A 1982 Raleigh 10 speed with TSDZ2 mid-drive

[RTIII]

[T]he fact the frame was cheap and has stamped steel dropouts. Both of those things make it a much better choice for conversion than most of the "nice" bikes of the period. Thick tubing is stiffer than thin, and stamped dropouts (if they're reasonably thick) can take a lot of damage without breaking.

Thanks, Chalo, these were (on whole) my thoughts when I got the bike. I knew what I was going to do with it. I wanted a strong frame that could take abuse with grace, and wasn't worried about light weight, or what some snod thinks about it. If I had it to do over again, I might have chosen a similarly "cheap yet strong" bike that was young enough to have a freehub and maybe 700C wheels, but I didn't know then what I know now and I'm not going to beat myself up about it.

BTW, someone else brought up the question of the dropouts' thickness, so I paid better attention and found they're remarkably thick - about 5mm.

It really is all in the details. A 1982 Huffy, with paper-thin dropouts and internally brazed frame, would not be nearly as suitable as your Raleigh. And an expensive 1982 Colnago with thin Columbus SL tubing would probably fail sooner too.

IDK what those particular bikes are, but I like your points. Thank you for making them.

You should verify the dropouts are aligned, because if they're not parallel, it puts a great deal of stress on the axle. A bike shop has special tools for gauging and straightening dropouts.

Yes, I get that. I dare say they're more parallel now than before I started.

I'm pretty good with metal - I have a 5000 sq ft workshop mostly devoted to metalworking. I'm also a reasonably competent engineer. So, of course, just out of "Standard Operating Procedure," I measured the parallelism of the dropouts before I even began - they were pretty crappy, measuring from about 120mm to 125mm along a length of, oh, about 25mm. I measured about 122 at the point where the (bolt on) wheels were anchored for decades. When I opened them up, I put a very modest effort into making them more parallel by squeezing them back together while the hydraulics were keeping them spread, thus helping some. I did this mostly because I knew that the spreading was going to make matters worse. But I didn't put even more effort into it because by then it was clear that I MIGHT want to spread them further, beyond 130, and I didn't want to work-harden the pieces unnecessarily.

Just curious, can you either briefly describe such tools or point me to them online? ... I don't need any help figuring parallelism - I already have a good selection of precision measurement tools to do that with, I'm thinking about the straightening tools...

The wheels might or might not work for you in the long run. There are very few 27" wheels that are equal, structurally, to what comes with a cheap no-frills 700c bike today-- let alone something built for heavy duty. It looks like your wheels have zinc plated spokes, which tend to become stuck in the nipples over time. That complicates later truing. But if your wheels do what you ask of them, then it's no big deal that you could have better ones.

I'm interested in this, but until my budget can return to a better place, I'm not going to change what I'm doing. ... BTW, half the rear spokes are stainless steel - the ones on the freehub side. I had to order shorter ones to mount the freehub correctly. The fronts and the other half of rears are the stock ones that Sta-Tru sells with its new wheels.

The very limited selection of tires in 27 inch curtails your ability to let fatter tires protect your wheels. Here's one fatter tire you can get: http://www.swifttire.com/product/sand-canyon-27-x-1-38-folding-tan/

The excellent Michelin World Tour tire I have recommended in the past seems to have been discontinued, unfortunately.

Thank you so much for this additional link - I looked for the Michelin World Tour tire and was unsuccessful in anything but old stock, and I thought that a bad idea. (Plus they were very expensive.)

There are some valuable points to what he's saying. Some is irrelevant-- like the fact the frame was cheap and has stamped steel dropouts.

As I learned when I was a teenager, in the process of becoming an adult, "it's not what you say, it's how you say it." I'm not inclined to believe he was ignorant of the caustic nature of his posting(s). It's been called out before... But more to the point about cheap frame and stamped steel dropouts; it seems clear to me he didn't mention these things in recognition that for my application these are assets, not liabilities. -shrug- Not looking back on that.

And thanks again for posting.

