TTL: The key measurement in sizing

What "big wrenches". Every quill stem I've seem has an allen or other
nut that is loosened to raise bar hight. Ahead system sucks plain and
simple. If bike makers left steer tubes uncut I might feel different
but since most ship bikes with the steer tubes cut I'll continue
tocriticize bike makers for this disregard for consumers. It takes
minutes to cut a steer tube and a shop can do it AFTER a customer
finds the right height for his/her comfort. Then EVERYONE wins.


On Apr 29, 4:53*pm, "
wrote:
On Apr 29, 6:04*pm, Andre Jute wrote:





On Apr 29, 4:01*pm, "

wrote:
On Apr 29, 2:41*pm, Andre Jute wrote:

I don't know why manufacturer size ali bikes and carbon bikes and ti
bikes by the seat tube length. Steel bikes were sized by the seat tube
length to relate them to the rider's height and weight without making
the frame any heavier than need be. The stiff non-ferrous materials
can take big seatpost and stem extensions. So the important dimension
for bike fit becomes the one that regulates the angle of the torso,
and that is top tube length. I have found that on almost any bike
except road bikes, seat tube height is, within reasonable margins,
irrelevant, but top tube length variations of only two centimeters
between bikes of otherwise near-identical geometry can make or break
the comfort and therefore the long-term utility of a bike. Somewhere
between 4 to 6 cm in top tube length on most bikes, fit to some
predetermined ideal torso angle becomes difficult or impossible and
you have to move up or down a size *or start looking at different
geometries.

Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING..html

Yes, as well as head-tube length, or more specifically stack-height.

Joseph

Nah, stack height is just another parasite foisted on cyclists by the
entire racing-fashion-onesizefitsallmakeitcheaperandchargemore
paradigm and the wretched A-head stems that came with it. A
traditional quill stem can be any height, angle and extension you
require; it solves a lot of problems without even breaking sweat.

BTW, without pretending it is a scientific measurement -- I didn't
even get the scales out --, I did once weigh an 80s Atax (I think, it
was off an early upmarket Peugeot bike) A-head stem in one hand
against the fully toollessly adjustable quill stem of my luxurious
Gazelle Toulouse (whose makers would you sue you for libel if you
called them weight weenies) -- and got a shock. The "sports" stem was
obviously heavier than the entire Gazelle adjustable assembly. It's a
crock that the A-head and its stem saves any significant weight; it's
purpose is to let manufacturers make a onesize bike, to make the
fittings more cheaply, to sell a second unit, the stem, to which a
mystique and therefore a boutique price can be attached, in other
words not for the benefit of the rider but for the glorification of
their bank accounts. I'm surprised that Tom Sherman doesn't ride the
ass of the bike manufacturers, and especially their components and
aftermarket adjuncts, every day for their greed.

Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING.html

A-Headset is way better than you make it out to be. Stiff bar, and
easy to adjust without any big wrenches. Who cares about weight, it's
just stonger. The dumb thing is when people cut off too much steerer!

But even quill stems have a limited adjustment range, so stack-height
needs to be taken into consideration. Not only for being able to get
the bars high enough, but also low enough! Think about that crazy cafe
racer hour record bike!

By stack-height I mean the overall height range of where the bars can
be placed relative to the bb or seat. Not just how much steerer is
showing.

Joseph- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Apr 30, 1:54 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
On Apr 30, 7:43 pm, Camilo wrote:







On Apr 30, 9:53 am, "Clive George" wrote:

The detachable faceplate is another great thing, but it's merely tradition
that means quills tend to not have them whereas threadless do - there's no
intrinsic reason why quills can't have them.

This is something that, in retrospect, I always think: DUH, why
haven't they always made quill stems with detachable faceplates. It
seems just so stupid not to.

Maybe its some engineering thing? Maybe they never thought of it?
Maybe it's the elegant smooth line with the discrete single bolt
underneath? Maybe it's because, in general, you just don't need to
remove the bars that often?

I tell you though, if/when I get to build a nice classic bike w/ quill
stem, I'm going with one of the many modern stems with detachable face
plate. I've seen some beautiful quills with that design.

Also some rather crude. The Kalloy-sourced quill with faceplate on my
Trek L700 Navigator isn't exactly Faberge workmanship -- nor even
Nitto, by a very long chalk. But it works. I understand why Trek fits
the Kalloy: a beautiful quill will cost five or ten times as much, and
possibly much more once the difference is multiplied up the
distribution chain, and add nothing to the functionality of the bike,
and many of the owners won't even notice.

