Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios, that
is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the
beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation of
it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do
a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made
it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number
of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning
to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist
do a cutaway of a Sturmey- Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning
to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as downsides,
none of which would be deal breakers for some applications. Motor power
for example.
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light and reliable
at the cost of zero gear variance.
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios,
that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to
the beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation
of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency,
etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated
than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a
Sturmey- Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students
could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude
more complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a
Rohloff look like child's play. It's a true
continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based.
No slipping surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction
losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning
to the beginning to digest the super-complicated
explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight,
efficiency, etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight
as downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for
some applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less
complicated than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap,
light and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared
CVT is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely
more complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios, that
is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the
beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation of
it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do
a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made
it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number
of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning
to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
--
- Frank Krygowski
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission continuously variable and limit the upper and lowerratios. But I suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
On 12/4/2024 10:22 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a
Sturmey- Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students
could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude
more complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a
Rohloff look like child's play. It's a true
continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based.
No slipping surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction
losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning
to the beginning to digest the super-complicated
explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight,
efficiency, etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight
as downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for
some applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less
complicated than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap,
light and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared
CVT is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely
more complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
Yeah I saw that. Old page format, never updated to modern
protocols.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
On Wed Dec 4 10:33:20 2024 AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 10:22 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a
Sturmey- Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students
could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude
more complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a
Rohloff look like child's play. It's a true
continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based.
No slipping surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction
losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning
to the beginning to digest the super-complicated
explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight,
efficiency, etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight
as downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for
some applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less
complicated than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap,
light and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared
CVT is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely
more complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
Yeah I saw that. Old page format, never updated to modern
protocols.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
To Franhk, he only uses old technology but then he shows us this complicated POS that no one is going to build.
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:54 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 10:33:20 2024 AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 10:22 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a
Sturmey- Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students
could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude
more complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a
Rohloff look like child's play. It's a true
continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based.
No slipping surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction
losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning
to the beginning to digest the super-complicated
explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight,
efficiency, etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight
as downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for
some applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less
complicated than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap,
light and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared
CVT is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely
more complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
Yeah I saw that. Old page format, never updated to modern
protocols.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
To Franhk, he only uses old technology but then he shows us this complicated POS that no one is going to build.
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze and
the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you have none.
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios,
that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to
the beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation
of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency,
etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated
than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT
is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely more
complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
On 12/4/2024 2:32 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios,
that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to
the beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation
of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency,
etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated
than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT
is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely more
complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
The trend forward seems to be for much less complex gearboxes with single >> gear, ie EV’s certainly for cars and what not, as the electric motor has >> much better torque range, vs internal combustion.
It's true that my EV, like (I believe) most, has one single fixed
reduction ratio. The real reason is the torque curve for its electric
motor happens to match what's necessary for motoring. Its peak torque is
at low rpm, useful when starting from a stop. The torque decreases at
higher rpm, which matches the reduced torque requirement for cruising at speed.
But some hybrids have surprisingly complicated transmissions. I don't
think that many people know that Prius hybrids use an unusual planetary
gear setup, to sort of blend the power from the battery and the engine. https://youtu.be/ZmHpSyTsfm0
Ie impressive as it might be I’m not sure of it’s applicable really.
Right. Derailleur transmissions have a lot going for them. I'm surprised Rohloff has done as well as it has. But we'll see, I guess.
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 2:32 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios,
that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to
the beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation
of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency,
etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated
than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT
is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely more
complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
The trend forward seems to be for much less complex gearboxes with single >>> gear, ie EV’s certainly for cars and what not, as the electric motor has >>> much better torque range, vs internal combustion.
It's true that my EV, like (I believe) most, has one single fixed
reduction ratio. The real reason is the torque curve for its electric
motor happens to match what's necessary for motoring. Its peak torque is
at low rpm, useful when starting from a stop. The torque decreases at
higher rpm, which matches the reduced torque requirement for cruising at
speed.
Only converted classics seem to have a gearbox ie multiple gears.
Cycling being much less homogeneous and relatively simplicity does allow
But some hybrids have surprisingly complicated transmissions. I don't
think that many people know that Prius hybrids use an unusual planetary
gear setup, to sort of blend the power from the battery and the engine.
https://youtu.be/ZmHpSyTsfm0
Ie impressive as it might be I’m not sure of it’s applicable really.
Right. Derailleur transmissions have a lot going for them. I'm surprised
Rohloff has done as well as it has. But we'll see, I guess.
some small companies to exist, and technological diversity, ie can buy
bikes with cable or electronic systems or even wireless, have disk with hydraulics or cable or a hybrid of both, or rim brakes of few different types, even some hydraulic systems still being sold.
Some of technology maybe is a bit stagnant ie sees no to limited
development but still a long way off being obsolete and still sold either
on bikes or as 3rd party kit.
Roger Merriman
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do
a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made
it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number
of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and >>> supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning
to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
On 12/4/2024 2:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:And his latest, can't get a headset to seat.
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gearSo this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist
do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical
genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work,
who needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
On 12/4/2024 12:05 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gearI was noticing the eccentric movement during one of the animations and thought "how do they account for that"...then they showed the elliptical
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do
a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made
it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number
of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces,
and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
gear design...well done!
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gearSo this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist
do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist
do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
--
- Frank Krygowski
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
lol...sure tommy, but then you can't figure out out to attach a crank
arm or adjust a headset without claiming the parts are defective.
On 12/4/2024 1:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:54 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 10:33:20 2024 AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 10:22 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:Yeah I saw that. Old page format, never updated to modern protocols. >>>>>
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic control >>>>>>> slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT is much more >>>>>>> complex than what I drive* and infinitely more complex than what I >>>>>>> most often ride (fixed)
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, >>>>>>>>>> I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey- Archer AW hub >>>>>>>>>> and mount it on a display stand near an explanatory poster, so >>>>>>>>>> interested students could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look >>>>>>>>>> like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios, that is >>>>>>>>>> completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and supposedly >>>>>>>>>> minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to >>>>>>>>>> start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to
digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation. >>>>>>>>>>
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc. >>>>>>>>>>
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated than >>>>>>>> a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light and >>>>>>>>> reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
--
Andrew Muzi am@yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971
To Franhk, he only uses old technology but then he shows us this
complicated POS that no one is going to build.
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze
and the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you have
none.
And you still haven't explained how you went from being broke and living
on social security in 2013 to reaping a $12000 monthly income off your investments with no other source of income.
tears of laughter tommy....
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:39:39 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 1:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze
and the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you have
none.
And you still haven't explained how you went from being broke and living
on social security in 2013 to reaping a $12000 monthly income off your
investments with no other source of income.
tears of laughter tommy....
Rather than lying about everything that you can, I'll just show them: I
never said I was broke and I never said that I was living on Social
Security alone.
I said that during the Great Recession that occurred
during Obama that I lost half of my investments that weren't made up
during Obama's time in office with his 25% inflation over his 8 years.
During Trump I regained my investments BACK to what they were before Obama and then with far better investment advice I grew it to $1.1 million
despite the 22% inflation during the 4 years of Biden.
I understanjd why you deny that reality is real but then you have nothing because you do not even have a passing clue of how to handle money.
The
alligator tears you cried when I said that I had been making $233,000
dollars a year showed that you simply canmot believe that a real engineer
can make that sort of money.
And even in these times of hardship I have
been offered $200,000/yr to move to Texas.
Too bad you can't get anything right - there isn't anything you won't lie about.
Except that you seem to be so set on me being a drunk that you must
be.
That you never once referred to having a wife until you had a need to
"prove" that you're not a queer.
Poor Liebermann couldn't even support
himself so he couldn't find a wife and everyone else that is married
mentions their wives now and again. But your supreme egotism
is the very
mark of homosexuality and even if you're not queer you will surely become
one to torture some insecure person.
I had far too much experrience with interviewing queers dying from AIDS to not recognize the symptoms in you.
On 12/4/2024 2:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do >>> a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made >>> it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number >>> of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and >>> supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning >>> to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
And his latest, can't get a headset to seat.
--
Add xx to reply
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 10:37:37 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:05 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gearI was noticing the eccentric movement during one of the animations and
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do
a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made
it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number
of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces,
and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
thought "how do they account for that"...then they showed the elliptical
gear design...well done!
Why do you use the term ecentric rather than cam?
On 12/4/2024 5:30 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:39:39 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 1:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze >>>> and the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you have
none.
And you still haven't explained how you went from being broke and living >> on social security in 2013 to reaping a $12000 monthly income off your
investments with no other source of income.
tears of laughter tommy....
Rather than lying about everything that you can, I'll just show them: I never said I was broke and I never said that I was living on Social Security alone.
Liar https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/hicB2nXjlr4/m/G2axqs0k_IwJ
Aug 9, 2013, 11:11:36?AM, cycl...@yahoo.com wrote:
"Trouble is that while I was out of it I sold or gave away almost my
entire bicycle collection. And all of my wardrobe and most of my tools!
And now on Social Security I have to VERY slowly make it up."
I said that during the Great Recession that occurred
during Obama that I lost half of my investments that weren't made up
during Obama's time in office with his 25% inflation over his 8 years.
Liar, you made up that lie after you realized no one was giving you any credibility. Not to mention your claims of 25% inflation are a lie as
well, the average rate of inflation under Obama was 1.4 %.
During Trump I regained my investments BACK to what they were before Obama and then with far better investment advice I grew it to $1.1 million despite the 22% inflation during the 4 years of Biden.
<yawn> blah blah tommy bullshit.
I understanjd why you deny that reality is real but then you have nothing because you do not even have a passing clue of how to handle money.
And yet, I can afford to take international vacations, while you still
grovel in your hovel.
The
alligator tears you cried when I said that I had been making $233,000 dollars a year showed that you simply canmot believe that a real engineer can make that sort of money.
no salaried engineer made $233K in the years you were working, with the possible exception of a principal in a start-up. You weren't a principal
in a startup or you would have bragged about it by now.
And even in these times of hardship I have
been offered $200,000/yr to move to Texas.
Hardship - for you. You're broke and living on social security, and no
one offered you a $200K job.
Too bad you can't get anything right - there isn't anything you won't lie about.
I haven't lied about anything yet.
- you never broke $100K in a year, and even that would have been an exceptionally generous salary for a high-school dropout with no degree.
Except that you seem to be so set on me being a drunk that you must
be.
I'm not the one with a drunk driving arrest.
That you never once referred to having a wife until you had a need to "prove" that you're not a queer.
No matter how many times you tell that lie, it will never become true.
Poor Liebermann couldn't even support
himself so he couldn't find a wife and everyone else that is married mentions their wives now and again. But your supreme egotism
Funny, I'm not the one claiming to be have made more than most CEOs,
having a $12000/mo investment income, being a "senior business
consultant", discovering HIV.....
is the very
mark of homosexuality and even if you're not queer you will surely become one to torture some insecure person.
lol..."I'll become one to torture some insecure person".....yeah tommy, that's how it works. People become gay for the purpose of torturing
insecure people...
I had far too much experrience with interviewing queers dying from AIDS to not recognize the symptoms in you.
No, tommy, you never interviewed gays. Even if you were involved in high-level development of the PCR, you would not have had any cause to
be involved in the sociological aspect of the homosexual lifestyle. It
would have had absolutely no bearing on any aspect of the development of
the PCR. It's just another lie you tell in hopes that it will get people
to respect you.
--
Add xx to reply
On 12/4/2024 5:32 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 10:37:37 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:05 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gearI was noticing the eccentric movement during one of the animations and
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do >>> a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand
near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made >>> it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number >>> of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces,
and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
thought "how do they account for that"...then they showed the elliptical >> gear design...well done!
Why do you use the term ecentric rather than cam?
Eccentric is an adverb modifying 'movement', Cam is a noun.
--
Add xx to reply
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 12:53:51 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear
hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist
do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated
than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play.
It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at
about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
--
- Frank Krygowski
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
lol...sure tommy, but then you can't figure out out to attach a crank
arm or adjust a headset without claiming the parts are defective.
I'm waiting for you to prove they aren't defective.
The torque value is
set not to crush the wave washer, which you don't know anything about,
and
setting the torque to that value crushes the wave washer flat. That means that the non-drive side is out of tolerance.
Not that you would know
anything about tolerances.
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios,
that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to
the beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation
of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency,
etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated
than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT
is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely more
complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
The trend forward seems to be for much less complex gearboxes with single gear, ie EV?s certainly for cars and what not, as the electric motor has
much better torque range, vs internal combustion.
