|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
tcmedara wrote:
LOL. While I think you are an obsessed quasi-religious zealot, that's not why I'm going to goof on you..... Dumabass, Frobnitz was *supporting you* ! Yeah, I realised that. I guess humo(u)r doesn't travel well. He was suggesting that rather than spam up a bunch of newsgroups where people are probably smart enough to tighten their QR, you should direct your efforts at the appropriate regulatory agencies and actually try to do something to fix the "problem". Actually, although you probably mean well, both you and Frobnitz don't seem to realise that I _did_ contact the "appropriate regulatory authorities" last year. They (or, to be precise, the CPSC) said they needed specific complaints of individual problems, rather than a general warning of a theoretical design problem. Of course, when I suggested that some of those riders who had described their incidents might care to contact the CPSC, I was roundly criticised for "scaremongering", and as far as I know, not a single rider bothered. Many of those who understood the problem or had even seen it for themselves had the touchingly naive belief that the manufacturers would fix the problem all on their own and it would be overkill to actually pressure them into doing so. Of course, what they didn't realise is that the manufacturers have a strong financial incentive to keep the current designs, since when Joe Bloggs upgrades to disks and finds his QR fork is not up to the job, he then generally goes out and buys a bolt-through fork. It's easy enough to see who wins out of this. Roll on one year, and entirely predictably, the manufacturers are still pretending the problem doesn't exist. They must be laughing all the way to the bank. As for J DeMarco at the CPSC, well he commissioned Mark LaPlant of Cannondale to report on the issue, and surprisingly enough the turkey didn't vote for Christmas. In fact he produced a bull**** whitewash which he refuses to publish. But since all the manufacturers can (apparently truthfully) claim that no rider has ever reported any incident, there really is little more that the CPSC can (or probably should) do. Your rejection of that course of action suggests that you're more interested in pursuing your own personal crusade rather than actually solving a problem -- percieved or otherwise. Rather than thank him for the suggestion or offer a counterpoint to why it's not a viable option, I hope you will now agree that I have offered a counterpoint as to why it is not a viable option, and I'm sorry for not giving sufficient explanation earlier. The simple fact is that while MTBers refuse to do more than grumble on bulletin boards, there is no real complaint to raise with anyone. I realised several months ago that there was really nothing more for me to do, but people still keep on emailing me with their stories, and I thought this latest one was sufficiently interesting to be worth sharing. Maybe next year there will be another. Don't hold your breath. James |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
"G.T." writes:
"TBF" wrote in message le.rogers.com... I keep hearing about this issue with greater frequency, but I've been running discs for a few years now and it's only popped out once in that time. It was my fault on that occasion, I realized afterwards that I hadn't properly tightend the QR. See, that's the point. The brake should be designed so that it *can't* force the wheel out of the dropouts, even if the QR is left completely loose. It's a design flaw, an epic design flaw that will cost some manufacturer a *lot* of money in court some day. No other current brake design that I'm aware of puts an ejection force into the wheel in normal operation, but front disk brakes do. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
BenS writes:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:32:14 -0500, dvt wrote: Zog The Undeniable wrote: James Annan wrote: It's now a year since the QR/disk brake problem hit the headlines, and I thought some of you might be interested in hearing how the manufacturers are dealing with it. I'm pretty sure some manufacturers are now starting to put the disc on the RH side of the fork. I might be dense, but I can't see how that would help. I *can* see that putting the calipers in front of the fork would help, but the right hand side? What am I missing? Putting the caliper on the front of the fork would probably lead to it ripping off it's mounting. How do you figure? The forces on the mounting bosses on the fork leg would be the same as they are with the current design. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
Westie wrote:
G.T. wrote: snip It's much easier to blame the user. That's what you're doing and that's what the manufacturers are doing. Even though they know the forces acting to rip the wheel out of the dropout are high. So why blame people for driving fast? Surely by now, speed limiters should have been fitted to all vehicles limiting their speed to 10km/hour to avoid impact injuries. We all know that the forces acting to squash drivers, passengers and pedestrians are high. Studies may have shown that disc brakes apply strong forces to the dropout but other studies have clearly shown that improperly maintained vehicles travelling at speed can apply strong forces to human bodies upon impact. Yet maintain and use a vehicle safely and the odds of your crashing due to equipment failure are reduced. Why would this not apply to disc brakes? Despite all the debate I still haven't seen a statistically significant number reports of injuries resulting from this issue where user error has been ruled out. Given the numbers of bikes with disc brakes out there there surely should be several if not dozens of incidents a week if this is a realistic fault that the average rider should be concerned with. That's one of the ****tiest analogies I have ever read. Wheels have ejected even when the user has properly tightened their QR. That should NEVER happen. Not once. It's not an issue of improper maintenance or anything analogous to using a bicycle in an unsafe manner. Greg |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
The Nelson Paradigm wrote:
