French bike - ream the steerer or sand the stem?



Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> Hank Wirtz wrote:

Just wondering...Who won the lawsuit?

EJ in NJ
>
>>Any Francophiles out there have advice?
>>
>>I want to put a taller stem (Nitto Technomic) on my old Peugeot, and I'm
>>wondering which is preferable: having the steerer tube reamed out from
>>22.0mm to 22.2, or sand the stem down?

>
>
> Don't do it! I was involved in a lawsuit about a steerer that was
> reamed that .2mm, and then broke. Live with the fit. Perhaps have a
> frame maker like mark Nobilette make you a custom stem, of steel, with
> a 22mm quill.
>
>
>>The advantage of reaming is that I could swap stems later without having to
>>deal with it ever again. The stem would still be usable on an English-
>>thread bike, too. The downside is that the steerer tube is already thinner
>>than an English one (1.5mm walls, as opposed to 1.6mm) and reaming would
>>take it down to 1.4mm walls. Would that be unsafe?
>>
>>The advantage of sanding the stem is that I have much more material to work
>>with, and it should be more sound structurally.
>>
>>Anybody done this and have an opinion? TIA-
>>
>>-Hank

>
>
 
E Willson wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> > Hank Wirtz wrote:

> Just wondering...Who won the lawsuit?


The rider that was injured, the loser was the bike shop that did the
reaming...about 15 years ago.
 
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > There are probably a lot of 22.0mm French stems that have done decades
> > of service in 22.2mm ISO steerers without the owners even being aware
> > they have the wrong size in there.

>
> Read the post...22mm fork, 22.2 quill stem, not the other way around.


My point was that the fit didn't have to be all that precise, and
therefore he could sand the quill without worry.

> Best advice is from Phil...new fork, of 22.2, then any stem, including
> threadless.


The only issue there is that a new fork will look wrong on an old bike,
cost $$$, or both.

Chalo Colina
 
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> E Willson wrote:
> > Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> > > Hank Wirtz wrote:

> > Just wondering...Who won the lawsuit?

>
> The rider that was injured, the loser was the bike shop that

did the
> reaming...about 15 years ago.


Interesting. And we know that, 15 years later, it was the
reaming as opposed to over-insertion of the quill, butt quality,
overheating, etc., etc., that caused the failure? I reamed the
steerer on my PX-10 about a million years ago and lived to tell
about it. I was young and don't know if it was the right thing
to do, but even then I would have needed something more than "a
person reamed his steerer 15 years ago and it broke" to form an
opinion. My last steel racing frame broke three times in a 25
year period Just Riding Along.

I have sanded quills to fit into a French steerer, and it sucks
and mars the stem. Personally, I would dump the entire bike and
go buy something with standard dimensions. Anything to avoid the
non-standard BB, derailleur hanger thread, tube diameter,
seatpost size and all the fussy stuff that came original on my
'69 PX-10. I hated French bikes. Sorry Sheldon. -- Jay Beattie.
 
Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 23:46:07 -0500, Hank Wirtz
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>It's a PX-10 and I'm about to have it repainted (Andrew Muzi sold me
>>old decals). I've already bought a new A-9 in French threading from
>>Harris, but I'm starting to wonder if the new steerer might be the
>>better option.
>>
>>Thanks all for the suggestions (and sorry for those who I sniped at
>>who said a stem shouldn't be sanded - I think you're wrong, but hey -
>>I asked).

>
> Hank:
>
> If it was me, I'd use a more vintage headset, but that's another
> matter. Sounds like you are going "modern" with the bike.
>


I am - sorta. It's a '75 PX10 that I got in '86 or so. My mom had bought
it in '84 to try racing, but it was WAY too big for her (56cm, she's
5'5"), so she gave it to me (I was 13). I repainted it in '88 to match
the '87 PX10 (the last year they made it, but that wasn't a REAL
PX10,since it was Columbus SLX and not 531) - light blue, with white,
yellow & orange decals. I also had the full set of braze-ons added.
This last year, I had the rear triangle spread to 130mm, had some new
wheels built and hung 9-speed Veloce on it (hubs, cassette, derailleurs
& Ergos). I got some Phil Wood retainer rings and a UN-72 BB and put on
a Sugino XD triple. For brakes, I got some Tektro 521AGs. I'd thought
about Veloces with drop bolts, but I wanted 28mm tires with fenders, so
I opted for a long reach brake. Took the polish wheel on my Dremel and
removed the Tektro logo.

So with mostly new parts, my idea was to get the frame looking vintage
again, I got the original decals from Andrew Muzi at Yellow Jersey, and
I'm going to get it repainted in the metallic blue with gold lug edging
that was on most of the UO8s (but some PX10s, too - Sheldon has one).