Heavy goods vehicles at least the Lorries seem to be roughly the same
EV/ICE ie 12/18 gears.
Buses seem to be single speed but then their speed doesn?t vary much, ie 0-20/30mph ish
All of such vehicles seem to be automatic gearboxes though fairly sophisticated, ie able to cope with engine braking and so on, certainly not seen a lorry on fire for few years now which had run out of brakes coming
off the hill, which certainly used to be a thing as child ie a lorry in the escape lane ie sand pit with smoking brakes or on fire!
Ie impressive as it might be I?m not sure of it?s applicable really.
Roger Merriman
On Wed Dec 4 18:04:46 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:32 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 10:37:37 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:05 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do >>>>> a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand >>>>> near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made >>>>> it work.)I was noticing the eccentric movement during one of the animations and >>>> thought "how do they account for that"...then they showed the elliptical >>>> gear design...well done!
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number >>>>> of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, >>>>> and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
Why do you use the term ecentric rather than cam?
Eccentric is an adverb modifying 'movement', Cam is a noun.
--
Add xx to reply
Showing again how stupid you are. You never mentioned movement.
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 16:45:36 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 2:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:And his latest, can't get a headset to seat.
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a displaySo this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical
genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work,
who needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
And you have never worked on your own bikes so what do you know about it?
On Wed Dec 4 17:59:56 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:30 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:39:39 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 1:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze >>>>>> and the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you have >>>>> none.
And you still haven't explained how you went from being broke and living >>>> on social security in 2013 to reaping a $12000 monthly income off your >>>> investments with no other source of income.
tears of laughter tommy....
Rather than lying about everything that you can, I'll just show them: I
never said I was broke and I never said that I was living on Social
Security alone.
Liar
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/hicB2nXjlr4/m/G2axqs0k_IwJ >>
Aug 9, 2013, 11:11:36?AM, cycl...@yahoo.com wrote:
"Trouble is that while I was out of it I sold or gave away almost my
entire bicycle collection. And all of my wardrobe and most of my tools!
And now on Social Security I have to VERY slowly make it up."
I said that during the Great Recession that occurred
during Obama that I lost half of my investments that weren't made up
during Obama's time in office with his 25% inflation over his 8 years.
Liar, you made up that lie after you realized no one was giving you any
credibility. Not to mention your claims of 25% inflation are a lie as
well, the average rate of inflation under Obama was 1.4 %.
During Trump I regained my investments BACK to what they were before Obama >>> and then with far better investment advice I grew it to $1.1 million
despite the 22% inflation during the 4 years of Biden.
<yawn> blah blah tommy bullshit.
I understanjd why you deny that reality is real but then you have nothing >>> because you do not even have a passing clue of how to handle money.
And yet, I can afford to take international vacations, while you still
grovel in your hovel.
The
alligator tears you cried when I said that I had been making $233,000
dollars a year showed that you simply canmot believe that a real engineer >>> can make that sort of money.
no salaried engineer made $233K in the years you were working, with the
possible exception of a principal in a start-up. You weren't a principal
in a startup or you would have bragged about it by now.
And even in these times of hardship I have
been offered $200,000/yr to move to Texas.
Hardship - for you. You're broke and living on social security, and no
one offered you a $200K job.
Too bad you can't get anything right - there isn't anything you won't lie >>> about.
I haven't lied about anything yet.
- you never broke $100K in a year, and even that would have been an
exceptionally generous salary for a high-school dropout with no degree.
Except that you seem to be so set on me being a drunk that you must
be.
I'm not the one with a drunk driving arrest.
That you never once referred to having a wife until you had a need to
"prove" that you're not a queer.
No matter how many times you tell that lie, it will never become true.
Poor Liebermann couldn't even support
himself so he couldn't find a wife and everyone else that is married
mentions their wives now and again. But your supreme egotism
Funny, I'm not the one claiming to be have made more than most CEOs,
having a $12000/mo investment income, being a "senior business
consultant", discovering HIV.....
is the very
mark of homosexuality and even if you're not queer you will surely become >>> one to torture some insecure person.
lol..."I'll become one to torture some insecure person".....yeah tommy,
that's how it works. People become gay for the purpose of torturing
insecure people...
I had far too much experrience with interviewing queers dying from AIDS to >>> not recognize the symptoms in you.
No, tommy, you never interviewed gays. Even if you were involved in
high-level development of the PCR, you would not have had any cause to
be involved in the sociological aspect of the homosexual lifestyle. It
would have had absolutely no bearing on any aspect of the development of
the PCR. It's just another lie you tell in hopes that it will get people
to respect you.
--
Add xx to reply
We all know how incredibly stupid you are but https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/ shows the actual inflation rates during Obama, Trump and Biden.
On Wed Dec 4 16:45:36 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 2:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do >>>>> a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand >>>>> near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made >>>>> it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number >>>>> of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and >>>>> supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning >>>>> to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical
genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who >>> needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
And his latest, can't get a headset to seat.
--
Add xx to reply
Plainly showing that you don't work on your own bike so you don't understand what was said.
The cups are installed properly
but the heasset won't adjust properly probably indicating that the sealed bearings are crooked and not allowing the steering to be adjusted properly.
The original headset was a caged bearing type that is more flexible to the top and bottom of the head tube being offset slightly. But the sealed bearings are not.
This is an education that you will never be able to use
because you don't work on your own bikes and because it makes no sense to you since you don't know how to adjust a headset.
How does it feel to be as stupid as you are? Is it painful?
On 12/4/2024 5:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 12:53:51 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
--
- Frank Krygowski
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
lol...sure tommy, but then you can't figure out out to attach a crank
arm or adjust a headset without claiming the parts are defective.
I'm waiting for you to prove they aren't defective.
we aren't taking your word for it.
The torque value is
set not to crush the wave washer, which you don't know anything about,
I have Sram Red BB30s on two bikes.
and
setting the torque to that value crushes the wave washer flat. That means that the non-drive side is out of tolerance.
More likely it means you're doing it wrong
Not that you would know
anything about tolerances.
I know you have none.
--
Add xx to reply
On Wed Dec 4 18:21:41 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 6:00 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 16:45:36 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 2:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do >>>>>>> a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand >>>>>>> near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made >>>>>>> it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number >>>>>>> of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning >>>>>>> to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots >>>>>> to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical >>>>> genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars >>>>> slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who >>>>> needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
And his latest, can't get a headset to seat.
--
Add xx to reply
Plainly showing that you don't work on your own bike so you don't understand what was said.
You wish
The cups are installed properly
Probably not
but the heasset won't adjust properly probably indicating that the sealed bearings are crooked and not allowing the steering to be adjusted properly.
Yeeaaaaah, because sealed bearing assemblies are prone to being out of
alignment....lol...
The original headset was a caged bearing type that is more flexible to the top and bottom of the head tube being offset slightly. But the sealed bearings are not.
lol...sure, the singular points of contact in a caged ball bearing lend
themselves to being more tolerant of lateral
misalignments....sure...lol. That's one quick way to a 'notch-o-matic'
headset.
This is an education that you will never be able to use
no, that's an education no one should use.
because you don't work on your own bikes and because it makes no sense to you since you don't know how to adjust a headset.
Other than a few instances of needing to re-tighten a headset, I haven't
had any problems I couldn't figure out.
How does it feel to be as stupid as you are? Is it painful?
Look in the mirror
--
Add xx to reply
"Notchomatic"? Only you couldn't understand why headsets used to be different. I especially like your "probably not" based upon Adrews saying that as a faint possibility there could be a bump on the cup holding it misalligned. Is there ABYTHING thatyou could possibly understand? Tell us more about your professional cat 3 racing career as a permanent last place.
On 12/4/2024 5:45 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 14:44:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a displaySo this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see
what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots
to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical
genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who >>> needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
It doesn't surprise me at all that a man that was fired as a plant
engineer believes a constant velocity transmission with cam operated
sliding ration adjusters would be "very complicated."
I was never fired from any job. I was actively recruited for each of my
two teaching positions.
I designed most of
the hardware for many instruments from the ProPette, the Progroup which
added a turn table with test tubes besides the 3 dimentional plate
mechanism to the mechanical heart valve in my heart/lung machine.
Maybe you did - although I doubt it, based only on your decades-long
history of lies here. I'm VERY skeptical about you designing any
mechanical part of a heart/lung machine.
Why not give us details on those supposed designs of yours? Let us be >astonished at your brilliance!
On Wed Dec 4 18:21:41 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 6:00 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 16:45:36 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 2:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist do >>>>>>> a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand >>>>>>> near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see what made >>>>>>> it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite number >>>>>>> of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning >>>>>>> to digest the super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots >>>>>> to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical >>>>> genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars >>>>> slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who >>>>> needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
And his latest, can't get a headset to seat.
--
Add xx to reply
Plainly showing that you don't work on your own bike so you don't understand what was said.
You wish
The cups are installed properly
Probably not
but the heasset won't adjust properly probably indicating that the sealed bearings are crooked and not allowing the steering to be adjusted properly.
Yeeaaaaah, because sealed bearing assemblies are prone to being out of
alignment....lol...
The original headset was a caged bearing type that is more flexible to the top and bottom of the head tube being offset slightly. But the sealed bearings are not.
lol...sure, the singular points of contact in a caged ball bearing lend
themselves to being more tolerant of lateral
misalignments....sure...lol. That's one quick way to a 'notch-o-matic'
headset.
This is an education that you will never be able to use
no, that's an education no one should use.
because you don't work on your own bikes and because it makes no sense to you since you don't know how to adjust a headset.
Other than a few instances of needing to re-tighten a headset, I haven't
had any problems I couldn't figure out.
How does it feel to be as stupid as you are? Is it painful?
Look in the mirror
--
Add xx to reply
"Notchomatic"? >
Only you couldn't understand why headsets used to be different.
I especially like your "probably not" based upon Adrews saying that as a faint possibility there could be a bump on the cup holding it misalligned.
Is there ABYTHING that you could possibly understand?
Tell us more about your professional cat 3 racing career as a permanent last place.
On Wed Dec 4 18:07:43 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 12:53:51 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see >>>>>> what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
--
- Frank Krygowski
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots >>>>> to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
lol...sure tommy, but then you can't figure out out to attach a crank
arm or adjust a headset without claiming the parts are defective.
I'm waiting for you to prove they aren't defective.
we aren't taking your word for it.
The torque value is
set not to crush the wave washer, which you don't know anything about,
I have Sram Red BB30s on two bikes.
and
setting the torque to that value crushes the wave washer flat. That means >>> that the non-drive side is out of tolerance.
More likely it means you're doing it wrong
Not that you would know
anything about tolerances.
I know you have none.
--
Add xx to reply
If you did your own work on your bikes you would know that the SRAM spacing is controlled by the different crank size bearings and that the wave washer only offers a preload.
That is, the non-drive side bearing prevents the off-side crank arm from being over-tightened and pushing it solidly up against the wave washer.
So you just proved yet again that you don't work on your own bikes.
Keep the stupidity coming.
On 12/4/2024 6:43 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 18:11:46 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 6:06 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 17:59:56 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:30 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:39:39 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 1:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no >>>>>>>>> booze
and the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you >>>>>>>> have
none.
And you still haven't explained how you went from being broke and >>>>>>> living
on social security in 2013 to reaping a $12000 monthly income off >>>>>>> your
investments with no other source of income.
tears of laughter tommy....
Rather than lying about everything that you can, I'll just show
them: I
never said I was broke and I never said that I was living on Social >>>>>> Security alone.
Liar
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/hicB2nXjlr4/m/
G2axqs0k_IwJ
Aug 9, 2013, 11:11:36?AM, cycl...@yahoo.com wrote:
"Trouble is that while I was out of it I sold or gave away almost my >>>>> entire bicycle collection. And all of my wardrobe and most of my
tools!
And now on Social Security I have to VERY slowly make it up."
I said that during the Great Recession that occurred
during Obama that I lost half of my investments that weren't made up >>>>>> during Obama's time in office with his 25% inflation over his 8
years.
Liar, you made up that lie after you realized no one was giving you
any
credibility. Not to mention your claims of 25% inflation are a lie as >>>>> well, the average rate of inflation under Obama was 1.4 %.
During Trump I regained my investments BACK to what they were
before Obama
and then with far better investment advice I grew it to $1.1 million >>>>>> despite the 22% inflation during the 4 years of Biden.
<yawn> blah blah tommy bullshit.
And yet, I can afford to take international vacations, while you still >>>>> grovel in your hovel.
