Seven Cycles "Sounds Cheap"Touring Frame



T

Tim McNamara

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote:

> [email protected] wrote:
> > ... Just like tig-welded frames and cartridge bottom brackets,
> > threadless headsets and stems are intended to streamline the
> > bicycle manufacturing process. They are of dubious benefit, at
> > best, to the rider.

>
> If a TIG-welded frame is as light as or lighter than a lugged and
> brazed frame, has similar durability, and costs less, then the
> TIG-welding process is of benefit to the consumer who does not wish
> to spend money on what has become a cosmetic feature.


TIG welded joints are less durable than either lugged or fillet brazed
joints, as tested to fatigue failure. I remember reading an article
about that. The TIG joints failed much quicker than the others, and the
lugged joint lasted the longest. IIRC the TIG joint was done at
Serotta, the fillet brazed joint was done by tom Ritchey, and I can't
recall who did the lugged joint.

However, the question is really whether the joint is durable enough. If
it holds up under daily use for 40 years, that's good enough. And TIG
joints, unless done ineptly, will do that. My TIG welded bike, a Gunnar
Crosshairs, has held up fine under 'cross racing, touring the Alps and a
bunch of brevets and training rides over 7 years. Pretty hard to
complain about that! There are a lot of welded frames out there still
in service after decades from the BMA/6 manufacturers (Huffy, Murray et
al).

So mechanically TIG is fine. It's just boring and ugly IMHO. Someone
else might think differently. I like a good fillet, myself.
 
R Brickston wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2006 06:18:28 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> >And let's be clear: the impetus behind the threadless headset had
> >nothing to do with eliminating the somewhat rare problem of seized
> >stems and everything to do with streamlining the bicycle manufacturing
> >process.

>
> I'm swapping some handlebars around later today. Guess which system is
> going to be a huge PIA and which one will consist of R&R of four
> bolts.


Stems that allow easy removal/replacement of the bars pre-date
threadless headsets and stems. One example is the Cinelli Oyster. And
removable face plate quill stems are still available if you want one.
 
R

R Brickston

Guest
On 1 Sep 2006 08:20:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>R Brickston wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2006 06:18:28 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>> >And let's be clear: the impetus behind the threadless headset had
>> >nothing to do with eliminating the somewhat rare problem of seized
>> >stems and everything to do with streamlining the bicycle manufacturing
>> >process.

>>
>> I'm swapping some handlebars around later today. Guess which system is
>> going to be a huge PIA and which one will consist of R&R of four
>> bolts.

>
>Stems that allow easy removal/replacement of the bars pre-date
>threadless headsets and stems. One example is the Cinelli Oyster. And
>removable face plate quill stems are still available if you want one.


That's not going to help me today. Of course, the one with the quill
is a recent tape rewrap.
 
R

R Brickston

Guest
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 10:09:35 -0500, Tim McNamara
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> > >> Nice bike and they'll do it threadless.
>> > >
>> > >Yeah, that way you get to use an ugly, hard-to-adjust stem.
>> >
>> > Beauty is subjective. If the thing is fitted properly in the first
>> > place, adjusting should be a rare event. And, in your mind, what is
>> > so difficult about loosening a stem, lifting off and restacking
>> > some spacers? Does that sound like a half-hour job to you? Or do I
>> > have to drop it off at the tech for two weeks while he calls in a
>> > specialist?

>
>You can't just stick 2 cm of spacers under the stem, unfortunately,
>because of the design of threadless systems.


Depends where the stem was located on the steerer.

> Say you hurt your back and
>have to raise the bars to keep riding- my experience this year as like
>many people over 40 I am developing lumbar disk problems. You either
>have to buy a new fugly stem or a new fork plus some spacers, unless you
>were riding around with a few cm of steerer sticking up out of your stem
>(there's a nice look).


Beauty is subjective. On a tourer, beauty is not my primary objective,
particularly with a big ugly bag hanging of the front of the bars. I
just got a new fork for a another 520 I'm building out of a frame
someone gifted, I think I'll run the steerer maybe an extra 6cm higher
and maybe clamp on a light bar.

>Or you can buy an adjustable angle stem with a
>hinge and bolts to loosen up during a ride.


