Integrated Seatpost

"Frank Drackman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Last night I was thinking of all the silly things that have been

introduced

Quoted message said:

in the bike industry and couldn't get past the idea that the integrated

seat

Quoted message said:

post was probably the most useless. Maybe it works for a top pro but I
can't see the any advantage for an amateur racer.

Am I missing something?

Saving weight. It's not different from saving 40 grams of any other part.

Quoted message said:

Does anyone have one?

Not me. Despite the fact that I never change my seat height.

Lou

Frank Drackman said:

Am I missing something? Does anyone have one?

I don't have one, but ISTM that it's based on these fairly sensible
assumptions about someone willing to spend a lot on a bike: that
he knows how high his saddle should be (you still get about 20mm
of adjustment IIRC) , he's stopped growing, and that he'd like to save
a little weight.

The only disadvantage I can see is that it somewhat limits the
pool of prospective resale customers.

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

Frank Drackman said:

Last night I was thinking of all the silly things that have been introduced
in the bike industry and couldn't get past the idea that the integrated seat
post was probably the most useless. Maybe it works for a top pro but I
can't see the any advantage for an amateur racer.

Am I missing something?

You have a lot to learn if you think that's the most useless. Never
seen L-shaped cranks?

The integrated seatpost/fly through seat tube is actually a pretty
good idea. The conventional system is heavy, adds a couple of stress
raisers at highly loaded points, and is more susceptible to
contamination, corrosion and significant slippage than the best of the
integrated designs.

The only downside of the integrated system is that it doesn't allow
major changes of saddle height after initial set up - something which
no serious road cyclist is going to miss. In the lifetime of a bike,
I'm not going to need more than a few millimetres of height adjustment
to allow for changes to saddle design or pedal/cleat stack.

So, mechanically and functionally, it's elegant and does what it says
on the tin. By saving a couple of ounces there, the designer can add
material somewhere where it will do some good while still hitting the
UCI weight limit

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

Frank Drackman said:

Last night I was thinking of all the silly things that have been introduced
in the bike industry and couldn't get past the idea that the integrated seat
post was probably the most useless. Maybe it works for a top pro but I
can't see the any advantage for an amateur racer.

Am I missing something? Does anyone have one?

No, I don't have one and wouldn't buy a bike with one. What do you do
when you want to sell your bike? Or let one of your kids have it? Of
course I'm one of those old fogies who are still not sold on integrated
headsets.

Smokey

Smokey said:

Quoted message said:

Am I missing something? Does anyone have one?

No, I don't have one and wouldn't buy a bike with one. What do you do
when you want to sell your bike? Or let one of your kids have it? Of
course I'm one of those old fogies who are still not sold on integrated
headsets.

Well, not really the same problems. Headsets are parts that can wear,
whether with abuse or just time, and need periodic replacement. So, if
after 5 years you need to replace an integrated headset, you would be
screwed if it were no longer made.

Integrated seatposts are a different matter. You'd have to really, really
know how to fit the bike to you, and you better not change... I don't
know that I use the same saddle height I used 30 years ago, but I would
hate to be locked into that, as well as the same crankarm length and pedal
type. Of course, such things as integrated seatposts are not for those of
us who want to keep a bike for more than 5 years. Heck, neither are
boutique wheels, or threadless headsets (what, _now_ you want a higher
handlebar position? 5 years ago cutting the fork where it is was just
fine.), but we still have them in abundance.

Maybe those of us who are cranky about all these "advances" in bicycle
design should just shut up and learn to replace everything every 3 years
like we are supposed to.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Deserves death! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve
_`\(,_ | death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to
(_)/ (_) | them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.
-- J. R. R. Tolkein

In article <[email hidden]>,

David L. Johnson said:

Smokey said:

Quoted message said:

Am I missing something? Does anyone have one?

No, I don't have one and wouldn't buy a bike with one. What do you do
when you want to sell your bike? Or let one of your kids have it? Of
course I'm one of those old fogies who are still not sold on integrated
headsets.

Well, not really the same problems. Headsets are parts that can wear,
whether with abuse or just time, and need periodic replacement. So, if
after 5 years you need to replace an integrated headset, you would be
screwed if it were no longer made.