I understanjd why you deny that reality is real but then you have
nothing
because you do not even have a passing clue of how to handle money. >>>>>
The
alligator tears you cried when I said that I had been making $233,000 >>>>>> dollars a year showed that you simply canmot believe that a real
engineer
can make that sort of money.
no salaried engineer made $233K in the years you were working, with
the
possible exception of a principal in a start-up. You weren't a
principal
in a startup or you would have bragged about it by now.
And even in these times of hardship I have
been offered $200,000/yr to move to Texas.
Hardship - for you. You're broke and living on social security, and no >>>>> one offered you a $200K job.
Too bad you can't get anything right - there isn't anything you
won't lie
about.
I haven't lied about anything yet.
- you never broke $100K in a year, and even that would have been an
exceptionally generous salary for a high-school dropout with no
degree.
Except that you seem to be so set on me being a drunk that you must >>>>>> be.
I'm not the one with a drunk driving arrest.
That you never once referred to having a wife until you had a need to >>>>>> "prove" that you're not a queer.
No matter how many times you tell that lie, it will never become true. >>>>>
Poor Liebermann couldn't even support
himself so he couldn't find a wife and everyone else that is married >>>>>> mentions their wives now and again. But your supreme egotism
Funny, I'm not the one claiming to be have made more than most CEOs, >>>>> having a $12000/mo investment income, being a "senior business
consultant", discovering HIV.....
is the very
mark of homosexuality and even if you're not queer you will surely >>>>>> become
one to torture some insecure person.
lol..."I'll become one to torture some insecure person".....yeah
tommy,
that's how it works. People become gay for the purpose of torturing
insecure people...
I had far too much experrience with interviewing queers dying from >>>>>> AIDS to
not recognize the symptoms in you.
No, tommy, you never interviewed gays. Even if you were involved in
high-level development of the PCR, you would not have had any cause to >>>>> be involved in the sociological aspect of the homosexual lifestyle. It >>>>> would have had absolutely no bearing on any aspect of the
development of
the PCR. It's just another lie you tell in hopes that it will get
people
to respect you.
--
Add xx to reply
We all know how incredibly stupid you are but https://
www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/
shows the actual inflation rates during Obama, Trump and Biden.
and as usual, you post a link that disproves your own claim
    Jan    Feb    Mar    Apr    May    Jun    Jul    Aug
Sep    Oct    Nov    Dec    Ave
2009Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â 0.2Â Â Â Â -0.4Â Â Â Â -0.7Â Â Â Â -1.3Â Â Â Â -1.4Â Â Â Â -2.1
-1.5Â Â Â Â -1.3Â Â Â Â -0.2Â Â Â Â 1.8Â Â Â Â 2.7
    -0.4
2010Â Â Â Â 2.6Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.3Â Â Â Â 2.2Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.2
1.1Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.2Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.6
2011Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.7Â Â Â Â 3.2Â Â Â Â 3.6Â Â Â Â 3.6Â Â Â Â 3.6
3.8Â Â Â Â 3.9Â Â Â Â 3.5Â Â Â Â 3.4Â Â Â Â 3.0Â Â Â Â 3.2
2012Â Â Â Â 2.9Â Â Â Â 2.9Â Â Â Â 2.7Â Â Â Â 2.3Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.4
1.7Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 2.2Â Â Â Â 1.8Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 2.1
2013Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.4Â Â Â Â 1.8Â Â Â Â 2.0
1.5Â Â Â Â 1.2Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 1.2Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.5
2014Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.0
1.7Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.3Â Â Â Â 0.8Â Â Â Â 1.6
2015Â Â Â Â -0.1Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â -0.1Â Â Â Â -0.2Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â 0.1Â Â Â Â 0.2
0.2Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â 0.2Â Â Â Â 0.5Â Â Â Â 0.7Â Â Â Â 0.1
2016Â Â Â Â 1.4Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 0.9Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 0.8
1.1Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 1.3
Care to point out anywhere in those 8 years that would have driven the
average to 25%
--
Add xx to reply
Perhaps you'd like to let us know why you do not understand that
average inflation values are not additive but multiplicative?
Oh good grief! No, Tom, you're math is wrong.
Pick any row. Do the cumulative multiplication for the twelve months,
that you seem to be claiming is appropriate.
Then tell us how it generates the number in the last column - the one
labeled "Ave" for "Average."
Or even simpler, note all the rows have values that are higher than the
"Ave" listing.
You're looking like an ignorant fool yet again; this time, with simple
math.
On 12/4/2024 2:18 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 2:32 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was
teaching, I had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey-
Archer AW hub and mount it on a display stand near an
explanatory poster, so interested students could see what
made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff
look like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios,
that is completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and
supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys
You may want to start at about 14:30 before returning to
the beginning to digest the super-complicated explanation
of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency,
etc.
Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated
than a standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light
and reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
Nothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic
control slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT
is much more complex than what I drive* and infinitely more
complex than what I most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
The trend forward seems to be for much less complex gearboxes with single >>>> gear, ie EV’s certainly for cars and what not, as the electric motor has >>>> much better torque range, vs internal combustion.
It's true that my EV, like (I believe) most, has one single fixed
reduction ratio. The real reason is the torque curve for its electric
motor happens to match what's necessary for motoring. Its peak torque is >>> at low rpm, useful when starting from a stop. The torque decreases at
higher rpm, which matches the reduced torque requirement for cruising at >>> speed.
Only converted classics seem to have a gearbox ie multiple gears.
Cycling being much less homogeneous and relatively simplicity does allow
But some hybrids have surprisingly complicated transmissions. I don't
think that many people know that Prius hybrids use an unusual planetary
gear setup, to sort of blend the power from the battery and the engine.
https://youtu.be/ZmHpSyTsfm0
Ie impressive as it might be I’m not sure of it’s applicable really. >>>Right. Derailleur transmissions have a lot going for them. I'm surprised >>> Rohloff has done as well as it has. But we'll see, I guess.
some small companies to exist, and technological diversity, ie can buy
bikes with cable or electronic systems or even wireless, have disk with
hydraulics or cable or a hybrid of both, or rim brakes of few different
types, even some hydraulic systems still being sold.
Some of technology maybe is a bit stagnant ie sees no to limited
development but still a long way off being obsolete and still sold either
on bikes or as 3rd party kit.
Roger Merriman
"Only converted classics seem to have a gearbox ie multiple
gears."
I think you'll find modern not-electric vehicles now have
quite sophisticated (read 'complex') 5 or 6 step auto
gearboxes with their own sensor, servo, electronic and
cooling problems.
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 05:32:57 -0500, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 6:51 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 18:07:43 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 12:53:51 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>>>>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display >>>>>>>> stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see >>>>>>>> what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite >>>>>>>> number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping >>>>>>>> surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
--
- Frank Krygowski
So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All >>>>>>> anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots >>>>>>> to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission >>>>>>> continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I >>>>>>> suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
lol...sure tommy, but then you can't figure out out to attach a crank >>>>>> arm or adjust a headset without claiming the parts are defective.
I'm waiting for you to prove they aren't defective.
we aren't taking your word for it.
The torque value isI have Sram Red BB30s on two bikes.
set not to crush the wave washer, which you don't know anything about, >>>>
and
setting the torque to that value crushes the wave washer flat. That means >>>>> that the non-drive side is out of tolerance.
More likely it means you're doing it wrong
Not that you would know
anything about tolerances.
I know you have none.
--
Add xx to reply
If you did your own work on your bikes you would know that the SRAM spacing is controlled by the different crank size bearings and that the wave washer only offers a preload.
"spacing is controlled by the different crank size bearings"?
I'd love to see you post a published spec that supports Sram BB30s have
different crank bearing sizes
That is, the non-drive side bearing prevents the off-side crank arm from being over-tightened and pushing it solidly up against the wave washer.
Which has nothing to do with the size of the bearing.
So you just proved yet again that you don't work on your own bikes.
No, what you've just proven is why your crank arm fell off.
Keep the stupidity coming.
No need to with you around.
Like most craftsmen I know when I'm assembling something and it
doesn't fit correctly my first move is to disassembly it and
reassemble it very carefully to determine is the problem actually the
item, or was it me?
Tommy's solution is to assume that the part is wrong.
Quelle surprise!
On Thu Dec 5 05:42:02 2024 zen cycle wrote:
Quelle surprise!
Isn't everyone impressed that you can speak a phrase in a foreign language!
Tu es un idiot!
On Thu Dec 5 05:42:02 2024 zen cycle wrote:
Quelle surprise!
Isn't everyone impressed that you can speak a phrase in a foreign language!
Tu es un idiot!
On 12/5/2024 4:33 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 23:40:18 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:If you wanted to talk about the cumulative inflation during Obama's
We all know how incredibly stupid you are but https://
www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-
rates/ shows the actual inflation rates during Obama, Trump and
Biden.
and as usual, you post a link that disproves your own claim
    Jan    Feb    Mar    Apr    May    Jun    Jul    Aug
Sep    Oct    Nov    Dec    Ave
2009Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â 0.2Â Â Â Â -0.4Â Â Â Â -0.7Â Â Â Â -1.3Â Â Â Â -1.4
-2.1Â Â Â Â -1.5Â Â Â Â -1.3Â Â Â Â -0.2Â Â Â Â 1.8Â Â Â Â 2.7
    -0.4
2010Â Â Â Â 2.6Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.3Â Â Â Â 2.2Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.2
1.1Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.2Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.6
2011Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.7Â Â Â Â 3.2Â Â Â Â 3.6Â Â Â Â 3.6Â Â Â Â 3.6
3.8Â Â Â Â 3.9Â Â Â Â 3.5Â Â Â Â 3.4Â Â Â Â 3.0Â Â Â Â 3.2
2012Â Â Â Â 2.9Â Â Â Â 2.9Â Â Â Â 2.7Â Â Â Â 2.3Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.4
1.7Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 2.2Â Â Â Â 1.8Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 2.1
2013Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.4Â Â Â Â 1.8Â Â Â Â 2.0
1.5Â Â Â Â 1.2Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 1.2Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.5
2014Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 2.0Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 2.0
1.7Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 1.3Â Â Â Â 0.8Â Â Â Â 1.6
2015Â Â Â Â -0.1Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â -0.1Â Â Â Â -0.2Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â 0.1Â Â Â Â 0.2
0.2Â Â Â Â 0.0Â Â Â Â 0.2Â Â Â Â 0.5Â Â Â Â 0.7Â Â Â Â 0.1
2016Â Â Â Â 1.4Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 0.9Â Â Â Â 1.1Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 1.0Â Â Â Â 0.8
1.1Â Â Â Â 1.5Â Â Â Â 1.6Â Â Â Â 1.7Â Â Â Â 2.1Â Â Â Â 1.3
Care to point out anywhere in those 8 years that would have driven the >>>>> average to 25%
--
Add xx to reply
Perhaps you'd like to let us know why you do not understand that
average inflation values are not additive but multiplicative?
Oh good grief! No, Tom, you're math is wrong.
Pick any row. Do the cumulative multiplication for the twelve months,
that you seem to be claiming is appropriate.
Then tell us how it generates the number in the last column - the one
labeled "Ave" for "Average."
Or even simpler, note all the rows have values that are higher than the
"Ave" listing.
You're looking like an ignorant fool yet again; this time, with simple
math.
Frank again shows why he was fired as a plant engineer. He doesn't
understand basic mathematics.
That chart shows the AVERAGE inflation value for the previous YEAR.
Since the BUDGET was set by the PREVIOUS Congress, the inflations goes
for Obama from 2010 to 2017.
Moreover the average inflation rate from 2010 is increased OVER the
inflation rate of the following year.
terms, you should have used the word "cumulative."
And even if you did, your claim of 25% [cumulative] inflation was off by nearly a factor of two. Do the numbers, Tom. They work out to about 14%.
Here's an interesting coincidence: If you run the numbers for cumulative inflation under G.W.Bush, immediately before Obama, you _do_ find a cumulative value nearly twice as large as Obama's! (I get 24.4%.)
Oddly, Tom doesn't complain about the W.Bush years.
On Wed Dec 4 18:11:46 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 6:06 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 17:59:56 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:30 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:39:39 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 1:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 13:01:05 2024 Zen Cycle wrote:
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze >>>>>>>> and the wife spent your SS check already?
--
Add xx to reply
I absolutely love to see you crying about my wealth bvecause you have >>>>>>> none.
And you still haven't explained how you went from being broke and living >>>>>> on social security in 2013 to reaping a $12000 monthly income off your >>>>>> investments with no other source of income.
tears of laughter tommy....
Rather than lying about everything that you can, I'll just show them: I >>>>> never said I was broke and I never said that I was living on Social
Security alone.
Liar
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/hicB2nXjlr4/m/G2axqs0k_IwJ >>>>
Aug 9, 2013, 11:11:36?AM, cycl...@yahoo.com wrote:
"Trouble is that while I was out of it I sold or gave away almost my
entire bicycle collection. And all of my wardrobe and most of my tools! >>>> And now on Social Security I have to VERY slowly make it up."
