L
Lucie Levesque
Guest
I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
And what's the best, clips or clipless?
Thanks!
And what's the best, clips or clipless?
Thanks!
L
landotter
Guest
Lucie Levesque wrote:
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
Yes, it's very intelligently specced--I like it more than the fancier
Pilots as it's got normal wheels that should prove to be very reliable.
Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing. Good
choice of OEM tires and other small touches. Great and sensible cockpit
for folks that want drop bars with usable drops. Thumbs up from me at
least, if it fits of course.
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
>
For recreational riders, touring, sandals, or casual mtb shoes with spd
pedals are perfect. It's silly to not have shoes you can walk in. I
always recommend the Wellgo 800 pedal (sold under other names such as
Nashbar and Ritchey) to start. It's cheap enough, with a street price
of 30-40 bucks, that if you absolutely hate clipless, it's no big loss
and if you like it, fit it to the rest of your stable. I keep meaning
to replace mine with something fancier, but can't ever find a reason
to.
If you hate clipless, get some MKS GR9 platforms and clips, they're
incredibly comfortable, even in floppy shoes like your nasty old
Converse.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/PD4011
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
Yes, it's very intelligently specced--I like it more than the fancier
Pilots as it's got normal wheels that should prove to be very reliable.
Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing. Good
choice of OEM tires and other small touches. Great and sensible cockpit
for folks that want drop bars with usable drops. Thumbs up from me at
least, if it fits of course.
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
>
For recreational riders, touring, sandals, or casual mtb shoes with spd
pedals are perfect. It's silly to not have shoes you can walk in. I
always recommend the Wellgo 800 pedal (sold under other names such as
Nashbar and Ritchey) to start. It's cheap enough, with a street price
of 30-40 bucks, that if you absolutely hate clipless, it's no big loss
and if you like it, fit it to the rest of your stable. I keep meaning
to replace mine with something fancier, but can't ever find a reason
to.
If you hate clipless, get some MKS GR9 platforms and clips, they're
incredibly comfortable, even in floppy shoes like your nasty old
Converse.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/PD4011
K
Ken
Guest
"Lucie Levesque" <[email protected]> wrote in news:k2Fdg.3364$%Z2.353495
@news20.bellglobal.com:
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
The main purpose of these bikes is to improve fit for people who can't get
comfortable on the traditional racing bike geometry. If the Pilot fits you,
then buy it. Also check out similar bikes like the Giant OCR and Specialized
Roubaix.
Clips or clipless are a personal preference. Most people think clipless is
more comfortable, more efficient, and easier to use. Some retro-grouch types
still use toe clips. Some beginners choose to use neither (i.e. platform
pedals), but these are really only useful at very slow speeds.
@news20.bellglobal.com:
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
The main purpose of these bikes is to improve fit for people who can't get
comfortable on the traditional racing bike geometry. If the Pilot fits you,
then buy it. Also check out similar bikes like the Giant OCR and Specialized
Roubaix.
Clips or clipless are a personal preference. Most people think clipless is
more comfortable, more efficient, and easier to use. Some retro-grouch types
still use toe clips. Some beginners choose to use neither (i.e. platform
pedals), but these are really only useful at very slow speeds.
C
catzz66
Guest
Ken wrote:
>
> Clips or clipless are a personal preference. Most people think clipless is
> more comfortable, more efficient, and easier to use. Some retro-grouch types
> still use toe clips. Some beginners choose to use neither (i.e. platform
> pedals), but these are really only useful at very slow speeds.
>
.... and if you ride in situations where you have to frequently come to
complete stops.
>
> Clips or clipless are a personal preference. Most people think clipless is
> more comfortable, more efficient, and easier to use. Some retro-grouch types
> still use toe clips. Some beginners choose to use neither (i.e. platform
> pedals), but these are really only useful at very slow speeds.
>
.... and if you ride in situations where you have to frequently come to
complete stops.
L
landotter
Guest
catzz66 wrote:
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Clips or clipless are a personal preference. Most people think clipless is
> > more comfortable, more efficient, and easier to use. Some retro-grouch types
> > still use toe clips. Some beginners choose to use neither (i.e. platform
> > pedals), but these are really only useful at very slow speeds.
