RE: [CR] Brake cable routing logic?

(Example: Framebuilders:Richard Moon)

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [CR] Brake cable routing logic?
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 14:38:04 -0500
In-Reply-To: <200705021852.l42Iq5fv020919@cascade.cs.ubc.ca>
Thread-Topic: [CR] Brake cable routing logic?
thread-index: AceM6yoobNnbVirtTheg0XTvgXoc3gABT2ww
From: "Cheung, Doland" <CheungD@bv.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>


I would also include on the sealed BBs (and other OT stuff) that they are easier to maintain *in bulk*. I remember reading an interview years ago with some Euro pro mech and he absolutely loved all the unitized throw away stuff. Changing out 9 BBs after a wet stage of the tour is a lot easier than overhauling 9 of them.

Like Don, I can't believe any statement that says anything sealed has less friction. It doesn't make sense. The seal itself adds friction, so how could there be less? If it didn't add friction, how could it be 100% sealed?

Doland Cheung SoCal

-----Original Message----- From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of Donald Gillies Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 12:52 PM

I'd say that "friction savings" are quite possibly marketing gobbledy-gook, just like "cartridge BB's are more sealed" or "cartridge BB's last longer", or "cartridge BB's have less friction", when the real reason is, "they lower production costs and bring you back for more parts purchases, sooner, than with cup-and-cone BB's."