The derailure does not move down to the lowest two cogs. Which adjutment screw should be used to allow the indexing to move down (out) to the 13 and 12 tooth sprockets? How much adjustment? All other sprockets are ok... chain moves easily and there is no chain noise...so it appears that the indexing between cogs is correct. It is just a matter of allowing the derailueur to move furhther toward the drop-out.\n\nThanks for your interest and help.
126814
This will work for all rear derailleurs.\n\nFirst, start by undoing the rear derailleur cable anchor bolt. Pedal so that the derailleur shifts as far down the cogset as it will go. While pedaling, continue unscrewing the outer limit screw until your rear derailleur will shift into your outermost cog (your 12t). Check to see that the derailleur pulleys align with the teeth on your outermost cog.\n\nOnce this is done, reattach your rear derailleur cable. Adjust the tension until you dial in your shifting.\n\nOnce that's done, repeat the process above for the limit screw on the other end of your cogset - because nobody likes their rear derailleur shifting into their spokes.\n\nGood luck!
490958
Not necessarily. A loose sprocket would move from side to side, not front to back, so unless it is REALLY loose that is not the problem.\n\nIf your problem is that the chain falls off, then a loose sprocket can be the problem. When you place pressure on the pedals it will pull a loose sprocket out of the chainline and the chain will track off the gears.
519684
Vintage Bicycle Discussion Area\nVintage Lightweights\nVINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   1970's Japanese Racer\nPosted by J.T. on 7/30/2004 at  1:12:04 AM \nI bought a race/road bike from a thrift store the other day. It has been repainted and I don't know who made the bike. It is a ten-speed with multiple Sun Tour components. It has a Shimano 333 Stem Shifter and Shimano 27" Wheels. The brakes, handle bars and front derailer are diacompe. There was foam padding on the handle bars but I replaced it with tape. When I removed the padding there were two inscriptions. On the left hand bar there was an ivy wreath. Inside the wreath it says "Japan Champion". On the right hand bar it says "KB". Anyone know wjo made the bike?\nby: 67.5.136.119 \n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nNavigation: \n  oldroads.com \n    Top of Vintage Lightweights Discussion Area \n      First message in this thread \n\n        Replies:\n       RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   1970's Japanese Racer posted by JONathan on 7/30/2004 at 6:14:51 AM \n Not too much to go on. Fins, gills and scales...what kind of fish is it? If you have names for the cranks, wheels (hubs and rims) and freewheel type and make, the field could be narrowed a bit. The higher quality Japanese imports from the '70's were: Fuji; Miyata; Nishiki; Univega (Nishiki); Centurion; Bridgestone; Panasonic; and a host of branded Schwinns. The assumption is US imports. Canada had several others. Sekine comes to mind.\nPost a picture of the frame so the lug work and seat-stays are discernable. This can be matched up with known models for a good guess. The alloy "Champion" bars indicate a good quality bike. There were other quality rides, such as Kobe and Nakamura, etc., but these were fewer, at least from my experiences spotting VLW's. A serial number can be useful as gifferent makes had different number schemes and location on the frame.\nGood luck, JONathan\nNote: Sounds like a great commuter bike; the more generic looking the better, IMHO. Even lousy paint protects against rust. \nby: 67.118.246.240  \n\n       S/N, please posted by John E on 7/30/2004 at 2:34:23 PM \n In addition to more details on components and lug details, please post the serial number. Kawamura, Nishiki's framebuilder, punched S/Ns such as KS78091 (my 1971 American Eagle Semi-Pro) on the bottom of the BB shell. \n\nThe 333 indicates lower-end early 1970s Shimano components. I am guessing your bike weighs about 15kilos=33lbs. A lighter weight would indicate something better and/or newer.\nby: 66.185.168.82  \n\n       RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   1970's Japanese Racer posted by J.T. on 7/30/2004 at 5:28:19 PM \n The crankset has the same KB inscribed on it. The s/n is under the crankset, KS70120\nby: 67.5.140.46  \n\n       RE:RE:VINTAGE LIGHTWEIGHTS:   1970's Japanese Racer posted by JONathan on 7/30/2004 at 8:05:51 PM \n How about "Kabuki Bridegstone"? I have a Kabuki that is made by Bridegstone. One way to see is to check the lugs for magnetic response. They used Al lugs and thermal bonding, way ahead of the times. I would check mine for serial number, but it is second tier location. Another thing is to look for "integral derailer hanger" and check for forged dropouts. This would make it a keeper, for sure.\nUnless it was a Schwinn "varsity" with its unique construction, the identification of the myriad look-alikes is tough without decals and/or stickers. Unless there is a specific serial number provenance. Have you given it the test ride? The better bikes ride better, so you could then narrow it down to maybe a dozen makes.\nGood luck and happy rides,\nJONathan\nby: 67.118.246.2  \n\n       Nishiki posted by J.T. on 7/30/2004 at 8:21:46 PM \n Doing some of my own research I stumbled upon the Nishiki logo. The square with a stripe through it in the middle of the logo is inscribed next to