Please tell me the names of the beautiful quills, especially they're
tall and available in 1 1/8 inch size,

I have no idea if quill stems are available in 1 1/8. For interesting
quill stems with face plates, two that come to mind off hand are Salsa
and Cinelli (Frog).

Andre Jute wrote:

Nah, stack height is just another parasite foisted on cyclists by the
entire racing-fashion-onesizefitsallmakeitcheaperandchargemore
paradigm and the wretched A-head stems that came with it. A
traditional quill stem can be any height, angle and extension you
require; it solves a lot of problems without even breaking sweat.

I saw three different adjustable height and angle threadless stems at
Taipei Cycle, none of which are sold in the U.S.. So at least there is a
workaround to what the manufacturers have foisted on the public. Buy
these at any bike shop in Europe or Asia.

At least some manufacturers are not cutting the steer tube to the
shortest possible length. I have one of those stupid Delta extenders on
the one bike I have with a threadless headset. It looks terrible, but it
does the job.

In article
,
wrote:

What "big wrenches". Every quill stem I've seem has an allen or other
nut that is loosened to raise bar hight. Ahead system sucks plain and
simple. If bike makers left steer tubes uncut I might feel different
but since most ship bikes with the steer tubes cut I'll continue
tocriticize bike makers for this disregard for consumers. It takes
minutes to cut a steer tube and a shop can do it AFTER a customer
finds the right height for his/her comfort. Then EVERYONE wins.

A-Headset is way better than you make it out to be. Stiff bar, and
easy to adjust without any big wrenches. Who cares about weight, it's
just stonger. The dumb thing is when people cut off too much steerer!

Big Jim: the big (headset) wrenches are necessary for adjusting the
bearing preload on a threaded (quill stem) headset.

The wrenches are typically in the 30-40 mm range, and they have to be
very thin because the headset nut they are turning is very thin and
directly underneath the lockring.

The lockring also requires a big wrench, but it doesn't have to be flat,
so a fairly large adjustable wrench will do the trick.

The headset preload adjustment is moderately fussy and the locknut is
somewhat prone to loosening anyway. Loc-tite may be called for.

The setup of a new threadless setup does have its own fussiness (the
initial star-nut installation is easiest with a special nut-setter), but
bearing adjustment is faster, simpler, and requires only a few hex
wrenches. Pulling and reinstalling an already set-up fork to lube the
bearings or whatnot is easier with a threadless headset.

The adjustment stuff is not a compelling reason to change headsets, but
having just experienced my first fully frozen quill stem, I have a new
appreciation for the merits of the threadless design.

BTW, those looking for an adjustable threadless stem?

http://www.glorycycles.com/loerhscst.html

Look Ergostem.

It's $200, yes. The usual purpose is to allow precise bar positioning
for TT or track bikes, and it is highly adjustable for reach, rise, and
drop.

It also weighs 360g, which may explain why you don't see it on the
climber's bikes.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

On May 1, 5:59*pm, Ron Ruff wrote:
On Apr 29, 6:41*am, Andre Jute wrote:

So the important dimension
for bike fit becomes the one that regulates the angle of the torso,
and that is top tube length.

No. Seat tube length *is* irrelevant, but the top tube length is not a
good reach measurement since it varies with seat tube angle. What you
want is the distance from the bottom bracket forward, since your seat
fore/aft and height measurements will be referenced to the BB. This is
the "reach" measurement. And the relative height measurement is
approximated pretty well by the length of the head tube.

Sure thing, Ron, I'm happy to spend a Sunday morning in your church
too, doing bike trigonometry. My point is merely that with many modern
bikes, how you sit the rider on the bike has little to do with the
seat tube length and everything with the distance and angle of the
grips from the seat. I don't actually care what you find convenient to
use in calculating that distance and angle.

Oddly enough, if you work out the geometries of common frames you will
find that it is easy to get the saddle and and bars in *exactly* the
same position over a range of frame sizes of ~10cm or so... simply by
choosing and adjusting the appropriate seatpost and stem.

I must say I have found it convenient, in a sturdy mountain-bike type
frame at least (where the stiffness seems to be guaranteed by the size
and beef of the ail tubes), to go down one size (2mm, not 2in!) from
the traditional size, and adjust to the desired fit with a longer
seat post and a very upright North Road type handlebar. Several
European dealers told me they now advise people on comfort bikes to
take one size down from the obvious fit.