There's a solution.

>I saw a bunch of those on
>bikes at REI last week. On my quill stem bikes, one quick adjustment
>with a 6 mm allen wrench to raise the bars and ease my back, and I was
>on my way. Took about 60 seconds.


You'd have the same unsolved problem if your quill was already at it's
highest adjustment. 60 Seconds vs. what? 6 minutes? Or 60 seconds with
the adjustable angle stem. BFD.

>
>I know a lot of people like threadless stems because they are
>lighter/stiffer/newer/the cool standard. Many see them as the superior
>technology and have rational reasons for that.


>I think they suck.


Subjective.

>The
>stems are generally ugly as hell.


Subjective

>And I think that the headset preload
>and the clamping of the fork should be separated rather than dependent
>on the same couple of bolts.


Nonsense.

>I understand the mechanical arguments put forth by Jobst and others in
>favor of threadless stems. I wouldn't have as much complaint about a
>fork that uses a threaded headset and a stem that clamps to the steerer
>tube. Interestingly enough, threadless type stems were all the rage in
>France 50 years ago on high-end bikes and were abandoned as a less
>suitable technology because of the lack of easy adjustability to fit the
>rider.
>
>> I have one bike with a quill stem, and must remember to regularly
>> remove and grease, lest it seize on me.

>
>I have seven bikes with quill stems and one bike with a threadless stem.
>In 30+ years of being a bikie I've never had a quill stem seize into the
>steerer. Every few years when I remove them to repack the headset they
>just slide right on out. Waterproof marine grease is what I use on the
>quill, on the slug, on the bolt threads, and it doesn't need to be
>reapplied after the first assembly, unless I wipe it off.
 
J

Jay Beattie

Guest
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > R Brickston <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On 31 Aug 2006 15:43:24 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >R Brickston wrote:
> > > >> On 31 Aug 2006 11:45:32 -0700, "Matt"
> > > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >R Brickston wrote:
> > > >> >> ------------ "My local LBS is a dealer and can order a custom
> > > >> >> touring geometry...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> "I've got all the parts and the built to order frameset is
> > > >> >> $1600."
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> I called and asked if the Axiom Steel could be built with
> > > >> >> true touring geometry for the $1,595.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >R., Personally, and YMMV, $1600 seems reasonable. But it sounds
> > > >> >to me like the Waterford RST-14 is already exactly what you are
> > > >> >looking for, and at pretty much the same price.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Just a thought.
> > > >>
> > > >> Nice bike and they'll do it threadless.
> > > >
> > > >Yeah, that way you get to use an ugly, hard-to-adjust stem.
> > >
> > > Beauty is subjective. If the thing is fitted properly in the first
> > > place, adjusting should be a rare event. And, in your mind, what is
> > > so difficult about loosening a stem, lifting off and restacking
> > > some spacers? Does that sound like a half-hour job to you? Or do I
> > > have to drop it off at the tech for two weeks while he calls in a
> > > specialist?

>
> You can't just stick 2 cm of spacers under the stem, unfortunately,
> because of the design of threadless systems. Say you hurt your back and
> have to raise the bars to keep riding- my experience this year as like
> many people over 40 I am developing lumbar disk problems. You either
> have to buy a new fugly stem or a new fork plus some spacers, unless you
> were riding around with a few cm of steerer sticking up out of your stem
> (there's a nice look). Or you can buy an adjustable angle stem with a
> hinge and bolts to loosen up during a ride. I saw a bunch of those on
> bikes at REI last week. On my quill stem bikes, one quick adjustment
> with a 6 mm allen wrench to raise the bars and ease my back, and I was
> on my way. Took about 60 seconds.
>
> I know a lot of people like threadless stems because they are
> lighter/stiffer/newer/the cool standard. Many see them as the superior
> technology and have rational reasons for that. I think they suck. The
> stems are generally ugly as hell. And I think that the headset preload
> and the clamping of the fork should be separated rather than dependent
> on the same couple of bolts.
>
> I understand the mechanical arguments put forth by Jobst and others in
> favor of threadless stems. I wouldn't have as much complaint about a
> fork that uses a threaded headset and a stem that clamps to the steerer
> tube. Interestingly enough, threadless type stems were all the rage in
> France 50 years ago on high-end bikes and were abandoned as a less
> suitable technology because of the lack of easy adjustability to fit the
> rider.
>
> > I have one bike with a quill stem, and must remember to regularly
> > remove and grease, lest it seize on me.