 

[amberwolf]

Just a note about Sta-Tru wheels, as don't recall where you got yours, and it might make a difference to the quality of the spokes/etc in them. If you got them from Amazon, they may not actually be Sta-Tru wheels, though they could be and just sold against the manufacturer's wishes/contract/etc.:

http://statruwheels.com/Contact-Us.html

Notice for Amazon Customers

Sta-Tru Wheels has recieved an increase in Amazon inquires recently about wheels listed on Amazon.com. Sta-Tru Wheels DOES NOT sell wheels on Amazon.com. Any company selling wheels on Amazon are misrepresenting themselves as a Sta-Tru Wheels Authorized Dealer. We are working to resolve this issue. Sta-Tru Wheels OEM replacement wheels are designed to be sold, installed, and serviced by a licensed bicycle dealer. These sellers are not authorized by Sta-Tru Wheels to sell on Amazon.com. We cannot answer questions about these products as they do not use our part numbers. Please direct all product questions to the Amazon seller.

All OEM Replacement wheels not purchased and installed through a Authorized Bicycle Dealer are considered warranty void. All OEM Replacement warranty items are handled through the Authorized Dealer that it was purchased from. Sta-Tru Wheels will not deal with customers directly on warranty OEM Replacement Wheels. A OEM Replacement wheel is defined as any wheel sold individually and not as a packaged set.

 

[Norton]

I always assumed this bike was something you had hanging from the back of your garage.
Did you buy this bike brand new when you were young dumm and full of cumm?
And I also assumed when you started reading about ebikes and add-on mid-drives, you pulled it down to relive your youth and have some fun! emoji Happy Face. (To lessen the lesson)

But if this heap is something you just picked up at the thrift store for $35 dollars and used it as a base for a ? $700 ? ebike project, then you can take some criticism. unhappy face.
I once mentioned sentimental value. Is that part of this build? That would matter,, to you. We could then try to understand why this old bike.

If not, take criticism like a man.

You are using an old heap to try to build a modern e-cargo bike. You can't even use modern upgrades without major surgery.

All I'm saying is, consider starting with a heavier duty, more modern bike. At least test ride something from this century to see how you like it. CL is awesome. And cheap, if finances are the issue.
You're adding all these heavy steel parts to an ancient cheap road bike. True?

Good Luck.

 

[RTIII]

Dear Norton,

You're done. You can't incite me to match your vitriol, I'm not that person. Be as rude and as evil as you want, it has no place here and I won't bother.

Bye.

 

[Norton]

Dearest RT,

It's funny how even adults throw around the word 'evil' these days.
And it's funny how Sense-A-Tive grown men can be to criticism.

Buddy,
I'm not picking on you.
I'm concerned that you are basing a fully loaded cargo bike on an old cheap road bike. (If it was a bike you bought brand new back in '82, I can see your attachment to it, but still....)
Look up Fully Loaded Touring Bikes. Look up Bike Trailers.
None of this needs to be reinvented by you, in your steel machine shop. It's all been done before and people know what works. And WHAT IS SAFE.

What you are doing seems dangerous,,,, to me,, and I'm sure to others.

Now if you really, really want to stay with this bike,, a trailer is the only way to go for hauling heavy crap.

Maybe you can use your inventiveness to come up with E-Brakes for the Bike Trailer attached to your ebike. The switches are available with those ebike brake levers or add on switches for your levers.
This may get you into seeing how great current generation mechanical and/or hydraulic Disc Brakes are for bikes!

As an example of current tech: The Trailer Hitch on my Bike Friday and its Trailer is: A ~8" length of heavy duty hydraulic hose with swedged on fittings and the coupling/disconnect is an air hose quick-release fitting. Believe it or not!
It works and it's as simple as it gets! Look it up.

Hell, there may already be an E-brake system for bike trailers!!! I'll leave that up to you. Google is your friend.

Good Luck! I come in peaceful concern.... for good.... and not for evil...... :lol:

ps, I wanted to ask if you know about vertical vs horizontal drop outs and which can handle ebike power better. And also maintaining really cheap old headset bearings,,, but I won't.....

 

[spinningmagnets]

Norton, you've stated your opinion, no need to keep repeating it.

