished !

the point is, why ask a forum for ideas, when everything you think is 'right'?!?

don't answer!

I asked for input, where it seemed like the poster made a good point I took this on board, where I felt the point was wrong or irrelevant I said so, the aim was to discuss - not to be blindly open to any and every idea whether right or wrong, that would be pointless.

And of course I told no one to 'fuck off'.

Quite a few people made good points which I picked up on, I seem to remember posting the following to various people input:

*Yeah I think you are right, unless I choose my ratios carefully I might have one chain a little slacker that the other.
*

*Good point on the wear and tear. I might make the chain length equal if I can.
*

*Cheers fred, might come in useful.
*

*Cheers for the link.
*

*Agreed, always an option.
*

*Good point Scott - and one I had not thought of, I will bear this is mind.
*

*Might be a good starting point, thanks for the numbers ! :)
*

Anyhow, let's agree you think I am some bastard who turns up having only been here a week and am rude to forum elders and have told 'everyone' to 'fuck off' and I think everything I think it right.

I don't think this is so.

But let's leave it there, we have both made our points, I get the message.