Old Dawes Galaxy

Libraryman2":bc16hlxo said:

My main hobby is astrophotography and I do know a lot about that...lol

Click to expand...

You're welcome to the time; it's often said that the best way to see if you understand something is to see if you can explain it to someone else succinctly . I'm still working on the succinctly bit.
Always in awe of anyone who can look at the night sky and recognise anything more than Orion and the moon - sometimes I think I even confuse them. Give me a slant parallelogram any day.

Thanks....

I often get exasperated with my wife, succinct she is not...around and around to say the simplest of things...zzzzzz!

So your explanations are good to me..yes astrophotographers have to go through a big and steep learning curve....exactly like I’m doing now.. :roll:

Ray

Re: rear frame dropout width.

Whoah there!
You say 135mm width, on a 1981 frame? Not likely.
The dimension should be measured with the wheel removed, BETWEEN the inside faces of the dropouts, where the hub axle/bearing cone lock nuts abutted.
I think you may be measuring the outsides of those dropouts, where the outer ends of the wheel axle is held into the frame.
If you then measure your hub axle length Over Locknuts (OLN), i.e. not the wheel to frame holding/clamping fittings, it will be the same as the dropout width within 1 or 2 mm.
The common OLN (sometimes also called the OLD) and dropout widths for this era frame is 126mm, possibly 120mm.
130mm can only achieved by Sheldon Brown's "cold set' bending method, and I think he would say 135mm is too far for this width frame.
All the best with the rest of the work,
Robin.

Good morning Robin...yes it surprised me too, pictures paint the truth...it’s an 80s frame but probably 85/6

The geometry looks right, no evidence of cold framing...the wheel nut spacing is 134mm
Drop out is 135mm

Please give me your opinion..

Ray

Hi Ray.
Well it certainly is wider than 126mm!
The dropout doesn't quite appear 135mm but certainly is 130 or so.
For a more accurate indication, your rule '0' left end needs to be against the flat where the locknut fits, you can see the nut marks on the flat where you should measure from, just in front of the trimmer setscrew.
Similarly the measurement needs to be horizontal to the right hand flat, where the nut marks will be there too.
The best tool would be calipers with internal gap measuring jaws, I inherited mine from my father who had every tool under the sun!
With that OLN size hub 7 gears cassettes are no problem, freewheel or freehub designs.
My Raleigh was an in-between OLN, but was cold set wider when I had a 126mm hub clamped in and I was hit from the side by a car coming out of a driveway across the pavement onto the road, where I was!
I got his number though.
My left hand pedal came up and took it off the front of the car.
He drove off without stopping, leaving the number plate behind!
All the best,
Robin.

Cheers Robin...yes I used inside calipers.....the ruler is just for the photo....not enough hands you understand

It’s all working o.k...I need to ensure that the new 7 speed Will not foul the frame when the chain is on...



This is the spindle...145mm long...bearing cone drive side is naff so I’m just looking to replace that...
The spindle length....just allows for a thin additional spacer to be fitted...if I need to move the wheel over a tad...(i’m guessing here)

But hopefully not needed...

I was a mechanical fitter in my past life...engineering apprenticeship!!
So I still have my callipers and micrometers...

Felt I needed to give a driver the finger yesterday, ...no appreciation of the vulnerability of bike users...have to say in all my years both on motorcycles in cars and in an 8 metre Motorhome...I’ve never received a finger from a cyclist...give em room I say...

Ray

Libraryman2":66vj5tlv said:

I was a mechanical fitter in my past life...engineering apprenticeship!!

Click to expand...

Ah - that makes sense. So was my dad at one point in his career and I inherited most of his tools (and an imagined voice over my shoulder when I'm doing something with the wrong ratio of brute force + ignorance : accepted engineering practice).

You may be interested to how/why the cycling world got to these wider spacings; You can never have enough gears but the standard freewheel threading sentenced the right hand axle bearing to remain inboard of this. The thicker the sprocket cluster got as manufacturers added gears (albeit with narrower spacing and thinner chains), the longer the cantilevered section of the axle became and they kept failing just inboard of the cone. Fundamentally, the freehub design just brings the wheel bearing further outboard. When the (now smaller) pawls eventually wear out you're in for a new hub but this suits the manufacturers so that's where we are. It's also noteworthy that track bikes still use 1/2 x 1/8 chains.

Mmm..interesting ...those bearing take quite a bit of load...I have been offered the caged replacement bearings but turned them down due to what I perceive as a inherently weaker system...a cage does nothing other than make them easier to install..
I’ve read in one post that the, spindles were prone to bending for that very reason..however there’s some debate about when that weakness revealed itself...on the 7 speeds or higher??

Ray

Hi Ray,
My Raleigh has done 1000's of miles on a 7 geared freewheel 126mm OLN hub with no bending of the rear axle. Even been up Ditchling Beacon a few times. Although yours will have more overhang being that bit longer each side.

I would ask others about this : Should the cones and locknuts have a tabbed washer (on to a slotted axle) in between?
Makes locking up more precise and less likely to free off and the possibility of righthand cone tightening up with hub rotation?
It's just a thought, not something I can ever remember seeing anywhere.
Regards,
Robin.

on the 7 speeds or higher?

Click to expand...

Above 126mm spacing iirc. I've broken more than one in my time but I was much fitter back then, stood out of the saddle more than I should and did many, many more miles than I do now. I would assume that a solid spindle would be tougher than the quick release tubes that I've ridden since Jagger was a lad (I exaggerate - no-one is that old) but the ability to take the wheels out quickly is more important to me than axle longevity. Agree with you totally about caged bearings. If you know how to fit them loose then why wouldn't you? I think many modern fancy wheels (i.e. above "pub bike" quality) have sealed cartridge needle bearings. I've no idea how they counter thrust but I'm an awful long way from being a bearing designer and I'm sure this is factored in. A good old cup/cone properly adjusted is a good match with my patience and tight-fisted (er, "value-conscious") nature.

@Robin: I've never found the tabbed washer design particularly useful. I lock up the sprocket side before it goes into the hub and do all my adjustment from the left. You need to hold the cone in position regardless so I struggle to understand what the tab is supposed to help with. I'm probably missing something but don't understand what you mean about the right hand cone tightening up with hub rotation. It's locked against the lock nut/spacers. If wheel rotation is moving it, it was never tight enough - but I still don't see where the washer comes in. I'm probably being dim so please explain if so.