Lets give this thread a few days off to let things cool down and give the moderators a chance to review it.

 

[RTIII]

Thank you, spinningmagnets, for a little sanity. ... No matter how on target someone's technical comments may be, if they present them in a harassing way, they deserve rebuke.

Meanwhile, there's been a lot of activities regarding my bike today, but I haven't time to write it all up just now. But shortly, I'll have replies to amberwolf about Sta-Tru wheels, reply to Chalo about his tire recommendation, and give an updates on the bike and its systems including the battery vendor's response about how it's not the BMS and what they want me to do to fix it, how I managed to get the front derailleur working, the additional fix needed for the kickstand's rotational problem, the new front light, and the attempt to fix the 11T skipping problem! LOTS to update about, but so little time!

 

[RTIII]

So... since the thread was locked, I couldn't update several things, then when it was unlocked, short on time! Now, let me get cracking:

Here's one [27"] fatter [than 1 1/4"] tire you can get: http://www.swifttire.com/product/sand-canyon-27-x-1-38-folding-tan/

Yes, looks great! I like that it has the gumwall or the back sidewall, though surprised the latter is cheaper.

Just a note about Sta-Tru wheels, as don't recall where you got yours, and it might make a difference to the quality of the spokes/etc in them. If you got them from Amazon, they may not actually be Sta-Tru wheels, though they could be and just sold against the manufacturer's wishes/contract/etc.

I find that so curious! I did buy one from Amazon, and when shopping I saw that there were some sellers who were selling THROUGH Amazon but were / are not Amazon, however I also noted that Amazon itself appears to be stocking and selling these wheels themselves, so I bought not only through Amazon but from Amazon itself! Now I learn that it may not be the real thing?! How bizarre! I bought the other from a different vendor, for a good bit less and it was the better wheel! The one I got from Amazon is not nearly as good a rim. However, they appear to be from the exact same extrusion, just the one had the ends joined better than the other. Neither came true running, either!

But back to our ongoing discussion of trailers. Thanks for sharing about yours, with those photos ... As I wrote back close to a month ago (in this thread):

I've already been contemplating a specialized trailer that could carry substantial loads. I've got design ideas for the hitch that lets the bike lean into corners while the trailer remains horizontal on two parallel wheels. And, design ideas for the trailer that permits its width and length to be changed very quickly to accommodate various loads, in particular moving the relative position of the wheels to the carriage so that various centers of gravity can be accommodated easily to keep a "tongue weight" at a reasonable level. And I have design ideas to add two wheels to become a four wheeler with only a few moments worth of clicking parts into place! 8)

I decided to start my experience with bike trailers with something to get a taste or feel for trailer design before I execute a design of my own. I've had this baby for a couple of weeks or so and was looking for a moment to get the hitch mounted. ... I don't particularly like the way the hitch works on this, but I think I'll give it a try. It's not as elegant as what I have in mind, but the trailer side already fabricated and it's reasonably light weight... Now I just have to fabricate the bike side, and I'm in a fabricating mood.

View attachment 2

...Notice here how I've fabricated a mount for the headlamp. Not sure I like it - the lamp seems vulnerable out there! After executing the installation, I'm now re-thinking it; maybe the lamp should have a quick-release so I'm not carrying it when I don't need it and so it's less likely to get damaged (or stolen). ... Not sure how I'll accomplish that ... Weld in a bolt so it can't get lost (or need a tool to tighten) and then use a wing-nut? Do that only for the lamp or maybe the mount, too? (And if the mount, it'll need an index to keep it in position, not just a bolt.) Hmmm...



On to other matters... You can also see how the kickstand now is on its heals instead of its toes! This is better than it was, but still not quite right! I need to try again, kind of splitting the difference between the last two attempts!

AND, as I reported in the main TSDZ2 thread, I replaced the chain and now the 11T doesn't skip or hop any more! 8) The math says I can get to a theoretical 34.2 MPH at 90 pedal RPM! ... Somehow, I don't think I'll get it up that high, but at least I'm more likely to NOT top out the assist speed of the TSDZ2! And THAT's something to be happy about!