> >
>
> ... and if you ride in situations where you have to frequently come to
> complete stops.
Like a utility bike. I've ridden everything from slot cleats to spd,
but I've given up on clips on my city bike as one less thing to fiddle
with. Some nice grippy rat traps provide plenty of grip and I can spin
them just fine.
Nothing wrong with using sneakers and some large platform beartraps on
a road bike, whatever makes your comfortable. Often such a setup,
though less ideal than pedals with retention system, encourage a newbie
to ride more as it's just a matter of jumping on the bike in whatever
workout clothes are handy.
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Clips or clipless are a personal preference. Most people think clipless is
> > more comfortable, more efficient, and easier to use. Some retro-grouch types
> > still use toe clips. Some beginners choose to use neither (i.e. platform
> > pedals), but these are really only useful at very slow speeds.
> >
>
> ... and if you ride in situations where you have to frequently come to
> complete stops.
Like a utility bike. I've ridden everything from slot cleats to spd,
but I've given up on clips on my city bike as one less thing to fiddle
with. Some nice grippy rat traps provide plenty of grip and I can spin
them just fine.
Nothing wrong with using sneakers and some large platform beartraps on
a road bike, whatever makes your comfortable. Often such a setup,
though less ideal than pedals with retention system, encourage a newbie
to ride more as it's just a matter of jumping on the bike in whatever
workout clothes are handy.
S
Steve Gravrock
Guest
On 2006-05-26, Lucie Levesque <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
I recently bought one. I haven't put very many miles on it yet, but so
far I'm quite happy with it. It seems to be pretty well balanced:
responsive enough without being unstable, decently equipped without
being too expensive, and practical enough while still being a bit sporty.
Being able to get the bars up around the height of my saddle was the
biggest selling point for me, but the bike's ability to carry a rear
rack and fenders was also important.
I also looked at the Specialized Sequoia, which has a similar frame
design. Specialized doesn't have anything directly comparable to the Pilot
1.2. The cheapest Sequoia model that doesn't come with Sora shifters
sells for about $300 more than the 1.2.
As with any bike, you should definitely test-ride one before you buy it.
The riding position was what sold me on the bike, but it might not be
to everyone's taste.
I'm clearly not the only one who thinks that the Pilot 1.2 hits a
price/performance sweet spot. The shop I bought mine from seems to be
selling them about as fast as Trek can ship them out.
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
I recently bought one. I haven't put very many miles on it yet, but so
far I'm quite happy with it. It seems to be pretty well balanced:
responsive enough without being unstable, decently equipped without
being too expensive, and practical enough while still being a bit sporty.
Being able to get the bars up around the height of my saddle was the
biggest selling point for me, but the bike's ability to carry a rear
rack and fenders was also important.
I also looked at the Specialized Sequoia, which has a similar frame
design. Specialized doesn't have anything directly comparable to the Pilot
1.2. The cheapest Sequoia model that doesn't come with Sora shifters
sells for about $300 more than the 1.2.
As with any bike, you should definitely test-ride one before you buy it.
The riding position was what sold me on the bike, but it might not be
to everyone's taste.
I'm clearly not the only one who thinks that the Pilot 1.2 hits a
price/performance sweet spot. The shop I bought mine from seems to be
selling them about as fast as Trek can ship them out.
C
Chris Neary
Guest
>Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
Definitely try before you buy.
Chris Neary
[email protected]
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
Definitely try before you buy.
Chris Neary
[email protected]
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
D
Dane Buson
Guest
Chris Neary <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
>
> I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
> with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
> on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
Err, I thought Tiagra and up were the same. I know *Sora* is different
though, is that what you were thinking of?
--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"I only touch base with reality on an as-needed basis!"
-- Royal Floyd Mengot (Klaus)
>>Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
>
> I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
> with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
> on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
Err, I thought Tiagra and up were the same. I know *Sora* is different
though, is that what you were thinking of?
--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"I only touch base with reality on an as-needed basis!"