So, yeah, I'm in WAY past what a house-brand aluminum bike with 105 from
NashPerGo would run me, but I test rode some bikes at the bike show this
last spring, and I didn't like the feel of any of them. Wheelbase was
too short, steering was too slow, and they just felt kind of dead. Even
though some of them weighed 6 or 7 pounds less than my PX10. I like my
75 deg head tube. I like my fender and tire clearance. I like that the
thing is pretty close to an heirloom in my family.

Some people ask me why I'm not keeping it with classic parts. The answer
is simple: I like to ride the thing, and most of the new parts work
better than the old ones. Just not the frame. The best compliment you
can pay an old bike is to ride it, and that's why I'm doing the Retro-
Modern thing with my PX10.

"Does anybody have any questions?"

-Hank
 
Hank Wirtz wrote:

>
> It's a PX-10 and I'm about to have it repainted (Andrew Muzi sold me old
> decals). I've already bought a new A-9 in French threading from Harris, but
> I'm starting to wonder if the new steerer might be the better option.
>
> Thanks all for the suggestions (and sorry for those who I sniped at who
> said a stem shouldn't be sanded - I think you're wrong, but hey - I asked).
>
> -HW


FYI, I'm a framebuilder, Hank. You will probably have stack height
problems with an A9 headset. I'd check it first. But if you're going
through Andrew you're in good hands.
Phil Brown
 
"philcycles" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> Hank Wirtz wrote:
>
>>
>> It's a PX-10 and I'm about to have it repainted (Andrew Muzi sold me
>> old decals). I've already bought a new A-9 in French threading from
>> Harris, but I'm starting to wonder if the new steerer might be the
>> better option.
>>
>> Thanks all for the suggestions (and sorry for those who I sniped at
>> who said a stem shouldn't be sanded - I think you're wrong, but hey -
>> I asked).
>>
>> -HW

>
> FYI, I'm a framebuilder, Hank. You will probably have stack height
> problems with an A9 headset. I'd check it first. But if you're going
> through Andrew you're in good hands.
> Phil Brown
>
>


I did, and I'm OK. The old Stronglight Competition was pretty tall to begin
with, and I now have an extra 3mm spacer in the place of the centerpull
cable hanger I'm no longer using.

And I only bought the decals from Andrew. He's in Wisconsin and I'm in
Washington. I'm actually talking with Dan Towle at R&E Cycles in Seattle,
who Andrew recommended. I sent him an email today to ask about the steerer
tube replacement, so I may wind up throwing that A-9 up on ebay.
 
>On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 23:46:07 -0500, Hank Wirtz
><[email protected]> wrote:


>>It's a PX-10 and I'm about to have it repainted (Andrew Muzi sold me old
>>decals). I've already bought a new A-9 in French threading from Harris, but
>>I'm starting to wonder if the new steerer might be the better option.
>>
>>Thanks all for the suggestions (and sorry for those who I sniped at who
>>said a stem shouldn't be sanded - I think you're wrong, but hey - I asked).


If you want, get out some oven cleaner and strip the stem entirely.
it will then be like a TRUE french stem, none of my atax / ava stems
are anodized. then get out the 2000 grit and rubbing compound and
polish that sucker to a holographic mirror shine. nothing is more
beautiful than a piece of aluminum polished in this way ...

- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA
 
On 3 Oct 2005 07:57:41 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>E Willson wrote:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>> > Hank Wirtz wrote:

>> Just wondering...Who won the lawsuit?

>
>The rider that was injured, the loser was the bike shop that did the
>reaming...about 15 years ago.


I take it that the rider did not go to this bike shop and say in so many
words "I want this steerer reamed", then?

Jasper
 
Chalo wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> >
> > Chalo wrote:
> > >
> > > There are probably a lot of 22.0mm French stems that have done decades
> > > of service in 22.2mm ISO steerers without the owners even being aware
> > > they have the wrong size in there.

> >
> > Read the post...22mm fork, 22.2 quill stem, not the other way around.

>
> My point was that the fit didn't have to be all that precise, and
> therefore he could sand the quill without worry.


Sure, make that thin-ish quill thinner, no problem breaking a quill. Or
maybe just get the quill started and hammer the thing in with a big
mallet.....
>
> > Best advice is from Phil...new fork, of 22.2, then any stem, including
> > threadless.

>
> The only issue there is that a new fork will look wrong on an old bike,
> cost $$$, or both.
>
> Chalo Colina
 
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > My point was that the fit didn't have to be all that precise, and
> > therefore he could sand the quill without worry.

>
> Sure, make that thin-ish quill thinner, no problem breaking a quill. Or
> maybe just get the quill started and hammer the thing in with a big
> mallet.....


So let me get this straight... you have no problem giving up 6.4mm on
the stem interface diameter (28.6 > 22.2), but you fret over that last
0.2mm?