I've got two links left over for my emergency kit - not that I'll ever need it I don't think. I'm running the chain the same length as the old one (in link count). I bet I could get a 32T in the rear if I really wanted, maybe a 34! (Is there as standard rule of thumb to have any idea if it might work without the parts on hand?)

While at it, I investigated the parallelism of the dropouts - the right one is pretty damned perfectly parallel to the wheel, while the left one splays outboard a tiny bit, but in thinking about this, I really don't see why anyone should be alarmed if there's some modest error in parallelism. Any additional stresses would be localized to the nut on the axle where it clamps down ... I could see if there were a significant error, perhaps the angle could put bending forces on the fixed portion of the axle. Yet, it's a non-rotating part so it isn't going to work-harden and get a stress crack like a rotating part would - it'll just bend some. And I can't see it bending enough to cause bearing problems or such... In any event, next time I have it apart, I'll see if I can't improve the parallelism of the left side.
Meanwhile, the 52T and 11T make a perfectly straight chainline!

 

[RTIII]

FINALLY back to the battery.

Recall that it's been flaky and the vendor said (nearly three weeks ago) that they were sending a new BMS for me to install. Then they said:

Sorry we still haven't received the BMS. We hear many times from the BMS company that they would send the BMS out. Our contact left his job. We will try to get the problem fixed ASAP. Please allow us a little time.

Later, they said:

The BMSs that we got from our supplier had the balance header connector in the wrong place. The additional wires that would be required for them to work makes it extremely difficult for them to fit inside the case. We should be getting in a new batch with the balance header in the correct place very shortly. A warranty order has already been created for a replacement BMS, as well as a the parts you requested.

And... four or five days after that (three days ago) a different technician at their company wrote me a LONG letter. It looks like the kind of thing that could be of general use to the e-bike community so I'm posting nearly all of it here, but won't put it in quote blocks because there's just too much of it... I'll denote the start and end like this:

_________________________

I’ve looked over the info you supplied and I am quite confident you do not have a BMS issue as such. If the BMS trips, it will need to be reset, by cycling the power on/off. When you faced an issue, this was not required. In your case, the power would come back by itself, with no reset required. A slim possibility is that the power switch feeding the BMS, is intermittent and that it could be switching the BMS on/off, but again, that is not a BMS issue, it is a switch issue. I have a sneaky suspicion the issue might be the power switch (or bad connection between switch and BMS).

Your info points towards a bad connection on a plug or the fuse between the battery and discharge lead. Could also be a bad power switch.

As you have no voltage or a low voltage being measured on the discharge lead to the controller, it should be quite simple to isolate the point where the bad connection is occurring. When doing the following tests, you must leave the battery connected to the same kit you mentioned before. You must do this as the circuit made, will help you to determine where in the circuit the voltage is dropping.

Follow the below steps to check the connections on the negative side of the battery:

1. If you start with connecting the red multimeter probe to the positive of the battery. This connection could be the red cable between the battery and the fuse. It could also be the 14th wire on the BMS balance plug (opposite end to the black cable).

2. Starting at the battery negative (large black cable that feeds into the BMS), then trace back through the cables using your black meter probe. The battery negative leaves the BMS on the large blue cable that goes into the BMS. Place your black meter lead on the black cable. Measure the voltage on that, relative to the battery positive (as stated above).
You should measure around 54V on a fully charged battery.

3. The output from the BMS to the controller, is the large blue cable. Follow that blue cable to a T-connector and measure again the voltage after the T-Connector. After this, measure the voltage before and after the discharge connector on the battery case. If there is a bad connection on any of the connection points, you should be able to identify where the voltage drops from the full battery voltage (~54V), down to the lower voltage you mentioned. You must leave the kit connected when running these tests (just like you did, when you stated you measure ~30V at the controller), as the small drain from the kit may be enough for the voltage drop to show up.

Follow these steps to measure the battery positive connections:

1. Connect the black probe of the meter to the small black wire on the BMS balance plug, or the large black cable between battery and BMS.