I said that during the Great Recession that occurredLiar, you made up that lie after you realized no one was giving you any >>>> credibility. Not to mention your claims of 25% inflation are a lie as
during Obama that I lost half of my investments that weren't made up >>>>> during Obama's time in office with his 25% inflation over his 8 years. >>>>
well, the average rate of inflation under Obama was 1.4 %.
During Trump I regained my investments BACK to what they were before Obama
and then with far better investment advice I grew it to $1.1 million >>>>> despite the 22% inflation during the 4 years of Biden.
<yawn> blah blah tommy bullshit.
I understanjd why you deny that reality is real but then you have nothing >>>>> because you do not even have a passing clue of how to handle money.
And yet, I can afford to take international vacations, while you still >>>> grovel in your hovel.
The
alligator tears you cried when I said that I had been making $233,000 >>>>> dollars a year showed that you simply canmot believe that a real engineer >>>>> can make that sort of money.
no salaried engineer made $233K in the years you were working, with the >>>> possible exception of a principal in a start-up. You weren't a principal >>>> in a startup or you would have bragged about it by now.
And even in these times of hardship I have
been offered $200,000/yr to move to Texas.
Hardship - for you. You're broke and living on social security, and no >>>> one offered you a $200K job.
Too bad you can't get anything right - there isn't anything you won't lie >>>>> about.
I haven't lied about anything yet.
- you never broke $100K in a year, and even that would have been an
exceptionally generous salary for a high-school dropout with no degree. >>>>
Except that you seem to be so set on me being a drunk that you must
be.
I'm not the one with a drunk driving arrest.
That you never once referred to having a wife until you had a need to >>>>> "prove" that you're not a queer.
No matter how many times you tell that lie, it will never become true. >>>>
Poor Liebermann couldn't even support
himself so he couldn't find a wife and everyone else that is married >>>>> mentions their wives now and again. But your supreme egotism
Funny, I'm not the one claiming to be have made more than most CEOs,
having a $12000/mo investment income, being a "senior business
consultant", discovering HIV.....
is the very
mark of homosexuality and even if you're not queer you will surely become >>>>> one to torture some insecure person.
lol..."I'll become one to torture some insecure person".....yeah tommy, >>>> that's how it works. People become gay for the purpose of torturing
insecure people...
I had far too much experrience with interviewing queers dying from AIDS to
not recognize the symptoms in you.
No, tommy, you never interviewed gays. Even if you were involved in
high-level development of the PCR, you would not have had any cause to >>>> be involved in the sociological aspect of the homosexual lifestyle. It >>>> would have had absolutely no bearing on any aspect of the development of >>>> the PCR. It's just another lie you tell in hopes that it will get people >>>> to respect you.
--
Add xx to reply
We all know how incredibly stupid you are but https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/ shows the actual inflation rates during Obama, Trump and Biden.
and as usual, you post a link that disproves your own claim
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ave
2009 0.0 0.2 -0.4 -0.7 -1.3 -1.4 -2.1 -1.5 -1.3 -0.2 1.8 2.7
-0.4
2010 2.6 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.6
2011 1.6 2.1 2.7 3.2 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.0 3.2
2012 2.9 2.9 2.7 2.3 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.2 1.8 1.7 2.1
2013 1.6 2.0 1.5 1.1 1.4 1.8 2.0 1.5 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.5
2014 1.6 1.1 1.5 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.3 0.8 1.6
2015 -0.1 0.0 -0.1 -0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.1
2016 1.4 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.1 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.1 1.3
Care to point out anywhere in those 8 years that would have driven the
average to 25%
--
Add xx to reply
Perhaps you'd like to let us know why you do not understand that average inflation values are not additive but multiplicative?
On 12/4/2024 12:54 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 10:33:20 2024 AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 10:22 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:Yeah I saw that. Old page format, never updated to modern protocols.
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic control
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I >>>>>>>> had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey- Archer AW hub and >>>>>>>> mount it on a display stand near an explanatory poster, so
interested students could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look
like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios, that is
completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and supposedly
minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start >>>>>>>> at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the >>>>>>>> super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated than a >>>>>> standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light andNothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT is much more
complex than what I drive* and infinitely more complex than what I
most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
--
Andrew Muzi am@yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971
To Franhk, he only uses old technology but then he shows us this
complicated POS that no one is going to build.
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze and
the wife spent your SS check already?
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:01:05 -0500, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:54 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 10:33:20 2024 AMuzi wrote:
On 12/4/2024 10:22 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 11:16 AM, AMuzi wrote:Yeah I saw that. Old page format, never updated to modern protocols.
On 12/4/2024 9:39 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 12/4/2024 9:54 AM, AMuzi wrote:I have to admit I don't know much about modern electronic control
On 12/3/2024 11:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand.Brilliant and clever! Thank you.
Internal gear hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I >>>>>>>>> had our machinist do a cutaway of a Sturmey- Archer AW hub and >>>>>>>>> mount it on a display stand near an explanatory poster, so
interested students could see what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more
complicated than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look >>>>>>>>> like child's play. It's a true continuously variable
transmission, with an infinite number of gear ratios, that is >>>>>>>>> completely gear-based. No slipping surfaces, and supposedly
minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start >>>>>>>>> at about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the >>>>>>>>> super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc. >>>>>>>>>
I can only see complexity, cost to fabricate and weight as
downsides, none of which would be deal breakers for some
applications. Motor power for example.
It actually seems to me to be significantly less complicated than a >>>>>>> standard automatic transmission
Sort of the inverse of fixed, which are dirt cheap, light andNothing a good pair of legs can't handle :)
reliable at the cost of zero gear variance.
slushboxes (except to avoid them) but the geared CVT is much more
complex than what I drive* and infinitely more complex than what I >>>>>> most often ride (fixed)
* https://corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog.cgi?show_page=130
Firefox is very wary of corvair.com!
"Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
--
Andrew Muzi am@yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971
To Franhk, he only uses old technology but then he shows us this
complicated POS that no one is going to build.
Wow, you're a cranky little bitch today. What's the matter, no booze and
the wife spent your SS check already?
The problem is that continue to deny you're a queer.
Never once did you
mention a wife in all these years until you needed to "prove" you're straight.
Instead, it was everything you were doing with the guys.
Everytime you post it is the same ego trip that homosexuals repeatly show.
10 million illegal aliens have been getting free medical care <implied - from federal funding>
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 23:27:15 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:45 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 14:44:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a displaySo this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see >>>>> what made it work.)