Integrated seatposts are a different matter. You'd have to really, really
know how to fit the bike to you, and you better not change... I don't
know that I use the same saddle height I used 30 years ago, but I would
hate to be locked into that, as well as the same crankarm length and pedal
type. Of course, such things as integrated seatposts are not for those of
us who want to keep a bike for more than 5 years. Heck, neither are
boutique wheels, or threadless headsets (what, _now_ you want a higher
handlebar position? 5 years ago cutting the fork where it is was just
fine.), but we still have them in abundance.

I disagree with you about threadless steering tubes. Most
people who ride a quill stem have it at its highest
position, so the options are illusory. Whereas the bars on
my threadless steering tube can be set from 65 mm below
the seat to 40 mm above the seat (including the change in
height from flipping the stem). The frame is a modest
sport frame. Perhaps one day I will shorten the steering
tube.

Funny thing is that I bought this frame it to be rather
more upright than extended, yet over time have continued
to adjust it to more radical riding postures.

--
Michael Press

Michael Warner said:

Frank Drackman said:

Am I missing something? Does anyone have one?

I don't have one, but ISTM that it's based on these fairly sensible
assumptions about someone willing to spend a lot on a bike: that
he knows how high his saddle should be (you still get about 20mm
of adjustment IIRC) , he's stopped growing, and that he'd like to save
a little weight.

The only disadvantage I can see is that it somewhat limits the
pool of prospective resale customers.

I think it reinforces the idea that frames and bicycles are not long
term investments...like riding for 15 years, changing fitness as you
age and thinking that your fit/position would change, which of course,
it does.

Michael Press said:

I disagree with you about threadless steering tubes. Most
people who ride a quill stem have it at its highest
position, so the options are illusory.

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

Quoted message said:

Whereas the bars on
my threadless steering tube can be set from 65 mm below the seat to 40
mm above the seat (including the change in height from flipping the
stem). The frame is a modest sport frame. Perhaps one day I will shorten
the steering tube.

Most people who ride with a threadless fork have 0 spacers above the stem
from day 1. So, if they progress in the other way from your experience,
they have to start looking for a riser stem, or a new fork.

Mine is the only bike I know of around here that has a spacer above the
stem.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Become MicroSoft-free forever. Ask me how.
_`\(,_ |
(_)/ (_) |

David L. Johnson said:

Smokey said:

Quoted message said:

Am I missing something? Does anyone have one?

No, I don't have one and wouldn't buy a bike with one. What do you do
when you want to sell your bike? Or let one of your kids have it? Of
course I'm one of those old fogies who are still not sold on integrated
headsets.

Well, not really the same problems. Headsets are parts that can wear,
whether with abuse or just time, and need periodic replacement. So, if
after 5 years you need to replace an integrated headset, you would be
screwed if it were no longer made.

While I agree with you in general, one is not "screwed." Bike companies
do not manufacture their own bearings. These are commodity
items, all of which are available somewhere.

If your LBS can't handle the job (unfortunately likely), most machine
shops should be able to identify the bearings, find replacements, and
install them.

Matt O.

David L. Johnson said:

Michael Press said:

I disagree with you about threadless steering tubes. Most
people who ride a quill stem have it at its highest
position, so the options are illusory.

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

It is apparent you always ride alone. Every quill stem I see is at its
maximum extension line. All the guys I ride with have quill stems on
their bikes. All at the max line. My TTT Synthesis stem has a sort of
long quill being forged instead of welded. And at its max line puts
the bars about 2" below the saddle height. Just right. What size
frame do you ride? I'll bet you ride a frame with zero standover
height to get your bars anywhere near saddle height. Not what I would
call a properly fitting frame. Or do you use a Nitto Technomic stem to
get all this height adjustment with quill stems?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Whereas the bars on
my threadless steering tube can be set from 65 mm below the seat to 40
mm above the seat (including the change in height from flipping the
stem). The frame is a modest sport frame. Perhaps one day I will shorten
the steering tube.

Most people who ride with a threadless fork have 0 spacers above the stem
from day 1. So, if they progress in the other way from your experience,
they have to start looking for a riser stem, or a new fork.

I have spacers above the stem on my threadless stem bikes. And spacers
below. All of the Treks sold at the local stores have a couple inches
of spacers below the stem. Easy to adjust bar height with the spacers
on Trek bikes. If the biggest bike dealer Trek leaves the forks extra
long with lots of spacers, I would say you are imagining problems of
not being able to adjust threadless stems. And of course just flipping
the stem over from -8 to +8 degrees gets more height adjustment than
all the quill stems except the Nitto Technomic.

