PRS-20... Opinions?

Given the eclectic collection of bikes I have (includes a Vision
recumbent and PowerWing Softride) I'm considering purchasing a Park
PRS-20 for a work stand:
http://tinyurl.com/b8eme
Anyone here have actual experience with this stand that they can share?
It looks like it will cover my varying frame style needs.

thanks in advance for any feedback,
Karl


--
If replying directly, please remove the
cleverly decorated addition to my return address.

Karl ...

I have the PRS-20 and am satisfied with it. As you might imagine, not
as fast or convenient as a stand that clamps the seatpost or downtube,
but I understand that with your collection of bikes you don't want
conventional clamping.

It works well for my light Titanium road bike. I like the way you can
easily spin the entire bike around horizontaly to work on either side
of it. It is very rugged - should last a lifetime. There are some
downsides. The rugged construction results in a lot of weight. In my
opinion it is a lot heavier than it needs to be. If you are leaving it
in one position, this won't be a problem, but if you want to carry it
around from place to place, it will become tiresome. I like the
aluminum construction of the Ultimate stands much better. The base is
fine for a lightweight bike, but seems like it might be prone to
tipping with heavier bikes or bikes with long wheelbases. If you have
multiple bikes, you may need to adjust the spacing from the fork clamp
to the bottom bracket support for each one, an additional step you
won't have with a conventional type stand.

Bottom line is that if you can get by with clamping a tube or seatpost,
I would strongly suggest getting the Ultimate Pro stand. If clamping
the fork dropouts is important to you, then the PRS-20 is probably the
way to go.

... Craig

K2 wrote:
Given the eclectic collection of bikes I have (includes a Vision
recumbent and PowerWing Softride) I'm considering purchasing a Park
PRS-20 for a work stand:
http://tinyurl.com/b8eme
Anyone here have actual experience with this stand that they can share?
It looks like it will cover my varying frame style needs.

thanks in advance for any feedback,
Karl


i think it's a great option. when working on planes, you only touch it
at known hard points. you should do the same with a bike - and this is
one of the few designs that allows it.

colocraig wrote:
In my opinion it is a lot heavier than it needs to be.

Apparently you're not alone in this opinion given that Park will be
offering this model:
http://www.parktool.com/products/det...&item=PRS%2D21
come spring.


--
If replying directly, please remove the
cleverly decorated addition to my return address.

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:30:27 -0800, jim beam wrote:
K2 wrote:
Given the eclectic collection of bikes I have (includes a Vision
recumbent and PowerWing Softride) I'm considering purchasing a Park
PRS-20 for a work stand:
http://tinyurl.com/b8eme
Anyone here have actual experience with this stand that they can share?
It looks like it will cover my varying frame style needs.

i think it's a great option. when working on planes, you only touch it
at known hard points. you should do the same with a bike - and this is
one of the few designs that allows it.

One thing that bothers me about it is the necessity of removing the front
wheel, and the inability to separate the fork and frame. In fact, I think
that if you loosened the stem bolts, your bike might well fall over
backwards, pivoting around the bb support. Not a giant problem, but you do
have to remember that headset adjustments are made with the bike on the
ground..

On the other hand, I don't have any problem with a simple
frame-tube-grabber (let alone a sacrificial-metal-seatpost-grabber)
design, since my frames can take it.

Jasper

Jasper Janssen wrote:
Not a giant problem, but you do
have to remember that headset adjustments are made with the bike on the
ground..


On the other hand, I don't have any problem with a simple
frame-tube-grabber (let alone a sacrificial-metal-seatpost-grabber)
design, since my frames can take it.


Yeah, well, on 2 of my 5 (or is it 6 now?) bikes I don't even have a
seatpost to grab, but that is a good point concerning headset work with
this stand.

--
If replying directly, please remove the
cleverly decorated addition to my return address.

Jasper Janssen wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:30:27 -0800, jim beam wrote:

K2 wrote:

Given the eclectic collection of bikes I have (includes a Vision
recumbent and PowerWing Softride) I'm considering purchasing a Park
PRS-20 for a work stand:
http://tinyurl.com/b8eme
Anyone here have actual experience with this stand that they can share?
It looks like it will cover my varying frame style needs.


i think it's a great option. when working on planes, you only touch it
at known hard points. you should do the same with a bike - and this is
one of the few designs that allows it.


One thing that bothers me about it is the necessity of removing the front
wheel, and the inability to separate the fork and frame.

re-check the park web site - it mounts from bb to front OR rear drops.
if you want to work on the fork, remove the rear wheel, mount to the
rear, and you're free to fiddle with the front end all you want.

In fact, I think
that if you loosened the stem bolts, your bike might well fall over
backwards, pivoting around the bb support. Not a giant problem, but you do
have to remember that headset adjustments are made with the bike on the
ground..

On the other hand, I don't have any problem with a simple
frame-tube-grabber (let alone a sacrificial-metal-seatpost-grabber)
design, since my frames can take it.

Jasper

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:57:40 -0800, jim beam wrote:

re-check the park web site - it mounts from bb to front OR rear drops.
if you want to work on the fork, remove the rear wheel, mount to the
rear, and you're free to fiddle with the front end all you want.

But then you get a droopy, possibly filthy chain dangling all over the
place. I mean, okay, it can be done, fair enough. But for most frames, I'd
call it needlessly complicated. If I can only touch a bike at known hard
points, I'm not sure I want to actually, like, mount it, where my leg
might accidentally touch the top tube, oh noes.


Jasper

Jasper Janssen wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:57:40 -0800, jim beam wrote:


re-check the park web site - it mounts from bb to front OR rear drops.
if you want to work on the fork, remove the rear wheel, mount to the
rear, and you're free to fiddle with the front end all you want.


But then you get a droopy, possibly filthy chain dangling all over the
place. I mean, okay, it can be done, fair enough. But for most frames, I'd
call it needlessly complicated. If I can only touch a bike at known hard
points, I'm not sure I want to actually, like, mount it, where my leg
might accidentally touch the top tube, oh noes.


Jasper

so how many psi's can you exert with your soft fleshy thigh vs. a clamp?
that's what it comes down to jasper - force per unit area. hard
points can take high high psi, the others can't!

Jasper Janssen wrote:

But then you get a droopy, possibly filthy chain dangling all over the
place. I mean, okay, it can be done, fair enough. But for most frames, I'd
call it needlessly complicated. If I can only touch a bike at known hard
points, I'm not sure I want to actually, like, mount it, where my leg
might accidentally touch the top tube, oh noes.


Apparenly this isn't a problem either. The dropout clamp looks to be
designed to accept the chain so that it doesn't dangle, see he
http://tinyurl.com/atn7x
I also remember seeing some claim that you can even use a chain cleaner
while it's in this configuration, but not sure.

You're right, it is more complicated then a standard clamp style stand,
but given my odd ball collection of bikes I sort of inherited the need.

regards,
Karl


--
If replying directly, please remove the
cleverly decorated addition to my return address.