2. Measure the positive coming from the battery, prior to the fuse with the red probe. Follow the red cable and measure each point in turn, before and after every connection. As above, leave the kit connected to the battery leads during these tests. Take the measurement without disconnecting the plugs. If you disconnect the plugs, you no longer have a circuit and any bad connection you might have, will not show up.

If the BMS is the cause of the issue, then it would be best to bypass the LED power switch contacts. The power switch function on the BMS is via the 2 small red wires that are soldered to the BMS directly. If those 2 red wires exiting the BMS are linked together, that should power on the BMS.

Let us know what you find and we’ll get the parts arranged. We have a guy in your state that can inspect the battery, diagnose and repair. We can speak to him and arrange that, if you would prefer that.

____________________

Wish they'd have told me they have someone nearby THREE WEEKS AGO!

Hope this data helps someone - I'm still trying to gulp it all down.

Also, I need to post here the images and such that they emailed me some weeks back.

 

[Chalo]

Static stress in the axle due to dropouts not being parallel can cause forces from normal riding (weight, bumps, chain pulling on hub) to escalate into the range where they promote low-cycle fatigue. The result is broken axles.

Almost all the broken front and left side rear axles I see are the result of dropout misalignment. You might or might not have a problem, but it would be a good idea to scrutinize the area as you're tightening the wheel in place, to see how much the frame and/or axle are getting wound up.

Here's more information about why and how to correct misaligned dropouts.

 

[RTIII]

Static stress in the axle due to dropouts not being parallel can cause forces from normal riding (weight, bumps, chain pulling on hub) to escalate into the range where they promote low-cycle fatigue. The result is broken axles.

Almost all the broken front and left side rear axles I see are the result of dropout misalignment. You might or might not have a problem, but it would be a good idea to scrutinize the area as you're tightening the wheel in place, to see how much the frame and/or axle are getting wound up.

Here's more information about why and how to correct misaligned dropouts.

Thanks, Chalo, interesting, informative and potentially vital. What I like most is that they give a specification, though they don't give the diameter for the black piece they're using in the tool. My wild assed guess is 20mm diameter - you don't have one to measure, do you? ...In my first writing of my comment to which you replied, I talked about tolerances, but deleted it because I didn't have a useful point of reference, but that's exactly what their tool provides.

I also liked that the article basically agreed with me that a modest error isn't really an issue. Actually 1/2 mm of that diameter at that distance is a large enough error that a "calibrated eyeball" can easily discern it - project it across the gap and it's a full mm across, what, typically 130, 135mm? I'm sure I could discern that error easily, but then, I'm accustomed to working with metal castings with machining steps that have to be accurate to +- 0.005mm or 0.0002", and frequently find it helpful just by sight to be able to determine errors of 0.125mm or 0.005"... I always use my measurement tools to confirm and gain specific measures, but I also am frequently amazed at just how good the eye can be!

Their solution ignores trying to be parallel to the wheel (rim) or even the other side, really, and instead depends on the position the axle will end up in and aims to get these two points aimed at each other correctly. That's an interesting approach. Practical. They don't say so but if you moved the tool(s) throughout the slot's adjustment range, you could have the same effect in measurement of discerning if the whole thing is parallel or not, as opposed to just those to axle end-points but what to do about any error might not be as easy to address as their solution. I have tools on hand that are used to measure parallelism, but they're not as convenient to use as their threaded dowel solution.

I feel certain the one side on my bike is virtually dead-nuts-on. The other isn't too bad, but is probably a bit worse than their spec. So, I'll both check it and straighten it. I might even make my own tool to get a very accurate measure with - only need one if it's designed correctly! But to copy their design I'd need a very fine, tightly fitting thread... Hmmm...

As an aside, their strategy for straightening could perhaps be improved. You'd want the alignment tool mounted as close to the neck as possible so that the whole rest of the dropout can be made to be parallel - do the best you can there, and the whole thing will probably end up perfect... This won't matter for some designs, but may for others, like mine, which just has huge slots. I'd like to have the whole slot range parallel.

 

[Norton]

That headlight,, good lord... :lol:

Now I understand.

