TIL

[ST80MND]

Back in the 90's, there was a company called Mountain Cycles, who made a bike called the San Andreas. It was a radical departure for the time, and adorned the covers of magazines and walls of bedrooms.

I just learned they are still around, at least as recently as 2012.

This pleases me. Its like learning that an old superhero you thought was dead is still kicking ass.
Yum Yum.

[ibRAD]

Hydraulic discs in '92? wow.

[BicycleBuck]

@st80mnd I remember those! The high chain stays and pivot were to combat suspension compression while pedaling and had the added bonus of limiting chain slap.

The really amazing piece was the upside-down fork. I don't know how well they performed and I wonder if they had seal problems. It's seems that getting enough gaskets to get a good seal would result in a lot of stiction.

[ranwhenparked]

However, Chicago Bicycle Company is still dead

[BaconSandwich]

@bicyclebuck said in TIL:

The really amazing piece was the upside-down fork

Maybe a dumb question, but what's the advantage/disadvantage of an upside down fork?

[Smallbear]

@baconsandwich Unsprung weight, apparently. At least so I was informed by a significantly more bike-geeky friend when I asked the same question.

[BaconSandwich]

@smallbear Ah. That does make sense.

[BicycleBuck]

@baconsandwich It's claimed that an inverted fork is lighter, stronger, and has better damping. I can see where those things might be true for a motorcycle where there is more weight being thrown around, but I suspect there are diminishing returns as the system weight drops.

The big disadvantages are stiction, higher chance of leaks (since the oil sits on the seals all the time), and placing the sliding tubes closer to the ground where they are more likely to get damaged.

[BaconSandwich]

@bicyclebuck I do wonder - if someone were to administer a double-blind test, how many cyclists would actually be able to tell the difference.

[BicycleBuck]

@baconsandwich said in TIL:

@bicyclebuck I do wonder - if someone were to administer a double-blind test, how many cyclists would actually be able to tell the difference.

That's an EXCELLENT question. The same is true for frames. Eliminate the visuals and sounds and I think that most cyclists couldn't tell the difference between a carbon, aluminum, and steel frame if they were all built to the same geometry. That test would be difficult to design since aluminum tubing has to have a greater cross-section to achieve the same strength as steel. Maybe if we took three frames by the same builder and encased them in a plastic shell to hide the frame material.

[BaconSandwich]

@bicyclebuck That sounds like the basis for a great article for some cycling magazine.

[BaconSandwich]

The funny thing is that we could say the same thing about a lot of car stuff. How many drivers can tell the difference between a few HP or a few PSI in tire pressures? Professionals - maybe. But I bet I wouldn't be able to tell half the differences in some of the car mods that people do. I think a lot of it is "if it makes me feel like a better driver, I'll be a better driver".