>
> I have seven bikes with quill stems and one bike with a threadless stem.
> In 30+ years of being a bikie I've never had a quill stem seize into the
> steerer. Every few years when I remove them to repack the headset they
> just slide right on out. Waterproof marine grease is what I use on the
> quill, on the slug, on the bolt threads, and it doesn't need to be
> reapplied after the first assembly, unless I wipe it off.


It also depends on what you call "seizure." I live in a wet
environment, and I would have to do routine maintenance on a weekly
basis to keep stems from sticking -- but they never stick that badly.
Only a few times have I had real stickers.

Nonetheless, I like threadless because it gives me more adjustability.
With my old Cinelli stems, I was already within a few mm of the minimum
insertion, so there was not much adjustability. With threadless, you
can flop them over and swap spacers, etc. There is also a better
selection in terms of price, reach and angle. Head set adjustment is a
breeze on threadless, although I hate slamming-in star nuts. That is a
PIA.

As a practical matter, the quill stem market is disappearing, so you
better like what you have on your bikes now. I think the market is
practically gone if you have an old French bike. You better be
prepared to spend the time sanding quills. -- Jay Beattie.
 
R Brickston wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2006 08:20:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >R Brickston wrote:
> >> On 1 Sep 2006 06:18:28 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >And let's be clear: the impetus behind the threadless headset had
> >> >nothing to do with eliminating the somewhat rare problem of seized
> >> >stems and everything to do with streamlining the bicycle manufacturing
> >> >process.
> >>
> >> I'm swapping some handlebars around later today. Guess which system is
> >> going to be a huge PIA and which one will consist of R&R of four
> >> bolts.

> >
> >Stems that allow easy removal/replacement of the bars pre-date
> >threadless headsets and stems. One example is the Cinelli Oyster. And
> >removable face plate quill stems are still available if you want one.

>
> That's not going to help me today. Of course, the one with the quill
> is a recent tape rewrap.


The way you wrote your earlier comment (above), it sounded as if you
thought that removeable face stems were only available for threadless
systems. So now I'm wondering why you bothered to mention it at all??
The situation could easily have been reversed, you could have a
remavable face quill stem and a conventional threadless stem.
 
jens5 wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > R Brickston wrote:
> > > I hear a fully loaded Seven Cycles bike with all the uber components
> > > can run $7-,0000 $9,000. My local LBS is a dealer and can order a
> > > custom touring geometry off my measurements and a fitting on mock-up

>
> You can order a hand brazed, lugged Reynolds, 631,725 or 853 frame to
> fit you in your choice of 60 custom, lacquered paint colors with
> contrasting inserts and pinstriping, again with your choice of
> braze-on's from Mercian in Derby, England for less than $1600. That
> would include the shipping from England to the US!
>


IMO, Mercians are The Real Deal and a real deal. Good stuff.


> Cheers, Richard
> > >
> > > I've got all the parts and the built to order frameset is $1600. Seven
> > > won't ship it without their name/logo on it. Is this a decent buy or
> > > would it be like a Ralph Lauren Polo shirt; $5 for the shirt and $40
> > > extra for the embroidered horse/rider.

> >
> > $1600 is about what most of the bigger name TIG welded custom steel
> > frame makers charge in the US. Independent Fabrications is another.
> > If the bike suits you and you get comfort from having the local shop
> > measure you for the bike size, then go for it. If you are comfortable
> > taking your own measurements, and know what size bike you ride, then
> > you can buy a custom lugged or TIG steel frame/fork from England for
> > half the price, delivered. Bob Jackson and Mercian and Dave Yates are
> > a few names that come to mind.
 
R Brickston wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2006 18:15:01 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >R Brickston wrote:
> >> On 31 Aug 2006 15:43:24 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >R Brickston wrote:
> >> >> On 31 Aug 2006 11:45:32 -0700, "Matt" <[email protected]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >R Brickston wrote:
> >> >> >> ------------
> >> >> >> "My local LBS is a dealer and can order a custom touring geometry...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "I've got all the parts and the built to order frameset is $1600."
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I called and asked if the Axiom Steel could be built with true touring
> >> >> >> geometry for the $1,595.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >R.,
> >> >> >Personally, and YMMV, $1600 seems reasonable. But it sounds to me like
> >> >> >the Waterford RST-14 is already exactly what you are looking for, and
> >> >> >at pretty much the same price.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Just a thought.
> >> >>
> >> >> Nice bike and they'll do it threadless.
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, that way you get to use an ugly, hard-to-adjust stem.
> >>
> >> Beauty is subjective. If the thing is fitted properly in the first
> >> place, adjusting should be a rare event. And, in your mind, what is so
> >> difficult about loosening a stem, lifting off and restacking some
> >> spacers? Does that sound like a half-hour job to you? Or do I have to
> >> drop it off at the tech for two weeks while he calls in a specialist?

> >
> >However needlessly complex the fitting ritual may be, chances are very
> >good that you will want to fine tune the handlebar height when you
> >actually ride the bike for the first time.. With a quill stem, it's a
> >few turns (lefty-loosey/righty-tighty) of a hex key. With threadless,
> >it's much more complex, including re-adjusting the headset.

>
> I've got to with the quill. In my view the threadless adjustment is
> just not that big a deal, but that's just me. In fact, I rarely
> adjusted the quills in either of those bikes.
> >
> >Also, in the case of my touring bike, I find I like to re-adjust the
> >bar height depending on how the bike is being used. With a quill stem,
> >that takes about 30 seconds. It's much more cumbersome with a
> >threadless stem. So cumbersome that I likely wouldn't bother.

>
> It can't be anymore of a PIA then adjusting the brakes.
>


If your brakes are that hard to adjust, replace them with a better
design. I long ago dumped some ca. 1990 Shimano cantis because, IMO,
they were a PIA on a bike where I wanted to be able to quickly swap out
wheels with rims of differing width.


> >Just like tig-welded frames and cartridge bottom brackets, threadless
> >headsets and stems are intended to streamline the bicycle manufacturing
> >process. They are of dubious benefit, at best, to the rider.

>
> I understand your psychology, perhaps. You are an old world, handmade,
> detail to craftsmanship, kind of bike person. I can also see why you
> would lean towards that kind of frame builder. Not a bad thing,
> naturally.
>


Perhaps you do understand my "psychology". :)


> While the benefit maybe dubious, the more modern manufacturing methods
> and ideas I think are mostly benign if not some improvement in some
> areas. Shoot me at dawn, no blindfold and no cigarette, but
> personally, I like the looks of the threadless headset and those fancy
> lugs don't really do anything for me, at least visually.


Well, getting back to the topic of this thread, something that is less
expensive to produce ought to have a price which reflects that fact.
IMO, that's not the case with the TIG welded, steel frame from Seven. I
think they use alot of website hype to drive up the selling price. YMMV.
 
R

R Brickston

Guest
On 1 Sep 2006 10:35:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>R Brickston wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2006 08:20:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >R Brickston wrote:
>> >> On 1 Sep 2006 06:18:28 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >And let's be clear: the impetus behind the threadless headset had
>> >> >nothing to do with eliminating the somewhat rare problem of seized
>> >> >stems and everything to do with streamlining the bicycle manufacturing
>> >> >process.
>> >>
>> >> I'm swapping some handlebars around later today. Guess which system is
>> >> going to be a huge PIA and which one will consist of R&R of four
>> >> bolts.
>> >
>> >Stems that allow easy removal/replacement of the bars pre-date
>> >threadless headsets and stems. One example is the Cinelli Oyster. And
>> >removable face plate quill stems are still available if you want one.

>>
>> That's not going to help me today. Of course, the one with the quill
>> is a recent tape rewrap.

>
>The way you wrote your earlier comment (above), it sounded as if you
>thought that removeable face stems were only available for threadless
>systems. So now I'm wondering why you bothered to mention it at all??
>The situation could easily have been reversed, you could have a
>remavable face quill stem and a conventional threadless stem.


What do you think the percentages are of PIA quill stems and face
plate quill stems?
 