This is the Rat Rod equivalent of an ebike! Everything is a period piece except for the mid-drive and battery. No current tech allowed. I like it !!!

I was going to explain modern derailleurs, again, about total T and max cassette size, but you can't put a modern derailleur on this Period Piece. Awesome !!

 

[RTIII]

The creation and installation of the trailer hitch went off without a hitch! :lol: 8)

Here you can see it done: I used the same two M6 mount points used for the rear rack and kickstand, and just sandwitched the dropout. The dropout is threaded, of course, so I just put in longer bolts and then mounted the hitch with nuts to the inside face. Simple, light weight, and strong.



View attachment 1

 

[dogman dan]

Tough love here on this forum, but nothing really delete and warn worthy so far.

RE the bike being safe, that all depends on the speed its ridden, and the weight of the load. I don't see any problems so long as the trailer load is not much over 50 pounds, and the speeds kept under 20 mph.

Those old frames are strong as hell, if you have a good one. That looks like a good, brazed and butted frame to me.

A cheap huffy from the same period not so strong. My bet is the frame has decent torsional stiffness from side to side, which is the primary thing you need when overloaded in my experience. Load em up, and you can get high speed wobble at 15 mph on a weak frame. You will quickly find your bikes actual safe limits for speed and load, and then just stick to loads that are safe to carry the speed you wish to travel.

Fairly obvious of course, that your brakes need to be kept in good working condition. But no reason they would be inadequate with a set of good pads on em, properly adjusted, and you dumped the slippery steel rims.

 

[RTIII]

RE the bike being safe, that all depends on the speed its ridden, and the weight of the load. I don't see any problems so long as the trailer load is not much over 50 pounds, and the speeds kept under 20 mph.

Those old frames are strong as hell, if you have a good one. That looks like a good, brazed and butted frame to me.

Yes, I agree; unladen I can get it up to about 25 MPH without much trouble, beyond that is neigh-unto-impossible, though I haven't really had a good chance to try out the 52T / 11T combo since I replaced the chain and fixed the jumping / skipping problem. ...Laden, I keep it to a max of 15 or so except where compelled to because of traffic. My route to get groceries is pretty awful, and sometimes joining in with the cars near 20MPH is the safest option.

As an aside, WAY back in the day a car forced me off a sidewalk, off a 3' drop onto concrete, while riding my (genuine) Raleigh (of which this Legran is a reasonably faithful copy). The impact was horrendous. However, SOMEHOW, I managed to ride the bike home! Once home, after shaking off the impact, I went to check out the bike. It's probably a very good thing that the wheel / fork went one way, the handlebars another and I'm sure that as it cocked sideways it was absorbing some energy... and I couldn't believe the frame was still intact - looked fine! UNTIL one looked very very carefully, you could see that the top tube where it meets the head tube had bent slightly. But that double-butting saved the day! A "cheap huffy" would never have survived! Neither would a carbon fiber frame, for that matter, I don't imagine.

My bet is the frame has decent torsional stiffness from side to side, which is the primary thing you need when overloaded in my experience. Load em up, and you can get high speed wobble at 15 mph on a weak frame. You will quickly find your bikes actual safe limits for speed and load, and then just stick to loads that are safe to carry the speed you wish to travel.

Yep, I've experienced that wobble... The trailer is perhaps the best way to handle the loads, but when not using one, I think I'm going to change the pannier style crate mounting to instead be "soft sided", run one per side, and run it longer but narrower. I'd chosen the plastic crate because it'll fit two grocery bags, but only with the bag's wide dimension going outward. Instead, I'm thinking of a pair of two-tandem-bags-long pannier setup that is a lot lighter, and narrower... This would probably increase the carrying capacity while at the same time reducing torsional loads.

Tough love here on this forum

I don't find repeating the same points over and over and with condescension in the delivery "love", tough or not; I call it harassment.

 

[amberwolf]

I think I'm going to change the pannier style crate mounting to instead be "soft sided", run one per side, and run it longer but narrower. I'd chosen the plastic crate because it'll fit two grocery bags, but only with the bag's wide dimension going outward. Instead, I'm thinking of a pair of two-tandem-bags-long pannier setup that is a lot lighter, and narrower...

Putting them low will help even more.

Dogman Dan's "bouncing betty" longtail's coroplast & wood & aluminum boxes is one way to do that.
https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=28389&hilit=betty&start=50#p854673

My CrazyBike2's metal boxes is another, though I used existing boxes for a number of reasons. If I'd made my own I'd've gone with a bit narrower and a bit longer, maybe also deeper. The ones I have now, since they're so deep, would work better if I cut the outboard bottom "corner/edge" off at an angle, so leaning the bike in turns wouldn't result in groundstrike.

 

[dogman dan]

Tough up bro. He can repeat his opinion all he wants, till he calls you names, or whatever. If you don't want to read it, put him on your ignore list.

 

[tomjasz]

Norton, grow up. No one wants the advice of someone with absolutely no credibility. Seriously. Take your teenage trolling somewhere invited. You've done nothing but poke and target a single poster. We've read several dozen times that you think the bike is a waste. A majority of your posts are poking at Richard. Its rather sick. Maybe someone picked on you on another forum and you see an opportunity here.

 

[tomjasz]

Tough up bro. He can repeat his opinion all he wants, till he calls you names, or whatever. If you don't want to read it, put him on your ignore list.

You know dog, the kid, Norton, has spent most of 70 posts poking at a single poster. Yeah, this is the wild west of eBikes, built by the tough guys, and this is exactly what keeps many from posting here. Some asshat can, obviously, target another poster and the victim gets told to toughen up.

 

[amberwolf]

Tough up bro. He can repeat his opinion all he wants, till he calls you names, or whatever. If you don't want to read it, put him on your ignore list.

Yet other members were removed entirely from the forum, including many dozens of helpful posts to others, when they repeated their opinion of various things?

I don't think that's very fair.

 

[dogman dan]

Oh,,, its so tempting to ban a guy for repeating his opinion on every thread. The helmet argument, the brakes argument, etc etc. If that kind of repeating was a banning offense, I'd be the first to be gone. Those guys had to go because of how they did it.

Norton should find somebody else to bug. Focusing on just one person on this huge forum is trolling even without name calling. If he crosses the line enough we will ban him. But so far, I only see a ton of harsh words about the bike.

I for one, don't want to see this become a site where debate is stifled by moderators deleting stuff constantly. If people don't have the balls to take the debate here, so be it.

Its a fine line between trolling and a good debate, and some really crusty characters here have learned to walk it. Others, who had really good info to offer, got goaded into crossing the line, and are gone. I am just one of the moderators here, but for me, the line is attacking the person, usually name calling.

When I said toughen up, what I meant was,,, Don't let this guy goad you into crossing the line yourself. I did not mean lie down and take it like a dog. I meant don't post replies till you cool off, so you don't get the axe.

And btw,, nobody except for spammers gets banned permanent on one violation. What gets you banned is replying to a moderator warning with something like F off. Then we respond, yes indeed, somebody will. Norton got warning one when the thread got locked because of him. But locking a thread is a warning to both of those having too harsh an argument,,,, In most cases, one needs to back off some, the other needs to toughen up.

You want to herd this basket of snakes? Volunteer to moderate. I'm plenty tired of doing it. AW got tired of it. We have been adding new moderators lately. It does need to be done by more than one or two mods that actively stick our heads up to get whacked for taking action. Or not taking action. Both responses wrong to somebody. Its all lose to be a moderator of this forum.

 

[methods]

Moderation Hat on:

Norton is acting like an ass on this last page... But he started by trying to help...
Reading only the last page screams troll. Reading the whole thread.... Meh.
It just got a little personal.

Seems to me Norton wants to be as critical as Chalo - but with fewer chops.
I like Chalo, he is like a gusher of interesting and useful information.

Norton ... I know it's hard to let it go when someone is doing something you think is stupid. Your best bet is to sting once then delete the thread from your updates and move on to other places you can be helpful.