-- Royal Floyd Mengot (Klaus)
L
landotter
Guest
Chris Neary wrote:
> >Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
>
> I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
> with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
> on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
I thought it was only the Sora that was the odd brifter of the lineup?
Personally, I wish they'd offer barends or downtube shifters on entry
level bikes. You could either shave over a 100 bucks off the price, or
sell $500 105 equipped bikes.
> >Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
>
> I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
> with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
> on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
I thought it was only the Sora that was the odd brifter of the lineup?
Personally, I wish they'd offer barends or downtube shifters on entry
level bikes. You could either shave over a 100 bucks off the price, or
sell $500 105 equipped bikes.
S
SMS
Guest
Steve Gravrock wrote:
> On 2006-05-26, Lucie Levesque <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> I recently bought one. I haven't put very many miles on it yet, but so
> far I'm quite happy with it. It seems to be pretty well balanced:
> responsive enough without being unstable, decently equipped without
> being too expensive, and practical enough while still being a bit sporty.
> Being able to get the bars up around the height of my saddle was the
> biggest selling point for me,
Note that with any threadless headset bicycle, there are a variety of
ways to solve the handlebar height problem, though it's great that a
bicycle manufacturer actually is doing something to correct the problem
that they created in the first place.
The coolest solution is at
"http://www.speedlifter.com/de/sehen/index.html" but I don't think you
can buy this in the U.S., and they removed the English page for this
product. And now they're selling an OEM version, LOL. Like the bicycle
manufacturers, that went to threadless headsets to save them money, are
going to include a device that costs them about 5x the money they saved!
> but the bike's ability to carry a rear rack and fenders was also
important.
Amazing how few bikes have rack braze-ons anymore. I was selling a used
Burley Piccolo on craig's list and was swamped with people that wanted
to buy it. I had to edit my listing to explain that they should not buy
it if their bicycle did not have full braze-ons for a rack, as only the
Burley rack works with the Piccolo, and it requires braze-ons.
> On 2006-05-26, Lucie Levesque <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> I recently bought one. I haven't put very many miles on it yet, but so
> far I'm quite happy with it. It seems to be pretty well balanced:
> responsive enough without being unstable, decently equipped without
> being too expensive, and practical enough while still being a bit sporty.
> Being able to get the bars up around the height of my saddle was the
> biggest selling point for me,
Note that with any threadless headset bicycle, there are a variety of
ways to solve the handlebar height problem, though it's great that a
bicycle manufacturer actually is doing something to correct the problem
that they created in the first place.
The coolest solution is at
"http://www.speedlifter.com/de/sehen/index.html" but I don't think you
can buy this in the U.S., and they removed the English page for this
product. And now they're selling an OEM version, LOL. Like the bicycle
manufacturers, that went to threadless headsets to save them money, are
going to include a device that costs them about 5x the money they saved!
> but the bike's ability to carry a rear rack and fenders was also
important.
Amazing how few bikes have rack braze-ons anymore. I was selling a used
Burley Piccolo on craig's list and was swamped with people that wanted
to buy it. I had to edit my listing to explain that they should not buy
it if their bicycle did not have full braze-ons for a rack, as only the
Burley rack works with the Piccolo, and it requires braze-ons.
P
Peter Cole
Guest
SMS wrote:
> Note that with any threadless headset bicycle, there are a variety of
> ways to solve the handlebar height problem, though it's great that a
> bicycle manufacturer actually is doing something to correct the problem
> that they created in the first place.
>
> The coolest solution is at
> "http://www.speedlifter.com/de/sehen/index.html" but I don't think you
> can buy this in the U.S., and they removed the English page for this
> product. And now they're selling an OEM version, LOL. Like the bicycle
> manufacturers, that went to threadless headsets to save them money, are
> going to include a device that costs them about 5x the money they saved!
What a dumb idea. You have to cut a "precision keyhole slot" in the
steer tube. Yeah, sure, that's simple.
Who needs to change their bar height 4", anyway -- never mind with a QR.
Incredible.
You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
quill stem in the steer tube.
>
> > but the bike's ability to carry a rear rack and fenders was also
> important.
>
> Amazing how few bikes have rack braze-ons anymore. I was selling a used
> Burley Piccolo on craig's list and was swamped with people that wanted
> to buy it. I had to edit my listing to explain that they should not buy
> it if their bicycle did not have full braze-ons for a rack, as only the
> Burley rack works with the Piccolo, and it requires braze-ons.
Trailer-bikes have huge re-sale appeal. People know that kids outgrow
them and realize you can get lightly used ones for way less than list. I
had several people offer to buy mine while we were still using it. It
was/is an Adams, which didn't need braze-ons, which was handy, since I
bought extra mounts cheaply so that I could pull it with several bikes
-- I ruled out the Piccolo expressly because it required a (special)
rack -- an equally (to the Speedlifter) over-engineered product.
> Note that with any threadless headset bicycle, there are a variety of
> ways to solve the handlebar height problem, though it's great that a
> bicycle manufacturer actually is doing something to correct the problem
> that they created in the first place.
>
> The coolest solution is at
> "http://www.speedlifter.com/de/sehen/index.html" but I don't think you
> can buy this in the U.S., and they removed the English page for this
> product. And now they're selling an OEM version, LOL. Like the bicycle
> manufacturers, that went to threadless headsets to save them money, are
> going to include a device that costs them about 5x the money they saved!
What a dumb idea. You have to cut a "precision keyhole slot" in the
steer tube. Yeah, sure, that's simple.
Who needs to change their bar height 4", anyway -- never mind with a QR.
Incredible.
You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
quill stem in the steer tube.
>
> > but the bike's ability to carry a rear rack and fenders was also
> important.
>
> Amazing how few bikes have rack braze-ons anymore. I was selling a used
> Burley Piccolo on craig's list and was swamped with people that wanted
> to buy it. I had to edit my listing to explain that they should not buy
> it if their bicycle did not have full braze-ons for a rack, as only the
> Burley rack works with the Piccolo, and it requires braze-ons.
Trailer-bikes have huge re-sale appeal. People know that kids outgrow
them and realize you can get lightly used ones for way less than list. I
had several people offer to buy mine while we were still using it. It
was/is an Adams, which didn't need braze-ons, which was handy, since I
bought extra mounts cheaply so that I could pull it with several bikes
-- I ruled out the Piccolo expressly because it required a (special)
rack -- an equally (to the Speedlifter) over-engineered product.
S
SMS
Guest
Peter Cole wrote:
> Trailer-bikes have huge re-sale appeal. People know that kids outgrow
> them and realize you can get lightly used ones for way less than list. I
> had several people offer to buy mine while we were still using it. It
> was/is an Adams, which didn't need braze-ons, which was handy, since I
> bought extra mounts cheaply so that I could pull it with several bikes
> -- I ruled out the Piccolo expressly because it required a (special)
> rack -- an equally (to the Speedlifter) over-engineered product.
The advantage to the Piccolo is that it's much more stable for the rider
of the pilot bicycle. My wife had trouble with a seat post mount
trail-a-bike, as she is not an experience rider, but with the Piccolo,
it doesn't have such a big effect on the stability of the pilot bike.
I made three extra mounts that could be used on a standard strong rack
(i.e. a Blackburn Expedition Rack), which Burley might not approve of,
but they were very secure. The mount used a threaded coupling nut, and
two tubular steel drawer pulls, to simulate Burley's Moose Rack, with
the downside being that the rear rack couldn't be used for other things
if the mount was installed on it.
I think I bought it for $180 used, and I sold it for $165 used. Given
the interest in it, I probably priced it too low, but I didn't think
that selling it for more than I paid for it was the right thing to do. I
have no doubt that the current owner will be able to resell it for at
least $150 when he's done with it.
> Trailer-bikes have huge re-sale appeal. People know that kids outgrow
> them and realize you can get lightly used ones for way less than list. I
> had several people offer to buy mine while we were still using it. It
> was/is an Adams, which didn't need braze-ons, which was handy, since I
> bought extra mounts cheaply so that I could pull it with several bikes
> -- I ruled out the Piccolo expressly because it required a (special)
> rack -- an equally (to the Speedlifter) over-engineered product.