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > R Brickston <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On 31 Aug 2006 15:43:24 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >R Brickston wrote:
> > > >> On 31 Aug 2006 11:45:32 -0700, "Matt"
> > > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >R Brickston wrote:
> > > >> >> ------------ "My local LBS is a dealer and can order a custom
> > > >> >> touring geometry...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> "I've got all the parts and the built to order frameset is
> > > >> >> $1600."
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> I called and asked if the Axiom Steel could be built with
> > > >> >> true touring geometry for the $1,595.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >R., Personally, and YMMV, $1600 seems reasonable. But it sounds
> > > >> >to me like the Waterford RST-14 is already exactly what you are
> > > >> >looking for, and at pretty much the same price.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Just a thought.
> > > >>
> > > >> Nice bike and they'll do it threadless.
> > > >
> > > >Yeah, that way you get to use an ugly, hard-to-adjust stem.
> > >
> > > Beauty is subjective. If the thing is fitted properly in the first
> > > place, adjusting should be a rare event. And, in your mind, what is
> > > so difficult about loosening a stem, lifting off and restacking
> > > some spacers? Does that sound like a half-hour job to you? Or do I
> > > have to drop it off at the tech for two weeks while he calls in a
> > > specialist?

>
> You can't just stick 2 cm of spacers under the stem, unfortunately,
> because of the design of threadless systems. Say you hurt your back and
> have to raise the bars to keep riding- my experience this year as like
> many people over 40 I am developing lumbar disk problems. You either
> have to buy a new fugly stem or a new fork plus some spacers, unless you
> were riding around with a few cm of steerer sticking up out of your stem
> (there's a nice look). Or you can buy an adjustable angle stem with a
> hinge and bolts to loosen up during a ride. I saw a bunch of those on
> bikes at REI last week. On my quill stem bikes, one quick adjustment
> with a 6 mm allen wrench to raise the bars and ease my back, and I was
> on my way. Took about 60 seconds.
>
> I know a lot of people like threadless stems because they are
> lighter/stiffer/newer/the cool standard. Many see them as the superior
> technology and have rational reasons for that. I think they suck. The
> stems are generally ugly as hell. And I think that the headset preload
> and the clamping of the fork should be separated rather than dependent
> on the same couple of bolts.
>
> I understand the mechanical arguments put forth by Jobst and others in
> favor of threadless stems. I wouldn't have as much complaint about a
> fork that uses a threaded headset and a stem that clamps to the steerer
> tube. Interestingly enough, threadless type stems were all the rage in
> France 50 years ago on high-end bikes and were abandoned as a less
> suitable technology because of the lack of easy adjustability to fit the
> rider.
>
> > I have one bike with a quill stem, and must remember to regularly
> > remove and grease, lest it seize on me.

>
> I have seven bikes with quill stems and one bike with a threadless stem.
> In 30+ years of being a bikie I've never had a quill stem seize into the
> steerer. Every few years when I remove them to repack the headset they
> just slide right on out. Waterproof marine grease is what I use on the
> quill, on the slug, on the bolt threads, and it doesn't need to be
> reapplied after the first assembly, unless I wipe it off.


I have a quill stem road bike. Fits me perfectly. Ridden it on double
centuries on down. TTT Synthesis quill stem. This has one of the
longer quills on it. Other than the Nitto Technomic. I have the TTT
Synthesis set at the max extension line. No more raising it. I've had
it that way since the day I built up the frame. I've never felt the
need to ever want to raise it.

Where is this vaunted adjustability with quill stems? Unless you own a
Nitto Technomic, quill stems have no upward adjustability. Every quill
stem bike I've ever seen had the quill at the max line. All of the
welded quill stems in the last 10 years or so have very short quills.
There is no upward adjustability at all on those. Quill stems have no
adjustment other than downwards. Most people don't want lower bars.

On my threadless stem bikes I have 15 or 20 mm of spacers on top of the
stem. And 10 to 20 mm below the stem. Looks OK to me. So if I ever
feel the need to adjust the stem, I can just swap around a few spacers.
Pretty fast and easy. And of course I can just flip over the -8
degree stems I have and get the bars higher too. Lots more
adjustability than any quill stem, except the Look Ergostem. Or of
course just buy a new threadless stem for $10-20. Pretty cheap.
 
[email protected] wrote:

> Every quill
> stem bike I've ever seen had the quill at the max line


Where do you come up with this stuff? I've three bikes, all with quill
stems. Not one of them is at the max line. Perhaps your frames are a
wee bit small? Or you want an upright position?
 
T

Tim McNamara

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
R Brickston <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 10:09:35 -0500, Tim McNamara
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > >> Nice bike and they'll do it threadless.
> >> > >
> >> > >Yeah, that way you get to use an ugly, hard-to-adjust stem.
> >> >
> >> > Beauty is subjective. If the thing is fitted properly in the
> >> > first place, adjusting should be a rare event. And, in your
> >> > mind, what is so difficult about loosening a stem, lifting off
> >> > and restacking some spacers? Does that sound like a half-hour
> >> > job to you? Or do I have to drop it off at the tech for two
> >> > weeks while he calls in a specialist?

> >
> >You can't just stick 2 cm of spacers under the stem, unfortunately,
> >because of the design of threadless systems.

>
> Depends where the stem was located on the steerer.
>
> >Say you hurt your back and have to raise the bars to keep riding- my
> >experience this year as like many people over 40 I am developing
> >lumbar disk problems. You either have to buy a new fugly stem or a
> >new fork plus some spacers, unless you were riding around with a few
> >cm of steerer sticking up out of your stem (there's a nice look).

>
> Beauty is subjective. On a tourer, beauty is not my primary
> objective, particularly with a big ugly bag hanging of the front of
> the bars. I just got a new fork for a another 520 I'm building out of
> a frame someone gifted, I think I'll run the steerer maybe an extra
> 6cm higher and maybe clamp on a light bar.


I find that having a bar bag mounted high is too adverse on the
steering. My handlebar bag resides on a small rack, just a cm or so
above the front tire, in the old French manner. It's presence is almost
unnoticeable and I can ride for miles no handed with the bag full. I
can't do that with modern bar bags that sit high and usually are gapped
way out from the handlebars. I've tried both, the old French method
works much better.

> >Or you can buy an adjustable angle stem with a hinge and bolts to
> >loosen up during a ride.

>
> There's a solution.


Just not a reliable one.

> >I saw a bunch of those on bikes at REI last week. On my quill stem
> >bikes, one quick adjustment with a 6 mm allen wrench to raise the
> >bars and ease my back, and I was on my way. Took about 60 seconds.

>
> You'd have the same unsolved problem if your quill was already at
> it's highest adjustment. 60 Seconds vs. what? 6 minutes? Or 60
> seconds with the adjustable angle stem. BFD.


That's a consequence of the modern trend of riding too-small frames for
"stiffness" and "aerodynamics." Fortunately I was afflicted by such
silliness for only a couple of years. IMHO if you have more than four
inches of seatpost showing, your frame is too small. This is a bigger
deal for users of threadless headseats and stems.

> >I know a lot of people like threadless stems because they are
> >lighter/stiffer/newer/the cool standard. Many see them as the
> >superior technology and have rational reasons for that.

>
> >I think they suck.

>
> Subjective.


Hence the "I think" clause, eh?

> >The stems are generally ugly as hell.

>
> Subjective


Yup. So?

> >And I think that the headset preload and the clamping of the fork
> >should be separated rather than dependent on the same couple of
> >bolts.

>
> Nonsense.


********.
 
R Brickston wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2006 10:35:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >R Brickston wrote:
> >> On 1 Sep 2006 08:20:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >R Brickston wrote:
> >> >> On 1 Sep 2006 06:18:28 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >And let's be clear: the impetus behind the threadless headset had
> >> >> >nothing to do with eliminating the somewhat rare problem of seized
> >> >> >stems and everything to do with streamlining the bicycle manufacturing
> >> >> >process.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm swapping some handlebars around later today. Guess which system is
> >> >> going to be a huge PIA and which one will consist of R&R of four
> >> >> bolts.
> >> >
> >> >Stems that allow easy removal/replacement of the bars pre-date
> >> >threadless headsets and stems. One example is the Cinelli Oyster. And
> >> >removable face plate quill stems are still available if you want one.
> >>
> >> That's not going to help me today. Of course, the one with the quill
> >> is a recent tape rewrap.

