Threaded versus threadless headset - Page 3 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

08-20-2003, 02:21 PM

"Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<UwN0b.819184$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] .ca>...
> David L. Johnson wrote in message ...
> >>
> >With a quill stem (that is, with a threaded fork and headset),
>
> And if you do see guys with quill stems on the
> next ride then find another group to ride with,
> because they are the 'B' group. Those are
> probably the same lamers that are running
> conventional 32 spoke wheels. Not the types
> you want to been seen with!

Not at all; my wheels are either 36H, or 40H, 3X and tied and soldered ;-)
It all fits perfectly well with my quill stem, Brooks saddle, and sandals
as my footware :-)

- rick

08-20-2003, 02:33 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] writes:

> "Threadless headset" is a lame name for an improvement that had such a
> long time to market. The quill stem, aka, the creaking, wobbling,
> permanently stuck stem, was always a weak part on the bicycle that has
> been relieved of duty by this innovation. The main feature is not the
> headset with its lack of threads, but the stem and its solid reliable
> and removable attachment to the steer tube. However, the head bearing
> can be adjusted in a trifle, without two ungainly 8-point end
> wrenches. The whole job can be done with an Allen wrench. Besides
> that, for the weight weenies, it's lighter.
>
> For safety and reliability, get a stem that has two screws on the
> steer tube end and four on the front plate so that a one screw failure
> will not let the handlebar go free.

I recently put a Ritchey WCS stem on my bike.
That stem is only one I know of with the 4-bolt/2-bolt design you
describe.

08-20-2003, 03:23 PM

Richard Ney:

> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] writes:
>
> > "Threadless headset" is a lame name for an improvement that had such a
> > long time to market. The quill stem, aka, the creaking, wobbling,
> > permanently stuck stem, was always a weak part on the bicycle that has
> > been relieved of duty by this innovation. The main feature is not the
> > headset with its lack of threads, but the stem and its solid reliable
> > and removable attachment to the steer tube. However, the head bearing
> > can be adjusted in a trifle, without two ungainly 8-point end
> > wrenches. The whole job can be done with an Allen wrench. Besides
> > that, for the weight weenies, it's lighter.
> >
> > For safety and reliability, get a stem that has two screws on the
> > steer tube end and four on the front plate so that a one screw failure
> > will not let the handlebar go free.
>
> I recently put a Ritchey WCS stem on my bike.
> That stem is only one I know of with the 4-bolt/2-bolt design you
> describe.

Thomson, FSA, Oval Concepts, Deda Elementi all have the 2/4 bolt
arrangement for road stems. ITM has a 2/3 bolt feature.

08-20-2003, 10:56 PM

"Hjalmar Duklæt" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:rgI0b.15384$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].no...
> Hi,
> What's the advantage of a threadless headset over an oldfashioned threaded
> one? Is the threaded one stiffer/lighter? Would it improve my riding in
any
> way going from threaded to threadless?
> Hjalmar
>
>

Many thanks to all who have made their comments on my issue. My conclusion
is that I really don't need to swap fork/stem on my Trek 5500. I don't have
problems riding with other riders because of this obsolete setup, I like to
be able to change the hight of the bar without to much fuss, I also
regularly check that the stem is not stuck in the steerer (after having to
use a hacksaw to get the stem out of another bike/fork) and it probably will
not improve my sprint due to its better rigidness. Finally, I'll save a lot
of money.
Hjalmar

08-21-2003, 03:25 AM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote in message news:<QUS0b.13404$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>...
> I don't see that happening more than once or twice a year... every 5000
> miles.

Most excellent drive-by gloat.

Dick Durbin

08-21-2003, 04:54 AM

Threaded is better because the height it is adjustable.

The threadless is cheaper to manufacture. Like many
"advancements," i.e. the elimination of lugs, the move
to aluminum from chromolloy steel on the cheaper bikes,
these changes are marketed as improvements when they
are really not.

I remember the first bike I got with a threadless headset
and I guess I hadn't kept up with the times because I was
confused as to the assembly (this was a specialty high end
folding bike not sold in stores and it was bought on-line and
required assembly). I just couldn't believe that they'd eliminate
the easy adjustability, and I thought I was missing some parts.

"Hjalmar Duklæt" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:rgI0b.15384$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].no...
> Hi,
> What's the advantage of a threadless headset over an oldfashioned threaded
> one? Is the threaded one stiffer/lighter? Would it improve my riding in
any
> way going from threaded to threadless?
> Hjalmar
>
>