Andre Jute
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html

On May 1, 11:02 pm, Peter Cole wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
I don't know why manufacturer size ali bikes and carbon bikes and ti
bikes by the seat tube length. Steel bikes were sized by the seat tube
length to relate them to the rider's height and weight without making
the frame any heavier than need be. The stiff non-ferrous materials
can take big seatpost and stem extensions. So the important dimension
for bike fit becomes the one that regulates the angle of the torso,
and that is top tube length. I have found that on almost any bike
except road bikes, seat tube height is, within reasonable margins,
irrelevant, but top tube length variations of only two centimeters
between bikes of otherwise near-identical geometry can make or break
the comfort and therefore the long-term utility of a bike. Somewhere
between 4 to 6 cm in top tube length on most bikes, fit to some
predetermined ideal torso angle becomes difficult or impossible and
you have to move up or down a size or start looking at different
geometries.

Andre Jute
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

Summary:

"Top Tube Length: More Important Than Seat Tube Length!"

Thanks. I saw that when Sheldon first posted it, and just forgot, or
otherwise I would just have given the URL. Mind you, this has been an
interesting thread, and therefore worth a little duplication.

Andre Jute
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html

On May 2, 1:31 am, wrote:
What "big wrenches". Every quill stem I've seem has an allen or other
nut that is loosened to raise bar hight.

Not for the quill itself. The big wrench(es), usually 32 or 36mm, are
required for setting the threaded heatset up with the right
"tightness" in its ballbearing, and locking it down with another nut.
Park makes two special small wrenches 36x15mm and 32x15mm intended for
tourists to bolt to their bikes as threaded headset/pedal tools; they
bolt between the water bottle cage and the frame. Shimano's Nexus hub
gear axle nuts are also 15mm, so I would carry this tool in any event.
Many old fashioned threaded headsets require two big spanners to work
on the headset, one of them usually required to be pretty flat, but my
Trek Navigator L700 Cyber Nexus bike uses an interesting design by VP,
the MH-306AC threaded 1 1/8in headset, which uses only one size
spanner for both adjuster- and lock-nuts. By the way, if you check out
my Trek automatic bike via the URL under my netsite, take a close look
at those inoffensive, in fact bland-looking, pedals. They're VP-191
and Trek Benelux made me a gift of a set -- they're not standard until
you get into the Koga-Miyata price range; they are absolutely fabulous
pedals, silky-smooth.

Andre Jute
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html


Ahead system sucks plain and
simple. If bike makers left steer tubes uncut I might feel different
but since most ship bikes with the steer tubes cut I'll continue
tocriticize bike makers for this disregard for consumers. It takes
minutes to cut a steer tube and a shop can do it AFTER a customer
finds the right height for his/her comfort. Then EVERYONE wins.

On Apr 29, 4:53 pm, "

wrote:
On Apr 29, 6:04 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

On Apr 29, 4:01 pm, "

wrote:
On Apr 29, 2:41 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

I don't know why manufacturer size ali bikes and carbon bikes and ti
bikes by the seat tube length. Steel bikes were sized by the seat tube
length to relate them to the rider's height and weight without making
the frame any heavier than need be. The stiff non-ferrous materials
can take big seatpost and stem extensions. So the important dimension
for bike fit becomes the one that regulates the angle of the torso,
and that is top tube length. I have found that on almost any bike
except road bikes, seat tube height is, within reasonable margins,
irrelevant, but top tube length variations of only two centimeters
between bikes of otherwise near-identical geometry can make or break
the comfort and therefore the long-term utility of a bike. Somewhere
between 4 to 6 cm in top tube length on most bikes, fit to some
predetermined ideal torso angle becomes difficult or impossible and
you have to move up or down a size or start looking at different
geometries.

Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING.html

Yes, as well as head-tube length, or more specifically stack-height.

Joseph

Nah, stack height is just another parasite foisted on cyclists by the
entire racing-fashion-onesizefitsallmakeitcheaperandchargemore
paradigm and the wretched A-head stems that came with it. A
traditional quill stem can be any height, angle and extension you
require; it solves a lot of problems without even breaking sweat.

BTW, without pretending it is a scientific measurement -- I didn't
even get the scales out --, I did once weigh an 80s Atax (I think, it
was off an early upmarket Peugeot bike) A-head stem in one hand
against the fully toollessly adjustable quill stem of my luxurious
Gazelle Toulouse (whose makers would you sue you for libel if you
called them weight weenies) -- and got a shock. The "sports" stem was
obviously heavier than the entire Gazelle adjustable assembly. It's a
crock that the A-head and its stem saves any significant weight; it's
purpose is to let manufacturers make a onesize bike, to make the
fittings more cheaply, to sell a second unit, the stem, to which a
mystique and therefore a boutique price can be attached, in other
words not for the benefit of the rider but for the glorification of
their bank accounts. I'm surprised that Tom Sherman doesn't ride the
ass of the bike manufacturers, and especially their components and
aftermarket adjuncts, every day for their greed.

Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING.html

A-Headset is way better than you make it out to be. Stiff bar, and
easy to adjust without any big wrenches. Who cares about weight, it's
just stonger. The dumb thing is when people cut off too much steerer!

But even quill stems have a limited adjustment range, so stack-height
needs to be taken into consideration. Not only for being able to get
the bars high enough, but also low enough! Think about that crazy cafe
racer hour record bike!

By stack-height I mean the overall height range of where the bars can
be placed relative to the bb or seat. Not just how much steerer is
showing.

Joseph- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On May 2, 3:15 am, Camilo wrote:
On Apr 30, 1:54 pm, Andre Jute wrote:



On Apr 30, 7:43 pm, Camilo wrote:

On Apr 30, 9:53 am, "Clive George" wrote:

The detachable faceplate is another great thing, but it's merely tradition
that means quills tend to not have them whereas threadless do - there's no
intrinsic reason why quills can't have them.

This is something that, in retrospect, I always think: DUH, why
haven't they always made quill stems with detachable faceplates. It
seems just so stupid not to.

Maybe its some engineering thing? Maybe they never thought of it?
Maybe it's the elegant smooth line with the discrete single bolt
underneath? Maybe it's because, in general, you just don't need to
remove the bars that often?

I tell you though, if/when I get to build a nice classic bike w/ quill
stem, I'm going with one of the many modern stems with detachable face
plate. I've seen some beautiful quills with that design.

Also some rather crude. The Kalloy-sourced quill with faceplate on my
Trek L700 Navigator isn't exactly Faberge workmanship -- nor even
Nitto, by a very long chalk. But it works. I understand why Trek fits
the Kalloy: a beautiful quill will cost five or ten times as much, and
possibly much more once the difference is multiplied up the
distribution chain, and add nothing to the functionality of the bike,
and many of the owners won't even notice.

Please tell me the names of the beautiful quills, especially they're
tall and available in 1 1/8 inch size,

I have no idea if quill stems are available in 1 1/8. For interesting
quill stems with face plates, two that come to mind off hand are Salsa
and Cinelli (Frog).

Thanks. I should probably say, "for a 1 1/8 in headset" to avoid
confusion with the still bigger headsets of the kamikaze set. -- Andre
Jute

On May 2, 4:03*am, SMS wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Nah, stack height is just another parasite foisted on cyclists by the
entire racing-fashion-onesizefitsallmakeitcheaperandchargemore
paradigm and the wretched A-head stems that came with it. A
traditional quill stem can be any height, angle and extension you
require; it solves a lot of problems without even breaking sweat.

I saw three different adjustable height and angle threadless stems at
Taipei Cycle, none of which are sold in the U.S.. So at least there is a
workaround to what the manufacturers have foisted on the public. Buy
these at any bike shop in Europe or Asia.

Despite the engineering advantages of the threadless headset, such as
they may be, I prefer threaded headsets and quills because they give a
bigger range of adjustment.

At least some manufacturers are not cutting the steer tube to the
shortest possible length.

I hope you aren't suggesting that we should now congratulate them
because they stopped being dickwads. Let them do something right
first, rather than merely stop doing something wrongheaded.

I have one of those stupid Delta extenders on
the one bike I have with a threadless headset. It looks terrible, but it
does the job.

I can see a time when a threaded will come with various lengths of
extension tube reaching above the head tube, and threadless steerer
tubes will universally be uncut, and perhaps come with a clamp to hold
them, like a seat clamp (Sheldon has been there too!).

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Andre Jute wrote:
Nah, stack height is just another parasite foisted on cyclists by the
entire racing-fashion-onesizefitsallmakeitcheaperandchargemore
paradigm and the wretched A-head stems that came with it. A
traditional quill stem can be any height, angle and extension you
require; it solves a lot of problems without even breaking sweat.

SMS wrote:
I saw three different adjustable height and angle threadless stems at
Taipei Cycle, none of which are sold in the U.S.. So at least there is a
workaround to what the manufacturers have foisted on the public. Buy
these at any bike shop in Europe or Asia.

At least some manufacturers are not cutting the steer tube to the
shortest possible length. I have one of those stupid Delta extenders on
the one bike I have with a threadless headset. It looks terrible, but it
does the job.

You said that once before and I commented then that these AH adjustable
stems are original equipment to commonly available modern road bikes
such as Raleighs, not expensive, exotic nor rare.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **