Re: [CR]Complicating nomenclature

(Example: Framebuilding)

Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:06:20 -0700
From: "Chuck Schmidt" <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]Complicating nomenclature
References: <1Auwsb-23Oaod0@fwd03.sul.t-online.com> <p06010253bc5e91ff72e1@[216.175.101.128]>


"joel metz, ifbma/sfbma" wrote:
>
> hmm!
>
> well, the best quote i could find on this in my cursory search
> through the ol paper pile is from a "_cycling_ penny handbook"
> entitled "variable gears and all about them", published around 1920
> or so.
>
> its a section entitled "variable gears that can be fitted with a
> fixed wheel", which starts off:
>
> "we have made enquiries of the variable gear manufacturers, and we
> find that the following gears can be supplied optionally with a fixed
> instead of a free wheel..."
>
> which makes for an interesting can of worms, because it holds to my
> assertion that fixed wheel is the opposite of free wheel, but also
> separates the definition of "fixed wheel" from "fixed gear" even
> further, because here we have a fixed wheel which is most certainly
> not a fixed gear, by period definition.
>
> which leads me to think of wheels as free or fixed, and gears as
> variable or fixed - with "fixed" having different meanings in each
> context. in conjunction with "wheel", "fixed" is defined as
> "stationary", which when used with "gear" its meaning is "set" or
> "constant".
>
> coaster/backpedal brake hubs - in my mind, the wheel is free, the
> gear is fixed or variable... that the brake is inside the hub is
> immaterial to the fixed/free/variable gear/wheel discussion...
>
> -joel

Yo, Yo, YO!

It's all good Dog, but Homie is down with "bent stomper"? WORD! Are you down with that, Playboy?

Chuck Schmidt South Pasadena, Southern California

.