G.T. wrote: | "Twohat" wrote in message | ... || || "G.T." wrote in message || om... ||| ||| ||| It's much easier to blame the user. That's what you're doing and ||| that's what the manufacturers are doing. Even though they know the ||| forces acting to rip the wheel out of the dropout are high. ||| ||| Greg ||| ||| || Been braking hard on bumpy bits for over a year now with my Manitou || Magnums with Shimano Drybollock discs with no probs. || I might believe it if I saw it happen, but I'm not impressed with the || quasi-scientific conspiration theorists. || Annan has an axe to grind, and I think he is scaremongering || un-necessarily IMHO. || | | I hate scaremongering more than anybody (nobody is better at it than | the US media), but I've read a couple of scary accounts, and believe | me, I'll be keeping my front skewer very tight. And some day I'll | switch to a through-axle. | | Greg See, right there is the answer if you happen to feel a skewer is not enough. Problem solved. The point is, if there is a problem, that fork manufacturers are selling disc compatible forks with regular dropouts. If they're selling them there is no doubt that their safe, eh? I worked at Manitou when their steerers separated from their crowns, and just after I left their dropouts were breaking. How long do you think it took them to admit to a problem? Greg |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
G.T. wrote:
That's one of the ****tiest analogies I have ever read. Wheels have ejected even when the user has properly tightened their QR. That should NEVER happen. Not once. It's not an issue of improper maintenance or anything analogous to using a bicycle in an unsafe manner. I was thinking more of checking the tread depth on vehicles tyres versus checking the QR is secure. Regardless of what analogy is used, the issue is more about hearsay more than solid data at present. I have no doubt that disc brakes create more torque on the dropouts; but does that really create a problem on anything but an improperly adjusted quick release? No-one can say "Yes, it's a problem because we have this many accidents a year or statistically speaking there will be this many failures". And if it is a serious problem, what do you propose be done about it? A design change will fix future occurrences. But what realistically will be done about existing forks and brake systems? I'm waiting for more information before I jump on the bandwagon. -- Westie (Replace 'invalid' with 'yahoo' when replying.) |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
"Tim McNamara" wrote in message ... See, that's the point. The brake should be designed so that it *can't* force the wheel out of the dropouts, even if the QR is left completely loose. It's a design flaw, an epic design flaw that will cost some manufacturer a *lot* of money in court some day. No other current brake design that I'm aware of puts an ejection force into the wheel in normal operation, but front disk brakes do. I'd have thought angling the drop-out so it faces forward would prevent the axle rotating out if the pads are the pivot point. I'm still trying to think of any negative implications from doing this as it seems too easy. Being cynical a non-mechanical implication would be manufacturers seen to be fixing a problem they deny exists therefore admitting the potential problem after the fact and leaving the industry wide open to litigation. -- Regards, Pete |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
in message wsN6c.16296$Cf3.2864@lakeread01, tcmedara
') wrote: James Annan wrote: "Frobnitz" wrote in message ... Have you contacted someone like Watchdog (UK consumer affairs program, for the non-UK readers on the x-post) to see if they are interested. No, I don't think there is any point in that. Firstly, it doesn't affect me directly, and secondly, they are hardly going to take a complaint seriously that has only ever been noticed by one rider (and he didn't even have a crash or anything, it's just that his wheel won't stay put). Since it's already been cleared by the CPSC, there is obviously no design problem and I guess I must have made the whole thing up. It was quite a hassle making all the fake user accounts on singletrackworld: http://www.singletrackworld.com/foru...34406&t=933851 and just to make it seem more authentic I forged this review and hacked into Marin's site: http://www.marin.co.uk/marin-2004/reviews.php?ID=47 LOL. While I think you are an obsessed quasi-religious zealot, that's not why I'm going to goof on you..... *Dumabass,*Frobnitz*was**supporting*you**! Merkins. They just don't do irony, do they? Something to do with only having senses of humor, not of humour. There's a lot goes missing with that second 'u'. Mind you, of course, most of them wouldn't recognise humour of any sort if it fell on them in a thunderstorm. Simon, generally phlegmatic, but occasionally sanguine. PS Oh, and it was the _philosophers'_ stone. -- (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; Women are from Venus. Men are from Mars. Lusers are from Uranus. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"
in message ,
') wrote: Zog The Undeniable wrote: I'm pretty sure some manufacturers are now starting to put the disc on the RH side of the fork. It's certainly an accepted problem. Or you can just turn the QR around so the lever is on the right side. Or you could fill your bathtub with brightly coloured machine tools, whilst intoning in a cod French accent 'this is not a pipe'. All things are possible. But I don't see what it has to do with solving the brake ejection problem. Simon, rides a Lefty, doesn't have a problem. -- (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; MS Windows: A thirty-two bit extension ... to a sixteen bit ;; patch to an eight bit operating system originally coded for a ;; four bit microprocessor and sold by a two-bit company that ;; can't stand one bit of competition -- anonymous |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Seeing the TDF in person (also posted to r.b.r) | Mike Jacoubowsky | General | 0 | July 4th 04 05:43 AM |
funny things to do on a bike | jake jamison | General | 518 | June 11th 04 03:22 AM |
Schwinn Rocket 88 "chain suck" issue | Fletcher | Mountain Biking | 9 | December 24th 03 04:13 PM |
350 Watt Electric Scooter will bring a big smile this holiday | Joe | General | 2 | November 21st 03 07:16 AM |
Warranty issue | D T W .../\\... | Mountain Biking | 8 | July 19th 03 10:53 PM |