Mild Grind at the Highest Gear
 

Can anyone remind me how I would adjust this? I have looked at the park tool video but I really don't think I need a complete top down adjustment of the rear derailleur. I'm guessing one of the screws near the crank will fix it. Which one would it be?

Or should I try turning the barrel adjuster a quarter turn

Where is the sound coming from? Is it chain rub on the front cranks or does it come from the rear derailleur?
To avoid any assumptions, are you calling the highest gear the largest or smallest cog?

Screws at the crank adjust travel on the front derailleur so won't help if the sound is coming form the rear.

You clearly don't get it. Before doing anything, you need to identify the problem.

Is the chain rubbing on the front derailleur cage, or grinding on the high gear sprocket.

Assuming it's the RD you need to understand how that works. The cable controls the RD trim on all sprockets EXCEPT high gear where the RD is resting against the high gear limit. So fooling with the barrel adjust will mess up trim on all the sprockets without solving your issue.

FWIW this is why I hate "paint by numbers" tutorials which encourage people to work on stuff without teaching basic concepts first.

Definitely begin with your educated guess. You can move any screw in or out, just remember where you started if the result doesn't suit you. Barrel adjusters can be fooled with in the same manner. Your bike may have more than one to turn. :thumb:

I was in a hurry when I posted so maybe I can be clearer. When I am in the highest gear (largest cog in the front and smallest cog in the back), I hear a grinding. Having watched the videos it seems like maybe the barrel adjuster in the RD would help. However it also seems like the H screw could also help this problem as it seems to control how far over toward the frame the RD will travel. I guess it would also help if I had a bike stand. I really need to go ahead and get one since futzing with bikes seems to be my new hobby.

The fact that you're still undecided about which to adjust shows that you clearly haven't grasped key knowledge on the subject. Please reread my earlier post (#3) as often as necessary until you truly UNDERSTAND the functional difference between the barrel (trim) adjuster and the limit screws (both high and low).

Until you actually know what you're doing, you're equally likely to make things worse rather than better.

Sorry to sound harsh, but I'm trying to move you from someone who fiddles blindly, to one who can make adjustments to a purpose.
‐--------------
All the above not withstanding, you may not actually need or be able to adjust anything to solve the grinding in high. Follow the link to an explanation of chordal action, which causes derailleur bikes to feel like grinding on small sprockets.

In case the link fails because of a bias to HTTPS, you can copy and paste this into your browser ------ chain-guide chordal action ------ and scroll to the "Chain Guide" site, disregard the unsecure site warning if you get one, and go to the http version. It's an old site, no longer maintained, but is safe to view in HTTP.

It's a PIA method but BF tries hard to keep us safe.

Chordal action would have been my guess

The problem is that it can be hard to convince folks not to do anything.

That was my first guess.

The TLS on that site is not correct and it might not let you see the page. The http link version (that should work, perhaps with a warning about an "unsafe connection":
2.2.1 Chordal Action

My 2c when it comes to tutorials: :)

1)
Problems preventing you from EVER tuning your derailleurs properly (i.e. if all else fails :) ):

Problems preventing you from EVER tuning your derailleurs properly

2)
Bicycle derailleur tuning academy - the most pretentious sounding title of the year: :)

Relja

Since fixed. FWIW it's a very old site and apparently has never been upgraded to HTTPS.
Interestingly, there seems to be some sort of autocorrect at BF. Even after I correct the link to HTTP and it works, after a while it reverts to HTTPS and doesn't.

Yes, the "https-everything" craze was pushed strongly by Google since about a decade ago, even when it makes no sense whatsoever in any remotely reasonable practical scenario (it makes sense for banks and similar).
Browsers have started "pushing" it too, years ago, firing warnings when you try to connect using the non-encrypted protocol.

And yes, it is the forum's auto-correct.
I had copy/pasted the link, unedited. And it looks differently now in the post. :(

Will try again, without using the add-link forum option:
2.2.1 Chordal Action

Edit: Failed, again.
It may be the "necessary evil" because without such "HTTPS overwrites" forum readers might have their browsers "scream" at them about the "unsafe content" when viewing the forum.
Nonsense, but that's probably the best we can do now, as a species. :)

Relja

Tried just about everything, but we seem to live in an over protective world.

Tomorrow, I'll figure a way to point folks to the link in a way that only a human can recognize. Until then, folks can search chordal action
then scroll down to find chain guide.... and click on that, and if necessary accept going to the http site.

Edit. I think I got it. Hopefully I've outsmarted the computer.

EDIT/update, no, this still fails too. :(
What seems to be working (for me, for now) is this:

• Copy/paste the link
• Select the link's text
• Press CTRL + K
• Paste the full link in the "URL" section (and click OK, of course).

That still makes the forum auto-edit the link text, but it seems to preserve the link (as non-https).

For places like forums where users can post stuff on their own, auto-https rewrite is probably needed to prevent the browsers from displaying any warnings.

A Solomon's solution I made (not claiming to be the brightest guy in the room, and this was just the first idea that came to mind):
bike.bikegremlin.com/bikeforums/

Automating that would beat its purpose, and I suppose it won't get too much use anyway.

Let's give it a try:
https://bike.bikegremlin.com/bikeforums/#1

Edit 2:
That seems to work.
My initial idea was to make permanent (301) redirects, but that comes with its own can of worms down the road (IMO, based on my experience so far).

Relja

https default is a good thing. Even sites that don’t have sensitive content sometimes have logins via the same domain and your browser will happily send all those cookies via whatever network you happen to be on, not caring if there’s anyone else listening.

Thanks for highlighting the TLS problem, I assumed the site was knackered with Safari’s default “computer says no” error.

Figured it wouldn't take long for the dick squad to show up.

WOw you really spent a lot of time to be a condescending jerk. So sad.
​​Will just add you to the ignore list. Nice thing, that.

For what it’s worth, IMO you are blocking one of the most valued BF members/contributors.

(Who is far from the rudest folks I’ve seen on the forum. :). )

Of course, it’s your choice and personal preference, not my call - I just thought it’s good and fair to add this info in case it might help you decide (one way or another).

Relja

I agree he's not the rudest, which says a lot. Did you read the post? How is that not condescending? Fortunately there are lots of knowledgeable people on here who are not a-holes. If I'm asking such a stupid question then it should be easy to find plenty of polite people to answer it. But I appreciate the input. Happy Holidays

Fine by me.

I don't mind HTTPS default. I even have my browser set to warn of (not block) any non secure sites, so I know and can decide about any potential risks.

My issue is with BF's filter. When posting a link BF offers the option of HTTP or other protocols which may be applicable. However, after the post is up a short while, it automatically changes to HTTPS.

This is unnecessarily frustrating to folks who are left wondering why their link doesn't work anymore, even though they took a moment to test it immediately after posting. This "gotcha" fooled both the Gremlin and I even as we tried various alternate ways to point to the site.

IMO. If you're going to block all HTTP sites, which is fair enough, don't offer the protocol option.

He's not wrong though.

That just put you on mine.
I invite others to add you to theirs.

Folks please don't defend me or make this about choosing sides.

I am who I am and the OP is who he is. We simply see the world differently, and, like oil and water, will never mix well.

Hopefully the OP will solve his issue despite my help.

Maybe we should move this discussion to the Forum Suggestions & User Assistance section (the link should lead to the thread I opened there for this topic).

Relja

Such language on Christmas! Let's have another splash of Jack in the eggnog. :roflmao: