Re: [CR]Re: Geezers, etc.

(Example: Framebuilders:Pino Morroni)

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 22:12:11 -0800
Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Geezers, etc.
From: "Steven L. Sheffield" <stevens@veloworks.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20010117234816.012d63e0@j.imap.itd.umich.edu>


Gosh ... how would one figure out a Reynolds number for a 753 frame with a 531 fork?

[0.8 * 753] + [0.2 * 531] ???

If that is the formula, then my Reynolds number is only 1948.2

2([0.8*753]+[0.2*531])+531

How do you figure in Columbus tubesets?

--

Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at earthlink dot net aitch tee tea pea colon slash slash double-you double-you double-you dot veloworks dot com slash


> From: Joseph Bender-Zanoni <jfbender@umich.edu>
> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 23:48:16 -0800
> To: Lsquaredb@aol.com, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Geezers, etc.
>
> Good gosh,
>
> Reynolds number. A new figure of merit AND, rarer than any bike listed, a
> fluid mechanics joke.
>
> Joe
> Studded tires gripping well in A^2 but they turn the bikes handling
> otherwise into rubbish
>
>
>>
>> If I count my wife's Trek, my Reynolds number is 3717.
>> I hope this winter to move one of the projects into the fuctional category.
>>
>> Leonard Bulger
>> Ann Arbor, MI
>> 27 deg and icy