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite
number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping
surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots >>>> to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical >>> genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars
slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who >>> needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
It doesn't surprise me at all that a man that was fired as a plant
engineer believes a constant velocity transmission with cam operated
sliding ration adjusters would be "very complicated."
I was never fired from any job. I was actively recruited for each of my
two teaching positions.
Easy to say, pretty difficult to prove... and given that you are a
known liar......
I designed most of
the hardware for many instruments from the ProPette, the Progroup which
added a turn table with test tubes besides the 3 dimentional plate
mechanism to the mechanical heart valve in my heart/lung machine.
Maybe you did - although I doubt it, based only on your decades-long >history of lies here. I'm VERY skeptical about you designing any
mechanical part of a heart/lung machine.
Why not give us details on those supposed designs of yours? Let us be >astonished at your brilliance!
On 1/25/2025 7:31 PM, cyclintom wrote:
... anytime you think you can shut me up, you coward, you're welcome to try.
Nobody can shut you up. You spew nonsense daily, and ignore all evidence
that your spewing is imaginary and crazy. You refuse to be embarrassed
by your own endless idiocy, and you pretend you haven't been repeatedly
shown to be a fool.
That's exactly why Jay Beattie left this discussion group. It's exactly
why Jobst Brandt called you out many times. It's why all the most
intelligent members of this group are so frequently saying you're
absolutely, totally wrong on so many widely different points.
Your only benefit is that you constantly demonstrate how daft a person
and his views can be. Those who ever agree with you on any topic
probably wish you'd go away, because you make them look crazy by
association.
On 1/25/2025 7:31 PM, cyclintom wrote:
... anytime you think you can shut me up, you coward, you're welcome
to try.
Nobody can shut you up. You spew nonsense daily, and ignore all evidence
that your spewing is imaginary and crazy. You refuse to be embarrassed
by your own endless idiocy, and you pretend you haven't been repeatedly
shown to be a fool.
That's exactly why Jay Beattie left this discussion group. It's exactly
why Jobst Brandt called you out many times. It's why all the most
intelligent members of this group are so frequently saying you're
absolutely, totally wrong on so many widely different points.
Your only benefit is that you constantly demonstrate how daft a person
and his views can be. Those who ever agree with you on any topic
probably wish you'd go away, because you make them look crazy by
association.
On 1/25/2025 3:45 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Thu Dec 5 20:22:37 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
If you wanted to talk about the cumulative inflation during Obama's
terms, you should have used the word "cumulative."
And even if you did, your claim of 25% [cumulative] inflation was off by >>> nearly a factor of two. Do the numbers, Tom. They work out to about 14%. >>>
Here's an interesting coincidence: If you run the numbers for cumulative >>> inflation under G.W.Bush, immediately before Obama, you _do_ find a
cumulative value nearly twice as large as Obama's! (I get 24.4%.)
Oddly, Tom doesn't complain about the W.Bush years.
Krygowski, on a good day you're a fool.
As usual, Tom gets blown out of the water by mathematics so he descends
into insults.
Your math was totally wrong. Admit it and shut up.
On Thu Dec 5 03:44:06 2024 Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 23:27:15 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 12/4/2024 5:45 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 14:44:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2024 12:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Dec 4 00:05:00 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Bike transmissions: Derailleurs are easy to understand. Internal gear >>>>>>> hubs are more complicated. (When I was teaching, I had our machinist >>>>>>> do a cutaway of a Sturmey-Archer AW hub and mount it on a display >>>>>>> stand near an explanatory poster, so interested students could see >>>>>>> what made it work.)So this is something you consider "super complicated" is it? All
Rohloff 14 speed gear hubs are an order of magnitude more complicated >>>>>>> than AWs. But this new gizmo makes a Rohloff look like child's play. >>>>>>> It's a true continuously variable transmission, with an infinite >>>>>>> number of gear ratios, that is completely gear-based. No slipping >>>>>>> surfaces, and supposedly minimal friction losses.
Here's the link to the half hour explanation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWJHI7UHuys You may want to start at >>>>>>> about 14:30 before returning to the beginning to digest the
super-complicated explanation of it's operation.
No info in the video about prototype weight, efficiency, etc.
anyoine should have needed is to see the levers slidding in the slots >>>>>> to grasped the method that was used to both make the tranmission
continuously variable and limit the upper and lower ratios. But I
suppose you needed a half hour showing gears to grasp the idea.
Yes, Tom, I do consider that mechanism to be super complicated.
Of course, all of us here are familiar with your status as a mechanical >>>>> genius. ... um, one whose cranks fall off his bike, whose handlebars >>>>> slip, whose seatpost slips, whose derailleurs frequently don't work, who >>>>> needs special "non-stretch" cables ...
It doesn't surprise me at all that a man that was fired as a plant
engineer believes a constant velocity transmission with cam operated
sliding ration adjusters would be "very complicated."
I was never fired from any job. I was actively recruited for each of my
two teaching positions.
Easy to say, pretty difficult to prove... and given that you are a
known liar......
I designed most of
the hardware for many instruments from the ProPette, the Progroup which >>>> added a turn table with test tubes besides the 3 dimentional plate
mechanism to the mechanical heart valve in my heart/lung machine.
Maybe you did - although I doubt it, based only on your decades-long
history of lies here. I'm VERY skeptical about you designing any
mechanical part of a heart/lung machine.
Why not give us details on those supposed designs of yours? Let us be
astonished at your brilliance!
Not just a liar but a communist that hates the Constitution because it gives peopel the freedom to defend themselves.
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 20:45:42 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
10 million illegal aliens have been getting free medical care <implied - from federal funding>
What are your sources? I'm curious how you can be so wrong.
Trump says there is not enough money to treat 10 million
Americans and don't even get him started on immigrants he imports and "legalizes" to work at his resorts at half the wages.
And yet he receives exactly the same amount of taxes Obama
did (more actually). Where on Earth is he putting the money? In Musk's
saving accounts?
[]'s
//
Can undocumented immigrants get Medicare or Medicaid? Undocumented
immigrants don't have access to health insurance plans that are
Federal government-sponsored.
...........
More than 1 million immigrants, most lacking permanent legal status,
are covered by State health programs. Most of the States are
Republican, since they benefit most from the cheap labor
//
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 496 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 59:04:57 |
| Calls: | 9,760 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 13,742 |
| Messages: | 6,185,443 |