Remember that quill stems, being a poor structural design to begin
with, are always quite thick-walled. And most of them have loose
tolerances on top of that. It all works out because the thin-walled,
threaded steerer will almost invariably break first.

Chalo Colina
 
"Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>>
>> Chalo wrote:
>> >
>> > My point was that the fit didn't have to be all that precise, and
>> > therefore he could sand the quill without worry.

>>
>> Sure, make that thin-ish quill thinner, no problem breaking a quill. Or
>> maybe just get the quill started and hammer the thing in with a big
>> mallet.....

>
> So let me get this straight... you have no problem giving up 6.4mm on
> the stem interface diameter (28.6 > 22.2), but you fret over that last
> 0.2mm?
>
> Remember that quill stems, being a poor structural design to begin
> with, are always quite thick-walled. And most of them have loose
> tolerances on top of that. It all works out because the thin-walled,
> threaded steerer will almost invariably break first.
>
> Chalo Colina


I agree with you in principle that the last .2mm doesn't make a difference.
However, my only experience with a vintage stem was not good. My first road
bike was something that I found in my parent's garage, an Austrian? bike
from around 1970 or thereabouts with the plastic Simplex derailleurs. I
rode it from jr. high through the end of high school, and it served as the
commute bike after I got nicer bikes midway through high school. I fixed
it up as well as I could without spending any money (e.g. after the front
derailleur died, I shifted down by kicking the chain over and shifted up by
picking the chain up with my fingers). When I finally pulled the stem all
the way out after riding it for several years, I discovered that the quill
was broken all the way through. I had adjusted the height before, but that
was the first time I had pulled it out. The quill was actually in two
pieces, only held together by the wedge bolt. I don't know the history of
bike, so I don't know how it broke. I just shoved it back in deeper and
kept it in use because there was a decent length of the upper quill intact.

By the way the stem I had looked just like the one on this PX-10:
http://www.classicrendezvous.com/France/Peugeot/Peug_63PX10.htm
 
I think the end of the quill stem was long overdue for more than
one design failing.

Most recent stems have used a diagonal wedge instead of the cone
expander in their bottom end. Although at first this looks more
stable, it is not. My experience with the diagonal sliced wedge is
that lateral flex from the standing position unscrews the stem bolt.
The slant wedge does not restrain small rotations and from this I had
several loose stem occurrences, one so much so that the bars could
readily be pushed side to side while riding no-hands.

Since the stem is not a press fit in the steer tube, it has clearance
to elastically wobble radially in the top of the steertube. This
gives a flexible feel to the bars especially when standing and
coincidentally is the death of aluminum stems in wet weather because
water gets pumped into the interface. This destroys aluminum stems
when they are subject to the emulsion that develops in the contact
zone and oxidizes to become solidly expanded into the steertube. If
the stem is steel, it is still best to used a conical expander type.
Meanwhile, Aluminum stems either loosen their bolt or oxidize solid
depending on how forceful the rider uses the bars.

I for one, was made aware of my threadless steertube often for at
least a half year after installing it by the far grater rigidity of
the bars after no longer being mounted on a wimpy quill stem whose
neck twisted and its base wobbled in the steertube.

Jobst Brandt
 
[email protected] wrote in news:AeG0f.1234$Aw.22761
@typhoon.sonic.net:

> I think the end of the quill stem was long overdue for more than
> one design failing.
>

<SNIP>
>
> I for one, was made aware of my threadless steertube often for at
> least a half year after installing it by the far grater rigidity of
> the bars after no longer being mounted on a wimpy quill stem whose
> neck twisted and its base wobbled in the steertube.
>
> Jobst Brandt
>


Well, then you may be glad to hear that my current thinking is to get the
steerer tube replaced, and to go threadless. I'm planning on either a
Chorus or a Stronglight A9 threadless headset, and the Rivendell
lugged/fillet brazed 853 stem.
 
Chalo wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> >
> > Chalo wrote:
> > >
> > > My point was that the fit didn't have to be all that precise, and
> > > therefore he could sand the quill without worry.

> >
> > Sure, make that thin-ish quill thinner, no problem breaking a quill. Or
> > maybe just get the quill started and hammer the thing in with a big
> > mallet.....

>
> So let me get this straight... you have no problem giving up 6.4mm on
> the stem interface diameter (28.6 > 22.2), but you fret over that last
> 0.2mm?
>
> Remember that quill stems, being a poor structural design to begin
> with, are always quite thick-walled. And most of them have loose
> tolerances on top of that. It all works out because the thin-walled,
> threaded steerer will almost invariably break first.
>
> Chalo Colina


For a guy that has broken lots of stuff, I'm surprised you think it's
OK to make the quill shaft thinner. I would not do in my shop. I would
replace the fork, the best option, or find a 22mm quill stem for the
22mm fork.
 

Similar threads

B
Replies
18
Views
622
B