Re: [CR]slant parallelogram-- which slant?

(Example: Component Manufacturers:Chater-Lea)

In-Reply-To: <000801c0cddd$c4ccda80$8bb156d1@Marta>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:15:13 -0800
To: "garth libre" <rabbitman@mindspring.com>, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "Monkeyman" <monkey37@bluemarble.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]slant parallelogram-- which slant?


>Did the full slant design really improve things, or was it just that
>aluminum casting, chain design and >cluster teeth just evolved so that
>rear shifting vastly improved? So there are three questions that are
>>bugging me:
>1) Which is the slant that is refered to in slant parallelogram?

It's a good question and your confusion is standard. It's the slant that you see if you look at the deraileurfrom he back or front that causes the pulley cage to follow the freewheel as the cog sizes change. It allows the chain to be close to the cog no matter what gear it's in.
>2) Did it vastly improve things all by itself?

Yes.
>3) Don't high quality downward hanging derailleurs work as well or almost
>as well?

As someone who has been riding for 25 years and spent 15 years as a mechanic I can assure you no they didn't. If you don't believe me read "The Dancing Chain" or any other piece good bicycle history that discusses the rear deraileur. If someone says that a non-slant deraileur works as well I can say they don't know how to set up a rear deraileur correctly. This is another subject that has been beat to death over the years on many lists and the science involved is so simple and obvious let's not start another "well I think. . . " thread.

enjoy, Brandon"monkeyman"Ives

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nobody can do everything, but if everybody did something everything would get done.
      -Gil Scott Heron- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!