> >
> >The way you wrote your earlier comment (above), it sounded as if you
> >thought that removeable face stems were only available for threadless
> >systems. So now I'm wondering why you bothered to mention it at all??
> >The situation could easily have been reversed, you could have a
> >remavable face quill stem and a conventional threadless stem.

>
> What do you think the percentages are of PIA quill stems and face
> plate quill stems?


In the overall bike population? About the same as it is for ugly,
hard-to-adjust threadless stems, carbon bar setups excluded.
 
T

Tim McNamara

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Tim McNamara wrote:
>
> > I have seven bikes with quill stems and one bike with a threadless stem.
> > In 30+ years of being a bikie I've never had a quill stem seize into the
> > steerer. Every few years when I remove them to repack the headset they
> > just slide right on out. Waterproof marine grease is what I use on the
> > quill, on the slug, on the bolt threads, and it doesn't need to be
> > reapplied after the first assembly, unless I wipe it off.

>
> It also depends on what you call "seizure." I live in a wet
> environment, and I would have to do routine maintenance on a weekly
> basis to keep stems from sticking -- but they never stick that badly.
> Only a few times have I had real stickers.
>
> Nonetheless, I like threadless because it gives me more adjustability.
> With my old Cinelli stems, I was already within a few mm of the minimum
> insertion, so there was not much adjustability. With threadless, you
> can flop them over and swap spacers, etc. There is also a better
> selection in terms of price, reach and angle.


The limitations of the adjustability of the stems requires that
selection. You're not talking about adjustability in your description,
you are talking about replaceability.

> Head set adjustment is a breeze on threadless, although I hate
> slamming-in star nuts. That is a PIA.


I find it so easy to adjust a threaded headset that the difference is
negligible.

> As a practical matter, the quill stem market is disappearing, so you
> better like what you have on your bikes now. I think the market is
> practically gone if you have an old French bike. You better be
> prepared to spend the time sanding quills.


Actually, there are plenty of quill stems on the market. I'm not
worried. My LBS has at least 25 new quill stems in stock in all sizes.
You don't see 'em on Nashbar or one of those mail order Web sites, but
that doesn't mean they aren't readily available.

And nope, I don't have an old French bike so for me that's a non-issue.
Since my memory of French bikes is from the bike boom of the 70s, when
most French bikes you saw were bottom of the line junkers, my feelings
about them aren't all that positive. But the difference is only 0.2 mm,
so it's easy to fix.

My concern is being able to get good quality threaded 1" headsets in
another five years. Stems don't wear out. Headsets do.
 
T

Tim McNamara

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
"jens5" <[email protected]> wrote:

> [email protected] wrote:
> > R Brickston wrote:
> > > I hear a fully loaded Seven Cycles bike with all the uber
> > > components can run $7-,0000 $9,000. My local LBS is a dealer and
> > > can order a custom touring geometry off my measurements and a
> > > fitting on mock-up

>
> You can order a hand brazed, lugged Reynolds, 631,725 or 853 frame to
> fit you in your choice of 60 custom, lacquered paint colors with
> contrasting inserts and pinstriping, again with your choice of
> braze-on's from Mercian in Derby, England for less than $1600. That
> would include the shipping from England to the US!


I forgot about that option. A friend of mine did that and received a
very nicely made frame exactly to his specs. He is very pleased with it.
 
T

Tim McNamara

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

> I finally got a bike with a threadless headset. It's a lot easier to
> adjust than threaded. And no problem with an expander breaking through
> threads (might be rare but it does happen).


The star nut can cause the steerer to break, however.
 
R

R Brickston

Guest
Spoke Wars
Helmet Wars
Rim Wars
Bar Con / Brifter Wars
Chain Cleaning Wars
STI/Ergo Wars
Andonized Cracking Wars
Brandt/Beam Wars
Chain Lube Wars
Fogel/Ozark Wars
TIG/Lugged Wars
Quill/Threadless Wars

Did I miss any? I'm sure I did...
 
B

Bill Lloyd

Guest
On 2006-08-30 10:52:44 -0700, R Brickston <[email protected]> said:

> On 30 Aug 2006 10:19:18 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>> R Brickston wrote:
>>> Well, I've discovered that rbt can't really agree on any piece of
>>> equipment.

>>
>> I think you've seen a lot of agreement in this thread.

>
> Yes, Seven Cycles product is apparently very overrated.


No, they're good bikes. You can get another bikes that's as good for
less money, but that doesn't mean the Seven is necessarily "overrated."

Sure, they use marketing to help sell their bikes. They use marketing
to help sell their bikes for more than they could sell them for than if
they used less marketing. It's often the way the world works.

>
> Note that not one advising poster wrote anything like: "I own a Seven"
> or "I tested a Seven" or "I rode my friends Seven" or "I researched a
> Seven, but instead bought..."
>
>>
>>> At least with component groups there are only a handful of
>>> suppliers to argue about.

>>
>> I don't think you've seen much arguing (as in, espousing differences)
>> in this thread, either. No one seems much impressed with the steel
>> Seven's nuts-and-bolts value, which is where you started.
>>

>
> I'm not defending Seven Cycles, as a matter of fact, the only thing I
> originally had to go on was 1. Their complete bikes range from $5,000
> to $9,000 and the the web page, a/k/a "marketing hype."


And so, what's specifically wrong with this?

There's also advice here about lugged steel bikes that cost as much or
*more* than a Seven, and which weigh *more* and are likely less
durable. That's also fine, you have your set of folks who appreciate
the way bikes were made in the 60's and 70's, and want a bike that
appears similar today (steel alloys have improved substantially, to
where they can make a very light and strong bike, but they cannot match
titanium... you just can't make a bombproof 3 lb 58 cm steel frame,
where you pretty much can with Ti these days).

>
>>
>>> I thought there were a few good custom frame
>>> builders out there, but it seems to be in the dozens.

>>
>> Which might increase the odds of finding one nearby (another point of
>> agreement).
>>
>> The same guy who measures you builds the frame, eliminating at least
>> one source of error.

>
> I'm not sure you understand the measuring process and they claim
> 13,000 succesful fittings. In any event, one premise is to have a tech
> that is an expert fitter do that process and have the the frame
> builder just do what he is good at. BTW, there are 100 data points
> used in the measuring, according to the marketing department. To even
> consider spending this kind of money, I've looked into what this
> particular builder has to say. Some of it seems pretty comprehensive,
> such as the fitting process:
>
> http://sevencycles.com/order/CustomKit2006.pdf
>
> Or there hype on frame building:
>
> "Every Seven frame is subjected to no less than 50 alignment checks—28
> in welding alone. Each is designed to guarantee the straightest, most
> accurate frame possible. It’s no small effort to hold tolerances as
> tight as +/- 0.002" for the most critical measurements. "
>
> Most of the opinions given here on rbt don't seem to reflect any real
> knowledge of this builder. "TIG welded frames are a ripoff," or "No,
> look at this builder(s)," doesn't really inspire any confidence that
> someone studied or has knowledge of this particular frame builder.
>
>> You get to tap in directly to a knowledge base gained while providing
>> customer satisfaction (aka "staying in business").
>>
>> Suffice to say, I know who I'd go to, well worth a few hours' drive.
>> --D-y
 
B

Bill Lloyd

Guest
On 2006-08-31 21:18:08 -0700, [email protected] said:

> Yep, just like your seatpost. Routine maintainence......the horror!


But something that's really unnecessary on a threadless stem.

I find with threadless, I have fewer problems with headsets coming
loose, and seeing as I find the right height and then never change it,
this fancy quill stuff just isn't necessary. Should I ever need to
change the height, it takes about 5 minutes... less time than it takes
to regrease a quill stem.
 
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > I finally got a bike with a threadless headset. It's a lot easier to
> > adjust than threaded. And no problem with an expander breaking through
> > threads (might be rare but it does happen).

>
> The star nut can cause the steerer to break, however.


Of course. There's always a problem, isn't there? Well, it's a nice
thick steel steerer on that bike, at least <g>.

Funny, today I put a quill adapter into an old steel bike to use a
threadless-style stem on it. Possibly the worst of all worlds? --D-y