325054
Usually magnets or wedges that are pressed down inbetween two metal rails:\n\n&#92;/\n||\n\nSorry that i couldn't draw well via the keyboard, but imagine the above as a cross section of the wedge, and the lower vertical lines as a cross section of the metal or semi-metal rails...the rails can taper outward a little to create more surface-to-surface contact.  you can imagine the normal force exerted onto one another between the wedge and the rails as the wedge is pushed into the rails, this normal force grows fast quickly as more force is exerted onto the wedge.  and i'm assuming that you're taking or have taken physics courses, so you should know that let's say a box sliding on the floor, has a frictional force of kw, where k is the kinetic friction constant, and w is the weight of the box, for the wedge/rail setup, we would replace w with the normal force, and the equation wouldn't be that simple, in fact, the force would grow almost exponentially as more force is exerted downward on the wedge since the wedge gets wider and wider.  think of it as a brake/rotor setup on a car, but instead of circular, it's linear, and instead of the brake pads squeezing on the rotor, it's the rotor being pushed into the pads.  this similar setup is used on trolley cars, which is why on some trolley trails, you see another pair of rails, situated close together, inbetween the two main rails for the wheels.\n\nnow in an emergency, there is no stopping anywhere else on the roller coaster track except on the boarding/exiting platform.  the engineers made it so that the momentum of the cars will take them through the entire track system no matter what the (realistic) load distribution is.  can you imagine trying to stop an extremely fast set of attached cars on a track with twists, turns, and loops?  and on top of that, the decision when and where to stop the cars is left to some teenage kid in the booth?  very unsafe and unreliable.
103367
get a second opinion- Sorry a fuse is good or bad - no middle. you have an issue withe the sending unit in the tank - it is a simple but not a cheap part- most of the sending units have an arm that rides up and down with the fuel level- sometimes where the arm rubs against can loose contact and cause a gauge to read empty- or loose ground withe the tank. should be cheaper than 500.00 maybe
45611
I wanted a full suspension bike and the lowested priced make and model I chould find at the time was a Jamis Dakar. It's still around and I think it's still an 8-speed machine. I'm more of a road rider and use mountain biking as a distraction to stir up my exercise routine. It's not a fancy machine and it's very heavy it suits me just fine. I don't know if this model is still the low end of the line but it's worth checking out. Be sure to check Giant as well.
604804
Seems difficult to figure out. It would be better if you show it to someone else. Your riding colleagues may see the problem well. For now, it's not clear to figure out.
205225
The cage length affects capacity. Capacity is defined as the difference between the number of teeth on the largest and smallest cogs, added to the difference between the number of teeth on the big chainring and the small chainring. Long cage rear derailleurs have a high capacity, and can therefore handle a very wide range drivetrain. Short cage rear derailleurs are more limited in their capacity, working best on a drivetrain with closer gearing.\n\nShorter cage rear derailleurs take up less chain slack than a long cage rear derailleur. The chain is held more snugly, which can result in smoother, more precise shifting. However, longer cage rear derailleurs are capable of taking up more chain slack than a short cage rear derailleur, allowing you to run a wider range drivetrain than would be possible with a short cage rear derailleur.\n\nFor road bikes, your choice is fairly straightforward. If you plan to use a double crankset, stick to a short cage unit. For triple cranksets, you'll want to use a longer cage rear derailleur to handle the increased chain wrap necessitated by the wider range drivetrain.\n\nOn a mountain bike, your choice is slightly more difficult. Less experienced riders, or riders who ride frequently in steep terrain should probably stick to a long cage rear derailleur. This, combined with proper chain length, will allow the bike to be safely shifted into every gear on the bike. Racers might appreciate the lighter weight and slight shifting improvement a short cage rear derailleur offers. However, these benefits come with a tradeoff - because of the decreased capacity a short or medium cage rear derailleur offers, it may not be possible to safely use the small chainring in tandem with the smallest cogs. (The derailleur simply can't take up enough slack in the chain)\n\nFor mountain bikes, when in doubt, choose a long cage rear derailleur, unless you are certain you understand the limitations of a short/medium cage derailleur.