Quoted message said:

Mine is the only bike I know of around here that has a spacer above the
stem.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Become MicroSoft-free forever. Ask me how.
_`\(,_ |
(_)/ (_) |

I'm still trying to figure out why after pushing all the "benifits" of
putting the headset bearings INside the frame they go and start putting
the spindle bearings on the OUTside! LOL!!

- -
Comments and opinions compliments of,
"Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

My web Site:
http://geocities.com/czcorner

To E-mail me:
ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net

In article <[email hidden]>,

David L. Johnson said:

Michael Press said:

I disagree with you about threadless steering tubes. Most
people who ride a quill stem have it at its highest
position, so the options are illusory.

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

I see most quill stems at their minimum insertion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Whereas the bars on
my threadless steering tube can be set from 65 mm below the seat to 40
mm above the seat (including the change in height from flipping the
stem). The frame is a modest sport frame. Perhaps one day I will shorten
the steering tube.

Most people who ride with a threadless fork have 0 spacers above the stem
from day 1. So, if they progress in the other way from your experience,
they have to start looking for a riser stem, or a new fork.

Mine is the only bike I know of around here that has a spacer above the
stem.

No spacers above the stem is not a fault
of thread-less steering tubes.

--
Michael Press

Kinky Cowboy said:

The integrated seatpost/fly through seat tube is actually a pretty
good idea. The conventional system is heavy, adds a couple of stress
raisers at highly loaded points, and is more susceptible to
contamination, corrosion and significant slippage than the best of the
integrated designs.

The only downside of the integrated system is that it doesn't allow
major changes of saddle height after initial set up - something which
no serious road cyclist is going to miss. In the lifetime of a bike,
I'm not going to need more than a few millimetres of height adjustment
to allow for changes to saddle design or pedal/cleat stack.

So, mechanically and functionally, it's elegant and does what it says
on the tin. By saving a couple of ounces there, the designer can add
material somewhere where it will do some good while still hitting the
UCI weight limit

Kinky Cowboy*

All good points. If you keep your frame till it breaks, then all is
fine and dandy. Most people will get a new frame well before their old
frame is broken. With the integrated seatpost you limit the number of
folks that might fit the frame. Unless you happen to have long legs
relative to other folks who ride the same size frame as you do.
------------------
Alex

russellseaton1 said:

Quoted message said:

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

It is apparent you always ride alone.

The things you can see just by reading. Amazing. False, but amazing.

Quoted message said:

Every quill stem I see is at its
maximum extension line.

I have two bikes that still have quill stems. Neither at the max; one is
in the middle, the other near full insertion.

Quoted message said:

What size frame do
you ride? I'll bet you ride a frame with zero standover height to get
your bars anywhere near saddle height.

Now you're being silly.

Quoted message said:

Not what I would call a properly
fitting frame.

You can tell that my frame is too large over the internet?

You can, actually, see the bike I rode in on today. Hmm, not the same
stem any more. Now I have a stem with a removable face plate, and the
extension is a bit less than in the picture. That stem is about half-way
to the max line.

http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/djohnson.htm

Quoted message said:

I have spacers above the stem on my threadless stem bikes. And spacers
below. All of the Treks sold at the local stores have a couple inches
of spacers below the stem.

A couple of inches below the stem? Not real common. If anything, there
will be one or two spacers, giving maybe 10mm, of adjustment. Trek's
website shows the road bikes set up with maybe 10-20mm of spacers,
certainly no 2 inches.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Enron's slogan: Respect, Communication, Integrity, and
_`\(,_ | Excellence.
(_)/ (_) |

Michael Press said:

Quoted message said:

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

I see most quill stems at their minimum insertion.

....<snippage>

Quoted message said:

No spacers above the stem is not a fault
of thread-less steering tubes.

Nor would too-short quill stems be the fault of the threaded steerer. You
(the two responding in this way) are setting up a false premise. Look
around, count up the bikes on your next ride that have spacers above the
stem clamp -- that is, those that have room to adjust the bar upwards.

Whether it is possible to assemble a bike with room to adjust the bar
height is not the question, it is whether it is done in practice. Even
people I ride with who had their bikes built with very high bars, either
with custom frames having elongated headtubes, or with lots of spacers put
in before the steerer was cut, very few have any more spacers above the
bar -- and most with high bars already have riser stems or stems flipped
to the higher position.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig... You
_`\(,_ | soon find out the pig likes it!
(_)/ (_) |

Alex said:

All good points. If you keep your frame till it breaks, then all is
fine and dandy. Most people will get a new frame well before their old
frame is broken. With the integrated seatpost you limit the number of
folks that might fit the frame. Unless you happen to have long legs
relative to other folks who ride the same size frame as you do.
------------------
Alex

I don't know about anyone else, But I never really gave a rats ass
about who might be riding my frame after I'm done with it. It's all
about me, baby

In article <[email hidden]>,

David L. Johnson said:

Michael Press said:

Quoted message said:

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

I see most quill stems at their minimum insertion.

...<snippage>

Quoted message said:

No spacers above the stem is not a fault
of thread-less steering tubes.

Nor would too-short quill stems be the fault of the threaded steerer.

The point is that you condemn thread-less steering
tubes, not that quill stems are good or bad. I was
replying to a comment on thread-less steering tubes,
not quill stems.

Quoted message said:

You
(the two responding in this way) are setting up a false premise.

You speak of a `false premise' as if I should know
what you are talking about.

Quoted message said:

Look
around, count up the bikes on your next ride that have spacers above the
stem clamp -- that is, those that have room to adjust the bar upwards.
Whether it is possible to assemble a bike with room to adjust the bar
height is not the question, it is whether it is done in practice.

This does not support your assertion that thread-less
steering tubes are not a good long term investment.

Quoted message said:

Even
people I ride with who had their bikes built with very high bars, either
with custom frames having elongated headtubes, or with lots of spacers put
in before the steerer was cut, very few have any more spacers above the
bar

So what?

Quoted message said:

-- and most with high bars already have riser stems or stems flipped
to the higher position.

You wrote in article <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Of course, such things as integrated seatposts are not
for those of us who want to keep a bike for more than 5
years. Heck, neither are boutique wheels, or threadless
headsets.

This is where I take exception. You have not proved
your case: that thread-less steering tubes are ill
suited to long term use. Long thread-less steering
tubes are readily available and provide your minimum 5
years service.

--
Michael Press

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Michael Warner said:

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 07:53:58 -0700, Frank Drackman wrote:

The only disadvantage I can see is that it somewhat limits the
pool of prospective resale customers.

I think it reinforces the idea that frames and bicycles are not long
term investments...like riding for 15 years, changing fitness as you
age and thinking that your fit/position would change, which of course,
it does.

I haven't changed my saddle height more than 10mm in 20 years,
although I have raised my bars a bit.

Regarding bars, there are so many ahead stems out there in angles from
0 to 40 degrees fixed or +/- 55 degrees for the Deda adjustable unit
that changing bar height over a range of several inches is easy even
with no spacers either above or below the stem.

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

David L. Johnson said:

russellseaton1 said:

Quoted message said:

Not in my experience. Mine have been either around the middle, or fully
inserted, depending on the angle of the stem.

It is apparent you always ride alone.

The things you can see just by reading. Amazing. False, but amazing.

I just realized there must be no adjustment on the quill stem on my
road bike... it's all the way down, and apparently all the way up too.
???

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Every quill stem I see is at its
maximum extension line.

It is apparent you always ride alone. ;-) Couldn't help myself.

Quoted message said:

I have two bikes that still have quill stems. Neither at the max; one is
in the middle, the other near full insertion.

Same here.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What size frame do
you ride? I'll bet you ride a frame with zero standover height to get
your bars anywhere near saddle height.

Now you're being silly.

That's assuming that we all ride with our bars "near saddle height".
Not even remotely close. My seatpost is at its minimum insertion
limit, and the bars as low as they'll go. Even my "urban setup"
'cross bike has 8-9cm drop to the bars, and my MTB about 12cm.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not what I would call a properly
fitting frame.

You can tell that my frame is too large over the internet?

Thnk of the money the industry could save!

Quoted message said:

You can, actually, see the bike I rode in on today. Hmm, not the same
stem any more. Now I have a stem with a removable face plate, and the
extension is a bit less than in the picture. That stem is about half-way
to the max line.

http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/djohnson.htm

But I thought he only saw stems that were ALL the way up???

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have spacers above the stem on my threadless stem bikes. And spacers
below. All of the Treks sold at the local stores have a couple inches
of spacers below the stem.

A couple of inches below the stem? Not real common. If anything, there
will be one or two spacers, giving maybe 10mm, of adjustment. Trek's
website shows the road bikes set up with maybe 10-20mm of spacers,
certainly no 2 inches.

Especially considering that many threadless forks have a 2-3cm maximum
spacer spec.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame