Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/28/84; site lll-crg.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!brooks
From: brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: Re: Re: Ultra freewheels - bad?
Message-ID: <501@lll-crg.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 6-Apr-85 02:30:06 EST
Article-I.D.: lll-crg.501
Posted: Sat Apr  6 02:30:06 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 8-Apr-85 00:25:29 EST
References: <50@uw-june> <488@hoxna.UUCP>
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG group
Lines: 19

> According to continuing reports in bicycling magazine, shifting
> performance of "Ultra" type freewheels is noticibly worse than
> standard width freewheels.  The reasoning is that the narrow chains
> just don't pick up as well as standard width chains.  If you must

It is true that a sloppy, poorly adjusted derailer and Ultra freewheels don't
mix.  Another problem is the fact the the front two gears are spaced for the
wide chain and there is enough room between the gears for the chain to slide
through without tripping down on the small gear.

All in all the extra gears offered by the Ultra are very nice to have.  Having
to use good quality derailers and keep them in adjustment is a small price
to pay for the extra cogs.  Otherwize you find yourself changing the freewheel
to suit the type of ride you are going on.  I use a seven gear freewheel which
ranges from 13 to 28 teeth.  Having the 28 is very nice for the very steep
hills one has to climb where I ride.  The 13 is a must on the other side of the
hill.  You have to have a lot of cogs inbetween to have decent gearing steps.
I would reccomend an ultra to anyone who is serious about riding and keeping
his bicycle, as well as himself, in good shape.