jim beam wrote:
> James Annan wrote:
> > jim beam wrote:
> >
> >
> >> "interference between materials"??? "dead end"? so how come /i/ am
> >> the poor dolt that had to point out that axle faces are serrated and
> >> that subsequent indentation significantly increases retention force?
> >> i can't see you bothering to point out such trivial details tim.
> >>
> >
> > All I need to do is point to the pictures that jim beam so kindly
> > provided:
> >
> > http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/nishiki_before.jpeg
> > http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/nishiki_indent.jpeg
> >
> > Of course, a particularly dull-witted person might not wonder why it is
> > that someone (who?) bothered to scrape the paint off the dropout of an
> > old fork that happened to be lying around, nor what the picture might
> > have looked like had the fork end been left normally painted. But I
> > think most people reading this thread will have got the message clearly
> > enough.
>
> eh? that's spectacular b.s. that is a fork i happened to have laying
> about. the paint was already off. the snide implication that i somehow
> "prepared" it to alter the result is as bogus as it is desperate. it
> also shows incredible ignorance if you think a simple paint layer offers
> any significant resistance to steel indentors.
Yes, it does. I did the experiments, I reported the results. Google
for them if you can't remember.
> i can see b.s. may be the only way you could have any come-back on the
> evidence annan, but resorting to such a pathetic diversion is below even
> you. integrity and credibility go hand in hand, in case you never
> learned it before. [why did you leave scotland again?]
>
> >
> > Of course, for those who are still unconvinced, there is also Marvin's
> > comment posted earlier:
> >
> > "Every new bike I assembled today, I checked before and after on the
> > indentations. All of them embossed the paint to a fairly minor degree
> > with a single clamping, repeated clampings on one test subject made
> > them a little more obvious. None of them were to the same level as jim
> > beam's example above."
> >
> >
> > James
>
> straw clutch city. that was from a single thumb-pressure application.
> what now - suggest i have some kind of digital deformity and super-human
> strength so the result can be "ignored"? do the math on the indentation
> force. no, wait, /google/ for the math on the indentation force - it's
> been done for you. but i warn you, you'll be straying into retention
> force territory annan - you probably won't want to go there.
Oh, pull your head out of your ****, Beam. As I said at the time
(google for the post if you want), that was repeated on several
different bikes, one of which I checked repeatedly to see if this
embossing got more obvious over time. I don't think I reported it, but
I took one skewer and ramped it as tight as my padded hands could cope
with (far tighter than any recommendation) - still didn't emboss
through the virgin paint to the metal. These aren't exactly super
thick tough paint jobs we're talking about here, either.
So my actual, experimental evidence suggests that on new bikes you
don't have a metal to metal interface no matter what you do to the QR.
This substantially lowers the required pullout force.
Now if you've got a larger sample size, I'd love to hear it. Until
then I think I'm one of the only people who's even attempted actual,
unbiased experiments on this topic - ironically enough, something I
recall Beam complaining loudly about the lack of. Funny how he
complains even louder when things don't go his way.