"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue"

"Simon Daw" wrote in message
...

"Jon Senior" jon_AT_restlesslemon.co.uk wrote in message
...
"bomba" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:50:19 +0000, Peter B wrote:

Well I've not had a problem yet but I do make sure the standard
Shimano
skewers are very tight.

Is there such a thing as too tight? Is there a danger of the skewer
being over-stressed and being more likely to fail?

With quick-release, if you have the skewers too tight, they can make the
hub
bearings bind. Giant's bike manual suggested that the levers were too
loose
if closing them didn't leave an imprint in my palm. Doing so meant the
wheels stopped rotating within about 3/4 revolution, compared to around
20
when loose.

Jon


QR skewers certainly tighten the bearings, although it's something that's
always bemused me somewhat; how do they make so much difference when the
cones are locked onto a pretty un-compressable axle?

Actually, it is the axle that is compressing, and Ti axles require less
force to compress as much as steel ones do.

I suppose it's just
that very, very little movement of the cones on the axle is required to
make
a difference. Anyway, it's a normal effect, and needs to be taken account
of
when setting the cones. There should actually be a little play before the
QR
skewer is fastened. Not doing skewers up tightly isn't a good idea,
although
I think the imprint in the palm is a *bit* extreme!

Cones on a Ti axle should be even looser than those on a steel axle.

Dave

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

James

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* ! 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".
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, you launch into a paranoid rant asserting the veracity
of the claims while simultaneously asserting no direct interest. WTF???
Perhaps you should resolve the dispute between the voices in your head
before forcing us to sort through them.

Maybe you should bring that whole thing up with your doctor and he can check
you medication levels, eh?

Tom

"bomba" wrote in message

Is there such a thing as too tight? Is there a danger of the skewer
being over-stressed and being more likely to fail?


Giant's bike manual suggested that the levers were too loose
if closing them didn't leave an imprint in my palm.

Jon


I heard Rimmer has a permanent imprint on his palm... oh yeah, that was
from squeezing his helmet too much ;-)
--
Slacker

1. tighten your QR TIGHT and check them occasionaslly.

2. leave the lawyer lips intact (don't file them off).

It's worked for me and my Hayes mech's.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"May you have the wind at your back.
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

Jon Senior wrote:

With quick-release, if you have the skewers too tight, they can make the hub
bearings bind. Giant's bike manual suggested that the levers were too loose
if closing them didn't leave an imprint in my palm. Doing so meant the
wheels stopped rotating within about 3/4 revolution, compared to around 20
when loose.

That indicates a hub bearing adjustment error

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Russ wrote:

It's actually 1 Yr and 3 days :-(

Been wondering whether to get involved but decided I'd would.
Comments in reply to other posts
Legal action still pending, really ought to get on with it before someone
else goes the same way.

For anyone wondering what I'm on about see the link below

Russ
www.russ-appeal.org.uk


Good see you active on the ng's.

I think I disagree more than I agree about this issue, but regardless,
good luck and best wishes with the legal battle.
--
Slacker

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

"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.

writes:

David Reuteler wrote:

Or you can just turn the QR around so the lever is on the right
side.

? what does that fix?

Prevents the problem.

Not even remotely. You haven't been paying attention.

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.