aener

Ahhh. Makes sense. I didn't forget about the whole FFW thing. Honest. I really need to ride with other people more often.

I don't know how you personally use them, and granted I'm hardly an experienced user, but whenever I've used chop-sticks there's been two of them. Edit: More seriously - what's the difference between your Kicker Sprocket and... just running two sprockets? I appreciate the theoretical benefit of the ultra-wide base spreading the force much more, but with the 5-7mm based sprockets already don't really dig into the shell like old sprockets did, and it has the big disadvantage of tooth-quantity-flexibility. Edit 2: Also - holy machining costs, Batman! (I imagine.) And is it for people willing to run a chain long enough for the larger sprocket and taking up slack with a sprung tensioner on the small one, adjusting the alignment each time? (Or even a full mech, I guess.) Asking through genuine interest as I experimented with this a few years ago. On a 20" wheel I had a 22t up front, and a 15t and 11t on the rear. The two chainstay lengths were very, very close and one-link-length apart so I just used quick-links to add and remove as desired (enclosed dropouts with no tensioner). Didn't find it that useful in the end, and it added weight, and sacrificed chainline (not that either of those are real issues on my type of bike). It somehow just made the bike feel really weird, so I didn't try it for long at all.

First of his videos I've legitimately enjoyed. Always admired the riding but never really clicked with him. That was just flat out cool the whole way through (except for that stupid bench footplant line, obviously).

I was going to call you out on that - I thought you were better than that - but when drawing it out I realised that 3x created some pretty insane angles and assumed you'd tried that and switched down to 2x 3x3x is The One unless there's specific reasons not to. (I have a 2x2x front wheel because most companies don't make spokes long enough for 3x on such a tiny hub flange and relatively large ERD ((single wall 20")) ).

Would it screw with the lengths too much if you staggered them the opposite way? Latecross style. I know it leaves the seam exposed so getting the bob out might be a challenge, but probably nothing smashing it against the floor won't sort That would put your opposite side spokes together, which might make the build easier, And you'd be able to offset the sides a bit more normally. Think this is how roadies group their spokes, right? And they've got shit tonnes of money to pour into R&D Super pro image below to illustrate. Ignore the magenta dots - they were just a rough as hell spacing thing I forgot to remove. Edit: Just realised that if you have zero offset rims you could get super cheeky and push the trailing spokes back by one hole. Both sides of trailing spokes would then be on the "wrong side hole", but it would even out the tension over the circumference a little. So the pattern going clockwise from the valve hole would be: Green Light Blue Light Red Green Dark Blue Dark Red [repeat]

I've wondered this for years. Kudos for following through on it!

Again - another one I'd considered. Actually thought of one of those over the late Mondeo, but now I'm scared of Fords I know it's not all the cars that exist, but there's none on autotrader within 50 miles, and even that one's three times my top budget.

This was genuinely the first thing I looked at, but the back end looks rather short. If it was just me and a bike then lying diagonally would be fine, but sleeping two mostly requires being able to lie down the length of the car. I'm being cheap, but I already have a bad back Haha. As the above, really. Rovers look fine for cargo, but sleeping potentially two just not long enough. Had a Focus and it was long enough, but three failed Fords... I just want to try something else. Removing seats is a point though. Save on some weight to bump that MPG by .5!

That's a fair point. Forgot about Volvo. I'll give them a look too.

Cars aren't my thing. I've no interest in them, and I hate that mine dying yesterday has made me realise I've adopted a lifestyle that is almost dependant upon having one. Edit: That's unfair. I'm interested in how they work from a mechanical/engineering point of view, but not as a hobby. Had a dodgy Focus Estate - bad electrics - turned out they'd ripped two f**ked looms from separate cars and spliced them together and put them in this third one. ...Yeah. Mondeo Estate Mk3 - ran great and was perfect (developed a battery drain but disconnecting after use skirted this) but chassis rusted. Astra Estate - again, bad electrics, never liked this car. Second Mondeo Estate Mk3 - again, was great, but the turbo actuator and fuel pump have just gone. I really like Mondeo Estates - they fit pretty perfectly with me - but two dying has put me off a bit. Having a cam-chain is a great reassurance for me, not having to worry about big bills for replacing a belt at X miles. What car should I get? My use case points to an estate - often transport bulky items, ride bikes and don't trust external racks, sleep in boot for weekend trips. Frequent 200+ mile round-trips. My daily drive to work is 20 miles of country roads/villages, and it's just me. This makes me think I should get something smaller and more eco, but that'd be no good the rest of the time. Economy is a big factor (Mondeos got 60-70mpg standard). Don't care about gimmicks with the exception of cruise control (not essential but nice). Considered vans but having back seats is a boon - occasionally (but rarely) need the extra seats. I want a car as reliable as my bike - it just works, and if something breaks it's simple to stick a new one on. Would prefer the car to have brakes though. Internet says Passat for size, but the expected mpg and emissions look pretty poor. Looking to possibly an A4, though it might be a bit short for sleeping in. Potentially an A6. Skodas seem an option too, maybe? Definitely not a BMW. The less expensive the better - normally aim for around the £1,000 mark, but I could just about squeeze £4,000 if it'll get me something super reliable. £1,000 cars seem to get be between 1-2 years, so if a £4,000 will get me 6-8 years I guess I'm Ok with that.

I've done a 32h hub onto a 36h rim, and the reverse, both times with just a single spoke length (in both cases, the length calculated for the smaller hole-count). I know the change in angle will be smaller than the setup you're talking about, but just for some input. I'd guess they'll be pretty awkward to build, but would just about work with a single spoke length. Err on the slightly long side rather than short and use 14mm nipples, just to be safe?

Basically my favourite rider right now. Every set of clips you put out have me wanting more. Even when I've seen already seen them. Every damn time.

That was most enjoyable. Still a major, major fan of the 270° nose pivot hop ups you do.

That scene though... Damn. Missed this one by a year - crazy to think that some of the people already really damn good in that are still knocking about. Good effort!

Thanks guys Glad I bottled the full length one. Seems like a bit of gratification and encouragement has re-instilled the bug a bit.

Weighing duration since respective "dawn of time" against the expanded potential thought processes per second multiplied over that period, I'd put a computational perspective as significantly "longer" than a human's.

I knew I could count on you. Thank you for your excellence. I'm glad I can provide something positive for you guys. Just wish I could do the same for myself.

This is my 100th riding video. I wanted to make a 100 line video in celebration but it's been very difficult to get riding/collect footage and I don't think I'd've made it all the way there. I was hoping it would be something special to look back on, but watching the clips back I sacked the idea off because only one single clip was actually interesting and I'm left feeling pretty sour about the whole thing. Watching them back was just f**king boring. Couldn't bring myself to delete them so threw them in to this so that I can be done with the procedure. I'm not sure if I'll make any more. I'd like to have finished on a nice round number, but I sincerely doubt I have another 28 videos in me. Anyway. If you want to waste a handful of minutes of your life, courtesy of me wasting almost the entirety of mine, feel free to watch the below. Or don't - it's not likely to make a difference.

Ah! I see what you mean. Yes - that makes sense. I'll watch more videos and read guides, but it seems like I can do what I was thinking so long as that "Next Light" cable of yours is also factored in. I've been thinking of it as an endpoint, rather than one stop in a loop. Thanks!

Thanks for the input. That diagram seems to imply a series of lights... Am I misunderstanding? I want to have three switches, each correlating to one bulb. Is the attached a no-go? To slightly complicate matters, I plan on having two switches for the new bulbs so they can be turned on/off at the wall or at the bed, but that's a simple addition to the circuit. Just don't want to burn the house down! Edit: ignore the extra earthing cables going to the bulbs - got a bit overexcited Edit 2: Horrible timing. Just found this, which pretty much alludes to the same thing, just more wire-efficient. Add the third in the same way, and all is good?

Hello all. I've tried Googling, but I think it's such a basic question that I just want to verify that I can't find any answers that unambiguously address it. I'm sure it's a complete no-brainer for anyone who knows even the basics, but I just wanted to check on account of being a n00b. In my bedroom I have a single ceiling light, with a single switch at the wall. I haven't opened it up yet, but I've no reason to believe there'd be more than one power cable inside it. I want to wire two more lamps into a switch on the wall. I've got a triple wall switch and logistically everything is fine, but here's my question: Can I just branch the +ve, -ve and earth to all three lamps? In parallel, of course, but will switching two on halve their brightness, or full brightness and pull twice as much current? Instinct screams the latter on account of 4-way adaptors etc., but I've not done anything mains related before and just want an authoritative voice on the matter. Thanks!

I really love your videos. Always make me want to get out on the bike - something I can't say about many videos at all these days. You just do everything nicely, and your line choices are mint

A question from the ignorant: why the massive bulges in the downtubes near the BB these days? Is it a style thing, or is there a stiffness/strength benefit? It's present on so many brands that I feel it must be some practical reason. Some utilise the space created by it to tuck the shock out the way which is pretty smart, but other than that...

Do you think it might just be the thickness of the tubing? I saw it and thought it just another Arcade copy but in aluminium - not especially short? Or possibly you've just gotten accustomed to your longer 24" with a seat's appearance. I'm probably biased the other way.

937. We still do... today's version of this thread would be "Who's got the lowest bars?", or actually maybe "Who's got the most blackest-and-reddist colour scheme?", and everyone would win because everyone rides the same damn bike now.