Bad design or isolated incident?

all the documentation i've seen for alloy stems, [when the piece comes in the full retail box at any
rate] has a specific warning about replacement every few years - annually for some of the light
weight racing stuff.

bottom line is that alloy fatigues. it's not /if/, it's /when/. four years of use may not be as good
as the life exhibited by some of the wonderful old cinelli's for example, but for a regular cyclist,
four years is not an outrageously low life either, especially for a low end component like this.

there's not necessarily anything wrong with the two bolt design. if it worries you, get a
replacement that has more, but the key to safe cycling is regular inspection, service & replacement.
same goes for handlebars and every other component come to that.

Chris Zacho The Wheelman said:

I have, or rather had, a quill type road stem with a removable face (Kalloy UNO). Here's what this
stem looks like:

chucksbikes.comst002.htmOpen ↗

This is identical to similar stems made by Profile Design and "Zoom" (A Performance brand name). I
have owned it barely four years, when it failed last week. The top bolt pulled out (stripped).

This did not occur while tightening the bolt, It failed during use. It was not over tightened. Nor
had it been frequently loosened and re-tightened. I am not an overly heavy rider, I weigh 175 lbs
soaking wet. I am not a particularly strong rider, but a tourist/recreational/endurance cyclist.
And while I do like hills, I conquer them with low gears, not by standing and torqueing my bike
into a pretzel. In any case, the failure occurred while riding casually (13 MPH) on level
pavement. My handlebars just started twisting downwards, as the retaining cap came loose. I was
able to finish the short ride safely, by riding carefully, bearing as little weight on the bars as
possible.

When I got home, I saw the top bolt had pulled out, stripping the hole. The fit of the bottom bolt
was also sloppier than I felt it should be, like the hole was too big. Although this may have
resulted from having to ride the bike with the top bolt kaput. The bolts were tight when I left,
and there were the remains if five or six threads on the bolt. This was the same depth as the
bottom bolt. Further examination of the stem and how it failed led me to believe that this _may_
have been due to a flaw in the design. Here is my reasoning:

1. Unlike the MTB stems these are based upon, they only have two bolts, not four. Each bolt,
therefore has to bear twice the load.

2. They are parallel to the ground, not angled upwards, so the retaining cap must bear the entire
load of the rider.

3. The road rider is also leaned further forwards than on an MTB, so there is more weight for the
stem to bear in the first place.

As a result, this greater weight bourne by the handlebars is transmitted to the stem via the
bottom portion of this cap. Actually, through the 5-6 aluminum threads the steel bolt was holding
on to. This "force vector" would appear to be trying to "peel" the cap off the stem, in a
downwards and forewards direction. In addition, every jolt from the road would force the steel
bolts into the bottom of the threaded holes, gradually elongating them.

By this action, the top bolt _would_ give away first, since it is bearing the greatest strain
(both down and out, instead of just mostly down, like the bottom bolt). This is what eventually
happened. Fortunately, it did not happen during a panic stop or on a steep decent.

Anyway, this is my "barnyard engineering theory". If anyone here really IS an actual engineer, or
has had the proper training in engineering or forensic science, and can confirm, or correct this
theory, their input is welcome.

More importantly, if anybody else has, or knows someone who has experienced failures like this on
similar stems, I would definitely like to hear from them.

"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 geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

all the documentation i've seen for alloy stems, [when the piece comes in the full retail box at
any rate] has a specific warning about replacement every few years - annually for some of the
light weight racing stuff.

bottom line is that alloy fatigues. it's not /if/, it's /when/. four years of use may not be as
good as the life exhibited by some of the wonderful old cinelli's for example, but for a regular
cyclist, four years is not an outrageously low life either, especially for a low end component
like this.

there's not necessarily anything wrong with the two bolt design. if it worries you, get a
replacement that has more, but the key to safe cycling is regular inspection, service &
replacement. same goes for handlebars and every other component come to that.

Was there a warning label on the stem when you bought it, informing you of failure after 4 years?

This is a critical component on which our lives sometimes depends. In the event of a failure causing
a tragedy, I doubt a plaintiff's attorney would take the same position as you. This is an excellent
reason for buying a stem from a U.S. maker who is within easy reach of the generous juries in our
courts. U.S. makers are financially motivated to keep us safe. A little fear can be a good thing...

