Search results for:

Undibs on CdF after talking with @cake, geo of early CdF is too aggressive for me!

Interested by the CdF, sending a PM!

shitshitshit please don't like it I posted it ~ironically~. I'm not cut out for amey-posting, it's too much pressure.

Hello, is this the fat bike thread?

I would guess that's the easiest way to make it semi-hollow when using a CNC mill :)

Might be interested if @launchpadboi isn't :)

They look more like BR-RS305 to me!

As a last resort you could post a picture of the derailleur as seen from the back of the bike, maybe somebody can identify if there's anything wrong with the way you mounted the replacement cages, but I assume you and @hippy have already checked that.

Always disappointing to replace these parts, broke the hydro bladder of my Di2 brifter after less than a 1000 km due to a bad fall, I was a bit upset.

Bummer, can't trick the megacorp then!

Added some stuff to my previous answer while you typed yours :)

I hadn't realized this was the problem, I thought the gears changes were fine but @frank9755 couldn't get the 11T sprocket due to not having gear changes left, while having one "extra" gear change on the leftmost side of the cassette.

Isn't the cog at which you start the adjustment the one that is considered to be the fifth by the deraileur (don't have my bike at hand to test it out unfortunately)? In which case that could solve @frank9755's problem, because he seems to have an offset of one cog but fine shifting otherwise.

Your experience seem to indicate otherwise, but then I'm wondering how Shim hardcodes the position of the fifth sprocket among all available cassettes. I guess the distance between the hanger and the n-th cog of the cassette doesn't vary much amongst cassettes, if at all, but then I'd have let the user define the reference themselves.

I'd be curious to know if my solution to go into adjustment mode on the 6th sprocket works, now that you've identified the problem :)

Was gonna state the obvious and tell you to follow religiously the dealer's manual (starting at p.64), but @hippy already covered that.
Have you tried taking advantage of that and go into adjustment mode when you're on the 6th sprocket then? Might offset the whole thing (without fixing the root of the problem, but hey ;)

Also, I think I experienced something vaguely similar when setting mine up (but it's been so long I can't remember exactly what it was), and I think it had to do with the trim being offset : when the derailleur was on the fifth sprocket, I had alread used all of the 16 adjustments steps. I don't remember how I fixed it unfortunately, not sure what can be done to reset it except the standard "after crash" procedure, as @Matt101 is suggesting.

I honestly don't know and keep wondering the same thing. I've never had that problem happen with racks for instance, and I don't loctite any of these bolts. I've also noticed that it is mostly happening to the vertical (or almost vertical) bolts on my bike : the one under the fork crown and the one under the seatstay bridge.

This is a bit counterintuitive according to the Junker test described in the link sent by @MCamb, which seems to be based on the fact that "shear loading perpendicular to the fastener axis is the most severe form of loading for vibration-induced loosening" : you'd expect bolts parallel to the road to loosen first, as most of the vibrations induced by the road are, I assume, vertical.

If I understand correctly the Junker test, the plate under the fastener has to actually move to have any effect though (at least infinitesimally), so if I had to take a wild guess, I'd say that there tends to be more surface area (and thus more friction) at the dropouts between a rack and the frame, than at the tiny contact point between my mudguard and the seatstay bridge.
Totally unsubstantiated claim though.

Brilliant!

Amazing. I suggest you put a disk as large as the rim and send the picture to Grant Petersen.

Also, what is the mid-crank eyelet for?

Thanks, nice explanation, though it definitely relies on digging a little bit into the material : "When the bolt is tightened, the teeth grip and seat the mating surfaces".

@Chaley and yourself convinced me, I'm gonna try them out before drilling through my frame. Do the copies work just as well? The nord locks are stupidly expensive.

Thanks, I will not limit myself to 50 mm offset forks then :) Will continue looking around to see if I can find a sub 300€ one.

@Alex_B : that's something I considered, I need to shoot an email to the framebuilders I know to inquire about their prices (I'm in France, not the UK, so Geoff Robers wouldn't be very convenient!).

The thought of wrapping every single bolt each time doesn't seem very appealing to me either ;)

I though that wedgelocks required also digging into the material to prevent spinning. If they're just digging into each other, what's the difference with a standard washer?

I got an reply from Berthoud by the way : they confirmed that you can't re-radius stainless steel mudguards (at least not without specialized tools), contrary to aluminum ones.

I have not but it looks even more annoying to reapply than loctite :)

That has been my short-lived experience with lock nut washers.
@Chaley and @MCamb : are they reusable? I also assume that they would require digging a bit into the mudguard, not sure how that'll turn out after a few removals.

@MisterMikkel : I won't disagree that once slathered with loctite after a proper cleaning they're very pretty and work ok! It's just my experience that, if I don't go through the painful process of cleaning every single eyelet with a q-tip and alcohol, loctite won't work.
I have had at least 4 or 5 rides where, despite loctite, if I didn't clean the eyelets before applying it, bolts came loose (once or twice they even started rubbing on my tire). I'm not too keen on trying to increase the sample size, so I'm looking for a better solution :)

Yeah I've been decently happy with loctite once it's done, it's just that the whole process everytime I put mudguards back on is atrocious.
Not sure where I was going with my question actually, I think nobody has any practical experience with radially-oriented eyelets going all the way through the bridge, I've only ever seen it on Weigle's bike shown above.
I'm mostly concerned whether a nylstop nut will work as well as loctite : I've never had any problem with nylstop nuts on horizontal bolts, but these vertical eyelets on my bike (both at the fork crown and the seatstay bridge) have proven to very prone to rattling loose.

I've messaged them yesterday about availability and shipping costs to France, hopefully they'll tell me if they've got one laying around unlisted on the website :)

Ok, that opens up a lot of options then! Was convinced it mattered because I read some blurb about the combination of whatever HTA + 45 mm offset fork was the standard on gravel bikes, but that 71.5 HTA + 50 mm offset fork also gave equivalently nice handling. I was also influenced by the fact there are a lot of forks out there with chip dropouts which allow changing the offset by 5 mm, is it just marketing bullshit?

Also, unsure if trail is the only number I should look at when making comparisons like that, or if there are other metrics.

@cheekysnaker : if we give up on the whole 50mm offset thing, that works too, but it's in the same price range as Fairlight's Cempa 2.0, which is precisely what I wanted (more than the Enve actually), down to the stupidest detail like the orientation of the mudguard eyelet. If I'm buying a fork in the ~500€ range I'm definitely buying the Fairlight one.
Was hoping there were sub-300€ forks, like the ones specced on Bombtrack Ext (most likely Carbondas?) with different details (definitely want a front facing eyelet at the fork crown for instance).

Thanks, but unfortunately they have a 45 mm rake, while my bike's current fork has a 50 mm rake.