08-21-2003, 06:12 AM

"David L. Johnson" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<bi0llp$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].Lehigh.EDU>...
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:14:14 +0000, Bob M wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:39:02 -0400, Rick Onanian <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:07:00 -0400, David L. Johnson
> >> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> >>> again, every time you mess around with the stem, you have to re-adjust
> >>> the bearings.
> >>
> >> Care to elaborate? I've adjusted and changes stems on my threadless-stem
> >> road bike a few times, and if I missed something important, I'd like to
> >> know...
> >>
> >> Which bearings, and what type of adjustment?
> >>
> >>
> > Basically, you tighten the bolt on the cap until you feel no play in the
> > headset (which can be done by grabbing the front brakes and pushing the
> > bike forward). That's the adjustment. On a threaded headset, it's the
> > same adjustment, only you tighten large nuts that go around the steerer
> > tube.
>
> But you only do the adjustment on a threaded headset once. For
> threadless, you have to re-do each time you change anything about the
> stem. When you remove the stem of a threadless headset, the whole headset
> assembly is loose.
>
> Yes, it's simple enough to re-adjust, though I do not like the idea of
> trying to adjust the preload if the bearings are not clean and well-lubed.
>
> We have all heard about people who couldn't adjust the preload on their
> hubs; I see no reason to presume they could adjust the preload on a
> headset, either. For them, raising the bar height means a trip to the
> mechanic.

I guess I don't see this as a significant drawback to the threadless
design. Isn't there an easy workaround? Can't you just use a thin
clamp to hold the preload, and then move the spacers and stem around
as much as you like?

08-21-2003, 10:50 AM

Bob Hunt writes:

>>> But you only do the adjustment on a threaded headset once. For
>>> threadless, you have to re-do each time you change anything about
>>> the stem. When you remove the stem of a threadless headset, the
>>> whole headset assembly is loose.

>> I think you are overlooking the simplicity of this adjustment. You
>> can do it while sensing whether the bearing adjustment is correct,
>> unlike futzing with two large end wrenches on a guess and then
>> finding out it was off a bit (too tight or too loose). You can
>> bounce the front wheel while you adjust the Allen screw and hear
>> bearing rattle go away. Then you snug up the stem ad its done.

>>> Yes, it's simple enough to re-adjust, though I do not like the
>>> idea of trying to adjust the preload if the bearings are not clean
>>> and well-lubed.

>> Excuses won't get you no place! Dirt does not interfere with
>> Bearing adjustment unless it's so bad you should take it apart and
>> clean it.

>>> We have all heard about people who couldn't adjust the preload on
>>> their hubs; I see no reason to presume they could adjust the
>>> preload on a headset, either. For them, raising the bar height
>>> means a trip to the mechanic.

>> What I don't understand is why you want to take your stem off all
>> the time. I only do that to clean and lubricate the head bearings.
>> I don't see that happening more than once or twice a year... every
>> 5000 miles.

> The flip side of this is if you only do that adjustment once or
> twice a year, what's the big deal about ease of adjustment?

Read the message. This was in response to the first paragraph above.
Your line of logic works for responses to invalid complaints on all
sides of the issue. Somewhere, the lines must cross.

> To paraphrase the OP's question: "Is the design so much better that
> it's worth the money, time, and trouble to switch from threaded to
> threadless?". Both systems have advantages and disadvantages but
> neither has such an overwhelming advantage over the other that an
> otherwise unnecessary- no broken parts, etc- switch is worth it.

That depends on whether the old system is a burden on maintenance and
safety. I'm going to change because I have had enough problems with
quill stems to warrant it. Besides, the safety margin in a 0.975 dia
aluminum stem is nowhere near that of a 1.25 dia tubular stem.

Jobst Brandt
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Palo Alto CA

08-21-2003, 01:14 PM

"David L. Johnson" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:bi06b4$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].Lehigh.EDU...
> There is one, and only one, advantage to a threadless headset. Dealers
> only have to sell one size fork. There are many disadvantages: little to
> no bar height adjustment possible without replacing the stem, having to
> re-set the bearing adjustment any time the stem is replaced in order to
> try to improve bar height. Ugliness.
>
> The bar height problem is IMO a real one. Many new bikes are set up to
> look like what the pros ride. So people buy them, only to realize that

This is SO true. You should contact my friends at my LBS (Bike Gallery in
Portland, Oregon) and ask them what they did to my bike. Wanting a road bike
I bought a Trek 1000, before thinking about the fit and the threadless
issue. Well, needless to say once they fit me it was a disaster. I needed
the threadless stem raised about a half a foot! They came up with an
innovative solution where they managed to attach a threaded stem to the fork
by going down into the fork somehow. It's awesome. Works great. Not sure
EXACTLY what they did, but I love it. It's so well done I can foresee myself
keeping this bike for a long time and replacing parts as needed.

Preston

08-22-2003, 05:18 AM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote in news:Rv81b.13860$dk4.490375
@typhoon.sonic.net:

> That depends on whether the old system is a burden on maintenance and
> safety. I'm going to change because I have had enough problems with
> quill stems to warrant it. Besides, the safety margin in a 0.975 dia
> aluminum stem is nowhere near that of a 1.25 dia tubular stem.
>
> Jobst Brandt
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> Palo Alto CA
>
Now there's logic for you! Assuming that your 1.25" steerer and your
0.975" quill were not hollow and there were made of similar materials then
your conclusion of a higher safety margin would be sound. But they are
not. The wall thickness of a steerer is much less than that of a quill.
Even though the outside diameter of the steerer is much larger the quill
retains it's strength with increased wall thickness. Besides if you are
breaking your quills then you need to take up a different activity.

AL