The advantage to the Piccolo is that it's much more stable for the rider
of the pilot bicycle. My wife had trouble with a seat post mount
trail-a-bike, as she is not an experience rider, but with the Piccolo,
it doesn't have such a big effect on the stability of the pilot bike.
I made three extra mounts that could be used on a standard strong rack
(i.e. a Blackburn Expedition Rack), which Burley might not approve of,
but they were very secure. The mount used a threaded coupling nut, and
two tubular steel drawer pulls, to simulate Burley's Moose Rack, with
the downside being that the rear rack couldn't be used for other things
if the mount was installed on it.
I think I bought it for $180 used, and I sold it for $165 used. Given
the interest in it, I probably priced it too low, but I didn't think
that selling it for more than I paid for it was the right thing to do. I
have no doubt that the current owner will be able to resell it for at
least $150 when he's done with it.
R
Ryan Cousineau
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Chris Neary <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
> >
> > I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
> > with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
> > on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
>
> Err, I thought Tiagra and up were the same. I know *Sora* is different
> though, is that what you were thinking of?
Also, I'm curious as to what difficulty Sora would present to the
small-handed. By design, the Sora button cannot be reached from the
drops, but that's true for almost all cyclists.
Tiagra uses the same double-lever setup as the rest of the STI shifters.
For comparison, Campagnolo uses a button like the Sora design, but it is
located further back on the brifter and is easily usable from the drops.
Campy shifters also have a shifting lever behind the brake lever, but
the brake lever isn't used at all for shifting.
I have both Campy and Shimano bikes, and while the Shimano setup (both
Sora and not-Sora) is fine, I have grown rather fond of Campy shifting.
--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Chris Neary <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>Tiagra kit throughout is plenty for anybody that's not racing.
> >
> > I've heard that the shifting controls on Tiagra can be difficult for folks
> > with small hands, and that for them the more conventional STI controls found
> > on 105 or better gruppos can be a better choice.
>
> Err, I thought Tiagra and up were the same. I know *Sora* is different
> though, is that what you were thinking of?
Also, I'm curious as to what difficulty Sora would present to the
small-handed. By design, the Sora button cannot be reached from the
drops, but that's true for almost all cyclists.
Tiagra uses the same double-lever setup as the rest of the STI shifters.
For comparison, Campagnolo uses a button like the Sora design, but it is
located further back on the brifter and is easily usable from the drops.
Campy shifters also have a shifting lever behind the brake lever, but
the brake lever isn't used at all for shifting.
I have both Campy and Shimano bikes, and while the Shimano setup (both
Sora and not-Sora) is fine, I have grown rather fond of Campy shifting.
--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
C
Chris Neary
Guest
>Err, I thought Tiagra and up were the same. I know *Sora* is different
>though, is that what you were thinking of?
I believe you are correct. Since all the bikes in our fleet are Ultegra or
Dura-Ace the other Shimano gruppos sometimes blend together for me.
IIRC, the button arangement on Sora can't be easily shifted from the drop,
but the reach is adjustable - at least at one time it was the only Shimano
gruppo which could do this, though aftermarket fixes are now available (My
wife has a set of Shimano "Slim Shims"on her ride REF:
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCEqProduct.jsp?spid=14922 )
Chris Neary
[email protected]
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
>though, is that what you were thinking of?
I believe you are correct. Since all the bikes in our fleet are Ultegra or
Dura-Ace the other Shimano gruppos sometimes blend together for me.
IIRC, the button arangement on Sora can't be easily shifted from the drop,
but the reach is adjustable - at least at one time it was the only Shimano
gruppo which could do this, though aftermarket fixes are now available (My
wife has a set of Shimano "Slim Shims"on her ride REF:
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCEqProduct.jsp?spid=14922 )
Chris Neary
[email protected]
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
M
Matt O'Toole
Guest
On Sat, 27 May 2006 13:57:22 -0400, Peter Cole wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>> Note that with any threadless headset bicycle, there are a variety of
>> ways to solve the handlebar height problem, though it's great that a
>> bicycle manufacturer actually is doing something to correct the problem
>> that they created in the first place.
>>
>> The coolest solution is at
>> "http://www.speedlifter.com/de/sehen/index.html" but I don't think you
>> can buy this in the U.S., and they removed the English page for this
>> product. And now they're selling an OEM version, LOL. Like the bicycle
>> manufacturers, that went to threadless headsets to save them money, are
>> going to include a device that costs them about 5x the money they saved!
>
> What a dumb idea. You have to cut a "precision keyhole slot" in the
> steer tube. Yeah, sure, that's simple.
>
> Who needs to change their bar height 4", anyway -- never mind with a QR.
>
> Incredible.
>
> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
> quill stem in the steer tube.
Or use one of those Look adjustable stems for threadless steerers.
Matt O.
> SMS wrote:
>
>> Note that with any threadless headset bicycle, there are a variety of
>> ways to solve the handlebar height problem, though it's great that a
>> bicycle manufacturer actually is doing something to correct the problem
>> that they created in the first place.
>>
>> The coolest solution is at
>> "http://www.speedlifter.com/de/sehen/index.html" but I don't think you
>> can buy this in the U.S., and they removed the English page for this
>> product. And now they're selling an OEM version, LOL. Like the bicycle
>> manufacturers, that went to threadless headsets to save them money, are
>> going to include a device that costs them about 5x the money they saved!
>
> What a dumb idea. You have to cut a "precision keyhole slot" in the
> steer tube. Yeah, sure, that's simple.
>
> Who needs to change their bar height 4", anyway -- never mind with a QR.
>
> Incredible.
>
> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
> quill stem in the steer tube.
Or use one of those Look adjustable stems for threadless steerers.
Matt O.
T
Terry Morse
Guest
Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
> quill stem in the steer tube.
Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
bearings. It's not an optional item.
Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
--
terry morse - Undiscovered Country Tours - http://udctours.com
> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
> quill stem in the steer tube.
Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
bearings. It's not an optional item.
Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
--
terry morse - Undiscovered Country Tours - http://udctours.com
R
Ryan Cousineau
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
Terry Morse <[email protected]> wrote:
> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
> > quill stem in the steer tube.
>
> Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
> star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
> headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
> bearings. It's not an optional item.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
To an extent. The star nut and top cap are only necessary for setting up
and preloading the stem. Once the stem bolts are tightened up, the cap
and star nut can be removed, though removing star nuts is tricky (they
can often be driven out the bottom of the steer tube, though). The top
cap probably prevents a certain amount of water and sweat intrusion on
the steerer bearings, and it allows for quick adjustments of the stem
without losing preload, and it probably provides a certain amount of
redundancy in stem retention.
You can even set up the preload without relying on the use of the top
cap, though it is a fussier operation.
Observe what Sheldon did to an innocent touring frame:
http://sheldonbrown.org/thorn/index.html
--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
Terry Morse <[email protected]> wrote:
> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
> > quill stem in the steer tube.
>
> Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
> star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
> headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
> bearings. It's not an optional item.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
To an extent. The star nut and top cap are only necessary for setting up
and preloading the stem. Once the stem bolts are tightened up, the cap
and star nut can be removed, though removing star nuts is tricky (they
can often be driven out the bottom of the steer tube, though). The top
cap probably prevents a certain amount of water and sweat intrusion on
the steerer bearings, and it allows for quick adjustments of the stem
without losing preload, and it probably provides a certain amount of
redundancy in stem retention.
You can even set up the preload without relying on the use of the top
cap, though it is a fussier operation.
Observe what Sheldon did to an innocent touring frame:
http://sheldonbrown.org/thorn/index.html
--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
S
SMS
Guest
Terry Morse wrote:
> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
>> quill stem in the steer tube.
>
> Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
> star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
> headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
> bearings. It's not an optional item.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
The star nut is not required. I have one of the first bikes that used a
threadless headset and there was no star nut. It's a pain in the butt to
set the pre-load, but it can be done.
> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
>> quill stem in the steer tube.
>
> Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
> star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
> headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
> bearings. It's not an optional item.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
The star nut is not required. I have one of the first bikes that used a
threadless headset and there was no star nut. It's a pain in the butt to
set the pre-load, but it can be done.