366646
Try asking in the recumbent section of Bike Forums on the link below, users of this type of bike may be able to help you:\n\nhttp://www.bikeforums.net/\n\nGood Luck
386642
Fir the first question, you need to determine how many revolutions per second that is.\n\nSince one revolution is 2 * Pi radians, divide 4.60 radians per second by 2 * Pi to get the number of revolutions per second:\n\n4.60 / (2 * 3.14159) = 0.7321 revolutions.\n\nEach full revolution of the forward sprocket would pull a length of chain equal to the circumference.  Thus one complete revolution of the forward sprocket would pull a length of chain equal to (2 * Pi * radius) which is to say (2 * 3.14159 * 9) = 56.5486 centimeters of chain.\n\nThus, 0.7321 revolutions per second would pull (0.7321 * 56.5486) centimeters of chain per second, which is 41.3992 centimeters per second.\n\nReducing digits to account for significant figures, call it 41.40 centimeters per second is the linear velocity of the chain.\n\nCentripetal accelleration is velocity squared divided by radius, so (41.40 cm/s)^2 / 5.10cm:\n\n(41.40 cm/s)^2 / 5.10cm\n(1713.96 cm^2/s^2) / 5.10cm\n336.07 cm/s^2
587203
Sounds like a problem in the hub mechanism. I used to break the pawls inside the freewheel from using too tall of a gear. Replace the freewheel/cassette and then look at learning to spin. Spinning made me faster, saved my knees and I don't break freewheels anymore.
102464
14 bolt is PLENTY strong!\n\nBut why not sell it to a 4 X 4 enthusiast, use that money to go towards a narrowed 9" rear?\n\nI question the availability of gear ratios for that particular style of rear...That's one of the reasons why more people  aren't doing what you are considering right now!  Also think about housing ends, brakes, axles with the proper bolt patterns, etc...
485708
sorry I'm not able to answer your question but I'll say I have a Manitou Travis Intrinsic and it is the best fork I ever ran\ntry looking here\nhttp://www.answerproducts.com/items.asp?deptid=1&itemid=124
505803
to solve your problem with minimal work, just bring your bike into a LBS and they should have the tool to take it out, shouldnt cost you a dollar or two, they might just do it for you for free! \n\nCheers
438523
This is half a question! Would you be able to understand this question without more info? Are answerers supposed to be clairvoyant? But... read on.\nHow was the calculated MI calculated? Experimentally?\nYou show a 3.6% error. This could be considered reasonable experimental/measurement error. Could you have ignored (perhaps you were told to ignore) some contributors to error, such as: mass of a connecting string; error in pulley diameter (exactly what length of string per revolution can be difficult to determine because of string thickness); error in effective radius of mass of pulley (if it's the pulley MI you're dealing with) or wheel. Add more information to this Q via the "Additional Details" option and you may get a better answer.
350693
If your chain is streched, I would just get a new one.\nThe chain is already streched out, it won't last to long.\nBut like most guys I ride with they're lazy, so before you take the chain off, look and see how many links needs to come off by pulling the chain tight. You need a rivet remover to pop links off.
454219
From what I can see you forgot the moment of inertia of the pulley. \nRemember Torque = I*alpha. TensionxR = I*a/r. There will be another acceleration term from this torque.\n\nEDIT: No, wait sorry. I jut didn't see it. Ha it was right there in part i) The photo's kinda hard to read. Yeah, It's good.