Make mine a grande, hold the amaretto. (was:Re: [CR]high flange vs. low flange

(Example: Production Builders:Frejus)

From: <ABikie@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:24:37 EST
Subject: Make mine a grande, hold the amaretto. (was:Re: [CR]high flange vs. low flange
To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net, Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org


In a message dated 11/30/2003 3:49:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, chuckschmidt@earthlink.net writes: Campagnolo uses the terms Large and Small Flange. Some people use the terms High and Low Flange.

Abreviated, the first is: LF and SF. And the second would be: HF and LF.

Does everyone see the conflict and confusion the wrong terms generate?

Chuck Schmidt South Pasadena, Southern California (sunny, low 70s, clear and breezy... sorry)

p'Tah toe

whassamatafayou?

e molte facile perque no chiare 'flange normale' i 'flange grande' capische?

In a message dated 11/30/2003 4:15:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, PUTTER2451@aol.com writes:

When I was just a lad working in the LBS, I learned that the large flange was to shorten the distance from hub to rim, allowing for stiffer and more responsive wheels than the small flange would create. The small, in turn, was to give a more forgiving ride. Of course, I believe spokes have become more substantial and varied since then so as to be a bigger part of the various layouts now used. Seems logical to me.

Regards, Les Himel Chappaqua, NY

Thanks exactly what we were spreading and absorbing in those days. Higher flange, more acute spoke bracing algle, shorter spokes, less stretch. Then there was the radial1x2x3x4x spiels. To tie or not to tie? Track, road? Hi-Lo?

In it's difinitive study, many a pissin contest was sent on to the next season when the kids and professors at Cornell compared these and other ittues. Remember, these were the days of $8. licenses, BikeWorld, and Harlan Meyer.

We had sharp drills for lightness and floppy cables and toestrap ends we needed to tame.

The Ithicans came to some interesting conclusions - one of the most important components of the high tech bikes weighed mere grams, cost nothing, and made more difference than many that were more costly and less understandable. It was the air within the tires.

A few psi difference in tire pressure could make way more difference than three vs four and hi vs low.

Harvey Sachs is familiar with someone who knew the study, I think it was Jim Papadopoulos

Larry Black
Mt Airy, Md