MAB power flick

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:54 pm

My mate came to work today to pick up an office chair and had his teeny camera with him so he took a few frames after i was done changing hte drivetrain....17/40 now and it feels better than 16/39....but 17/41 would probably be my cup of tea!

The vid:
MAB Power on the trix

twolfe · Post by **twolfe** » Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:15 pm

17/40 is actually a higher ratio than 16/39, therefore it would feel more sluggish of the bottom end.However if you were after more top end speed,you may have gained an extra few kmh.

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:15 am

twolfe wrote:17/40 is actually a higher ratio than 16/39, therefore it would feel more sluggish of the bottom end.However if you were after more top end speed,you may have gained an extra few kmh.

Nah, before gear one was kinda useless....had to take all roundabouts on second. Now i can use gear 1 again.
...but as said, 41 in rear would be the shit!
....and shorter between 1-2....one gear between 3-4 and taller between 4-5.....then it would be just GREAT!

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:15 am

twolfe wrote:17/40 is actually a higher ratio than 16/39, therefore it would feel more sluggish of the bottom end.However if you were after more top end speed,you may have gained an extra few kmh.

....and yeah, of cource i know itÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´s a higher ratio....that was kinda the thing i was after!

brush · Post by **brush** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:24 am

17/43 mate, is perfect.

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:33 am

brush wrote:17/43 mate, is perfect.

Nah, got 16/39 before and thatÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´s kinda same....almost....

twolfe · Post by **twolfe** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:20 pm

16/39 and 17/43 aren't the same... almost. What are you on Killer ?, cause I want some.

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:47 am

twolfe wrote:16/39 and 17/43 aren't the same... almost. What are you on Killer ?, cause I want some.

It is according to the famous excel sheet

Quan-Time · Post by **Quan-Time** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:53 pm

17:43 here..

and 16:39 ISNT the same... they are however VERY close for arguement sake..

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:45 am

Quan-Time wrote:17:43 here..

and 16:39 ISNT the same... they are however VERY close for arguement sake..

Yep, thatÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´s why i said ALMOST