P
Peter Cole
Guest
SMS wrote:
> Terry Morse wrote:
>> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
>>> quill stem in the steer tube.
>>
>> Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
>> star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
>> headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
>> bearings. It's not an optional item.
>>
>> Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
>
> The star nut is not required. I have one of the first bikes that used a
> threadless headset and there was no star nut. It's a pain in the butt to
> set the pre-load, but it can be done.
You can also just drive the nut down farther and use a longer bolt on
the top cap. Practically speaking, you can set the preload once, install
a locking collar and never have to touch it again until you repack the
headset. Actually, in every headset I've used, the locking collar wasn't
necessary because the headset stays together because the plastic tapered
centering bushing forms a press fit, you have to knock the steer tube a
few times with a mallet to break it loose. In any case, I just use the
original stem as the locking collar (can use a canti hanger, etc.), with
a length of h-bar gives me a place to mount lights, bar, etc.
> Terry Morse wrote:
>> Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> You want an adjustable stem on a threadless bike? Just stick a long
>>> quill stem in the steer tube.
>>
>> Interesting suggestion, but you can't mount both a quill stem and a
>> star nut. They both fit into the steer tube. The star nut keeps the
>> headset from falling apart and provides a pre-load on the headset
>> bearings. It's not an optional item.
>>
>> Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
>
> The star nut is not required. I have one of the first bikes that used a
> threadless headset and there was no star nut. It's a pain in the butt to
> set the pre-load, but it can be done.
You can also just drive the nut down farther and use a longer bolt on
the top cap. Practically speaking, you can set the preload once, install
a locking collar and never have to touch it again until you repack the
headset. Actually, in every headset I've used, the locking collar wasn't
necessary because the headset stays together because the plastic tapered
centering bushing forms a press fit, you have to knock the steer tube a
few times with a mallet to break it loose. In any case, I just use the
original stem as the locking collar (can use a canti hanger, etc.), with
a length of h-bar gives me a place to mount lights, bar, etc.
M
Mike Jacoubowsky
Guest
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
Many others have given their thoughts on the Trek Pilot 1.2, so I'll pass on
that one (easy to do, since the comments were favorable, and anything I'd
say would have to be taken with a grain of salt since yes, I very much like
the bike, but I also make a living selling them!).
On the clipless pedals, absolutely, positively, do it! They're wonderful,
and nothing to be scared of if you have a decent teacher. Getting
scared-to-death people comfortable with clipless pedals in 10 minutes or
less is something I have a great deal of both experience and pride in. It's
just so easy... one of these days I'll have to write the definitive piece on
learning how to use them. One thing I'll say that's at odds with some others
here- the Shimano 520 pedal is a better choice than the WellGo. It presents
virtually zero compatibility issues with shoes (some pedals will tend to jam
up a bit when you're trying to get out of them), the release/entry
adjustment screw is "captured" so it can't fall out and render the pedal
useless, and they absolutely positively last forever. And only run about
$50.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
"Lucie Levesque" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:k2Fdg.3364$%[email protected]...
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
Many others have given their thoughts on the Trek Pilot 1.2, so I'll pass on
that one (easy to do, since the comments were favorable, and anything I'd
say would have to be taken with a grain of salt since yes, I very much like
the bike, but I also make a living selling them!).
On the clipless pedals, absolutely, positively, do it! They're wonderful,
and nothing to be scared of if you have a decent teacher. Getting
scared-to-death people comfortable with clipless pedals in 10 minutes or
less is something I have a great deal of both experience and pride in. It's
just so easy... one of these days I'll have to write the definitive piece on
learning how to use them. One thing I'll say that's at odds with some others
here- the Shimano 520 pedal is a better choice than the WellGo. It presents
virtually zero compatibility issues with shoes (some pedals will tend to jam
up a bit when you're trying to get out of them), the release/entry
adjustment screw is "captured" so it can't fall out and render the pedal
useless, and they absolutely positively last forever. And only run about
$50.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
"Lucie Levesque" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:k2Fdg.3364$%[email protected]...
> I'm looking at the Trek Pilot 1.2.. any thoughts on this bike?
>
> And what's the best, clips or clipless?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
Similar threads
