Osymetric Chainrings

[Kluckpang]

Does anyone know where I can buy Osymetric Chainrings? I want a 52/36 or a 53/38

 

[StinkFist]

Does anyone know where I can buy Osymetric Chainrings? I want a 52/36 or a 53/38

Available online - http://shop.osymetricusa.com

 

[Kluckpang]

Available online - http://shop.osymetricusa.com[/quote]

I can only find the outer ring there...

 

[PhitBoy]

Just out of curiosity, why do you want them?

Does anyone know where I can buy Osymetric Chainrings? I want a 52/36 or a 53/38

 

[StinkFist]

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

 

[Kluckpang]

Just out of curiosity, why do you want them?

I've tried them on a friends bike and it felt really good.

 

[Kluckpang]

Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

Thank you!

 

[winkybiker]

Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

 

[ray j willings]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

 

[winkybiker]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Here's the piece of crap I have to ride...

 

[StinkFist]

Very nice!!

Understated, very stealthy, yet quality throughout.

Is the Seat Post "3T" as well?

Do you mind if I offer you some excellent free advice?

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Here's the piece of crap I have to ride...

I've been waiting for him to ask you that

I never tire of seeing sweet Colnago's

 

[The Hegelian]

Delicious.

This place needs more bike porn.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Here's the piece of crap I have to ride...

Urrghh! Replace it with a master please!

 

[winkybiker]

Re:

Very nice!!

Understated, very stealthy, yet quality throughout.

Is the Seat Post "3T" as well?

Do you mind if I offer you some excellent free advice?

No, the seatpost is the Colnago-branded one that comes with the frame.

Advice is always welcome.

 

[StinkFist]

why not upgrade to some carbon pulleys. Save some weight and look cool.

 

[ray j willings]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Here's the piece of crap I have to ride...
,

I am glad you agree with me.
Saddle bag

 

[winkybiker]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Saddle bag

Yeah, I know, right? I'd be minutes faster with my spares dragging my jersey pockets down over my ass. And I love fishing for gels amongst tubes and tyre levers. I'll take it straight off on your advice.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Saddle bag

Yeah, I know, right? I'd be minutes faster with my spares dragging my jersey pockets down over my ass. And I love fishing for gels amongst tubes and tyre levers. I'll take it straight off on your advice.

What? You dont have a service car following you on rides...... lovely bike.

 

[ray j willings]

Re: Re:

If you "drill down" on that site, you will find inner rings.....only in 42 & 44 tooth though.

I imagine that because they are "skinny" on one axis, the minimum size in terms of teeth is larger for any given BCD than for a round chainring. Of course, if they allow you to push bigger gears, the comparison by teeth alone might not be valid.

But for me, the extreme ugliness disqualifies them from further consideration, regardless of functional improvements. I would hate my bike if I put these on.

instead of words just post a photo of your bike "heavy carthorse machine " in every thread with the words perfect.

To the OP ....go for it.

Saddle bag [/quote]

Yeah, I know, right? I'd be minutes faster with my spares dragging my jersey pockets down over my ass. And I love fishing for gels amongst tubes and tyre levers. I'll take it straight off on your advice.[/quote]

1st ,,I never called your bike a piece of Crap ,,those are your words , check the posts
I said your bike is a" heavy carthorse" ,which it is compared to my bikes and that's a fact. If you take a fact as an insult then that's your problem.

2nd. I carry a little pouch/bag. It has a spare tube "50grms" also some sticky patches a tiny mini pump and plastic levers [2] small hex key and latex gloves. The pouch/bag fits into one jersey pocket easy.
I then have other pockets free if needed for whatever purpose, in your case gels.

Its all very very light and certainly not dragging my jersey down over my arse.

Your bike is very nice not but not my cup of tea.