Every build is welcome on this forum - safe, dangerous, ugly, beautiful, strange, stupid, ... It's called R&D and it may just be the posters personal adventure in learning what works and what does not. I myself... Do many stupid things... If just to *KNOW* ... *FOR MYSELF*... why one way is in fact better than another.

My best decisions have come from my worst decisions. YouTube does not replace hard earned personal knowledge.

-methods

 

[neptronix]

Hey RTIII.. welcome to the forum. We like picky engineers here.. sorry for the dust up on your thread.

Nice build thread.. i think you have some things to learn the hard way.. many of us with a high post count also learned in a similar fashion.. keep it up.. keep building better and stronger..

 

[RTIII]

Hey RTIII.. welcome to the forum. We like picky engineers here.. sorry for the dust up on your thread.

What a nice comment - thank you, neptronix, I very much appreciate it.

Nice build thread.. i think you have some things to learn the hard way.. many of us with a high post count also learned in a similar fashion.. keep it up.. keep building better and stronger..

Also a very kind comment; I imagine you've seen a LOT of build threads, so saying mine is a nice one is a meaningful comment. ... My motivation has been to try and articulate my thinking, my choices, and so forth, as much in hopes that it can in some ways be a pay-back, a pay-it-forward, to help others as I myself have been helped, as it is to help encourage others to share the advice I could really use. And, I've gotten a lot of private messages, some expressing technical ideas, and others expressing thanks for various aspects of either the build or my writing, or asking questions they were too shy to post in public. As a few examples, I've gotten thanks for giving a budget, for outlining my engineering choices and the vendors I chose and why, and even for - and this will get the types like Norton - keeping old hardware alive and not just throwing it out in favor of new.

You say I have some things to learn the hard way... Here's a key thing; I know I'm ignorant! I hope I'm not stupid. My biggest issue isn't ignorance, however, it's budget. I have suffered a few unlucky blows in the financial department so I can't afford to do anything I want to do as I rebuild my financial underpinnings - something the likes of Norton can't seem to grasp. SURE, having the latest engineering is great, wonderful, a real joy, but just because YOU (someone like Norton) have no trouble buying anything in the bicycle world you want doesn't mean we are all in that space. So, I'm having to weave my way through, learning all the while, as I'm on a serious budget at this moment in time - not just financially but also in my time. ... I don't imagine it will always be this way for me, however, I suspect you'll agree that a person learns a lot more when they have to struggle through "the hard way." And, it's not without its joys.

Some of my reactions were not so much about my actual journey but to try and slough off some of the harassment from Norton, such as my reaction to "suspension" features of bikes. I TRIED to tell him I like the new technology, but I soon gathered that his REAL purpose was more to have someone to pick on, and which is why I can't agree with Dogman Dan's attitude. In my view, Dogman has it wrong; harassment isn't only calling people names, it's picking on them. Some call it "trolling." A simple, "stop picking on this guy" is all that's required - not banning, though the occasionally deleted posting might be a good strong signal to someone, "hey, that wasn't here to be helpful now was it?!"

Because of my recent injury, I got a new step-through and started a new build page for it. However, unfortunately, shortly thereafter I learned it's not a great frame for me, either in size or for the height one has to step-through. So, yesterday I bought a new bike frame and am just starting the build on it. It's the lowest step-through frame I've ever seen and maybe the lowest ever made! WOW! Wait till you see it! I'm a little unsure if I should start ANOTHER new thread just for this new frame, or update the other one... I think I'm going to make a whole new page, reference the others in the first posting, and try like hell to keep up the quality of my comments to earn remarks like yours above of, "Nice build thread..." 8)

Thanks again, neptronix.

 

[tomjasz]

The mods here are good fellas. Nep, fech, dog, methods, are all top shelf. So very patient only one PIA in the bunch but a pile of help with just one asshat allegiance. I didn't mean to say this should become a harsh site for moderation. It just irks when someone dogs someone. No reason. Point made, move on. I apologize for implying that moderators didn't give your all Dogman, you helped me from day one. It made my future and sealed my fate. Again. I apologize. Chalo? My favorite poster. Hes helped me imeasurably. Every moderator has forgotten more than my stroke brain will ever learn.