From: [email hidden] (jim=A0beam)

Quoted message said:

all the documentation i've seen for alloy stems, [when the piece comes in the full retail box at
any rate] has a specific warning about replacement every few years - annually for some of the light
weight racing stuff.

bottom line is that alloy fatigues. it's not /if/, it's /when/. four years of use may not be as
good as the life exhibited by some of the wonderful old Cinelli's for example, but for a regular
cyclist, four years is not an outrageously low life either, especially for a low end component
like this.

there's not necessarily anything wrong with the two bolt design. if it worries you, get a
replacement that has more, but the key to safe cycling is regular inspection, service &
replacement. same goes for handlebars and every other component come to that.

A better designed stem is the way I'm going, I just wanted to know if the failure is consistent with
this front mount design. This is the first road stem with a removable plate I have had. I won't make
the same design mistake again! I do regularly inspect my equipment before every ride. As I mentioned
in my original post, the bolts were tight when I started.

I do like the removable face plate, though, especially with my laced leather handlebar wraps. And I
think I found a better designed stem. Ironically, it too, is made by Cinelli. They call it the
"Frog". Kinda dorky looking, BUT the plate is on the top, not the front. So the stem, not the
faceplate bears the weight. It also has three bolts.

From the reviews I've read, it's virtually indestructible. These coming from "hard" riders.

"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 geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗

"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A better designed stem is the way I'm going, I just wanted to know if the failure is consistent
with this front mount design.

First off, and with absolutely no offence intended, I'm not sure we're qualified to decide which
stem is "better designed". You can choose a different stem and if you're more comfortable with it,
that's fine. But I'm not sure you're going to get a "better design" without some thoughtful
calculations. There's probably nothing wrong with a 2-bolt front faceplate design. The execution may
be somewhat questionable in this case, and that can range from quality of construction to quality of
materials to quality of design. I assure you though, a 2-bolt design such as that can be made to
take considerably more abuse than a cyclist can dish out.

Design is always a balance of cost, lightness and durability. Components can be designed to be very
light, but may not be very durable. With your particular situation, my guess is the component is
actually defective. I've never seen a front faceplate stem fail in that way. I don't think (I could
be wrong..) that there are boatloads of failures. That leads me to believe that you particular
situation may be somewhat unique.

Cheers,

Scott..

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

Quoted message said:

Was there a warning label on the stem when you bought it, informing you of failure after 4 years?

This is a critical component on which our lives sometimes depends. In the event of a failure
causing a tragedy, I doubt a plaintiff's attorney would take the same position as you. This is an
excellent reason for buying a stem from a U.S. maker who is within easy reach of the generous
juries in our courts. U.S. makers are financially motivated to keep us safe. A little fear can

be

Quoted message said:

a good thing...

It can also kill entire industries because of frivolous lawsuits. Ask Bell helmets, an American
company (the last I think, that produces helmets..) nearly sued out of existence by what I think are
safe to call frivolous lawsuits. Or the light aircraft industry. It's incredibly myopic, but all too
common, to think that any failure of any kind that can result in an injury or death must result in a
lawsuit for negligence. Now in this case, I think there may be a problem that could result in a
successful lawsuit had injury occurred.

A question here: can you not sue a company that sells products in the U.S. but is based in a foreign
country? I'm certain you must be able to. For instance, if your Hyundai explodes one day, I'm
certain you can sue Hyundai for damages, correct?

Cheers,

Scott..

Chris Zacho 'The Wheelman said:

A better designed stem is the way I'm going, I just wanted to know if the failure is consistent
with this front mount design. This is the first road stem with a removable plate I have had. I
won't make the same design mistake again! I do regularly inspect my equipment before every ride.
As I mentioned in my original post, the bolts were tight when I started.

Quoted message said:

I do like the removable face plate, though, especially with my laced leather handlebar wraps. And
I think I found a better designed stem. Ironically, it too, is made by Cinelli. They call it the
"Frog". Kinda dorky looking, BUT the plate is on the top, not the front. So the stem, not the
faceplate bears the weight. It also has three bolts.

Quoted message said:

From the reviews I've read, it's virtually indestructible. These coming from "hard" riders.

Most stems are hard to destroy - any stem with a moderate failure rate is gonna get recalled, given
the consequences of sudden stem failure. This does happen (e.g. Profile recalled some stems a few
years ago). Probably nearly all of the people who have your two-bolt stem have not broken it. That
is small comfort, of course, it just means that reviews aren't telling you much.

I'm not sure the Frog design is significantly different. I suspect that much of the stress on stem
clamp bolts comes from repeated loading and unloading, especially when climbing and pulling on the
bars. There, pulling up on one side will stress the Frog clamp much like any other. Without an
engineering analysis, we don't really know if one is better, or even if 4-bolt clamps are really
stronger than 2-bolt. (Tip: on multi bolt clamp stems, it's probably more important than usual to
get the bolts to the same torque.)

The type of failure you had - threads stripping out of the aluminum body of the stem - could have
happened in many stems, even the non-open-face quill type like old Cinellis. Whether it happens
probably has to do with strength of the material, precision of machining, and luck. If you want a
stem with threads that won't strip, get a steel stem. If you want an open-face steel stem (with a
solid reputation as a bonus) get a Salsa.

"S. Anderson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Was there a warning label on the stem when you bought it, informing you

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

failure after 4 years?

This is a critical component on which our lives sometimes depends. In

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

event of a failure causing a tragedy, I doubt a plaintiff's attorney

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

take the same position as you. This is an excellent reason for buying a stem from a U.S. maker
who is within easy reach of the generous juries in our courts. U.S. makers are financially
motivated to keep us safe. A little fear

can

Quoted message said:

be

Quoted message said:

a good thing...

It can also kill entire industries because of frivolous lawsuits. Ask

Bell

Quoted message said:

helmets, an American company (the last I think, that produces helmets..) nearly sued out of
existence by what I think are safe to call frivolous lawsuits. Or the light aircraft industry.
It's incredibly myopic, but

all

Quoted message said:

too common, to think that any failure of any kind that can result in an injury or death must
result in a lawsuit for negligence. Now in this

case,

Quoted message said:

I think there may be a problem that could result in a successful lawsuit

had

Quoted message said:

injury occurred.

A question here: can you not sue a company that sells products in the

U.S.

Quoted message said:

but is based in a foreign country? I'm certain you must be able to. For instance, if your Hyundai
explodes one day, I'm certain you can sue

Hyundai

Quoted message said:

for damages, correct?

Cheers,

Scott..

Good question. Car makers generally import their own and do business here. Don't bike parts makers
usually fill an order for an importer and just mail it to them? I'll bet it's easier to collect
damages from a domestic producer, but I really don't know.

I agree that frivolous lawsuits are frustrating and expensive for all of us. Folks need to be
responsible for their own actions, but that includes manufacturers too. We trust them with
our safety.

"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
From: [email hidden] (jim beam)

Quoted message said:

all the documentation i've seen for alloy stems, [when the piece comes in the full retail box at
any rate] has a specific warning about replacement every few years - annually for some of the light
weight racing stuff.

bottom line is that alloy fatigues. it's not /if/, it's /when/. four years of use may not be as
good as the life exhibited by some of the wonderful old Cinelli's for example, but for a regular
cyclist, four years is not an outrageously low life either, especially for a low end component
like this.

there's not necessarily anything wrong with the two bolt design. if it worries you, get a
replacement that has more, but the key to safe cycling is regular inspection, service &
replacement. same goes for handlebars and every other component come to that.

A better designed stem is the way I'm going, I just wanted to know if the failure is consistent with
this front mount design. This is the first road stem with a removable plate I have had. I won't make
the same design mistake again! I do regularly inspect my equipment before every ride. As I mentioned
in my original post, the bolts were tight when I started.

I do like the removable face plate, though, especially with my laced leather handlebar wraps. And I
think I found a better designed stem. Ironically, it too, is made by Cinelli. They call it the
"Frog". Kinda dorky looking, BUT the plate is on the top, not the front. So the stem, not the
faceplate bears the weight. It also has three bolts.

From the reviews I've read, it's virtually indestructible. These coming from "hard" riders.

"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 geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗

My Motus stem failed. Fortunately I was not hurt. I bought a Salsa with a removable face plate and
have had no problems at all. I don't need to check the stem each ride (or ever). They shape part of
the face plate similar to fit into a slot in the stem face. This greatly lessons stress on the bolts
I suppose.

"Benjamin Weiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:4042ba72$1@darkstar...

Quoted message said:

Chris Zacho "The Wheelman <[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

The type of failure you had - threads stripping out of the

aluminum

Quoted message said:

body of the stem - could have happened in many stems, even the non-open-face quill type like old
Cinellis.

Actually, the Cinelli 1As had a steel bolt threaded into a steel sleeve. I have a number of these,
some almost 30 years old -- and the oldest ones were raced for many years. This was a great, long-
lived product Not all that convenient, but very durable. -- Jay Beattie.

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

Quoted message said:

"S. Anderson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Frank Knox" <[email hidden]> wrote in

message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Was there a warning label on the stem when you bought it,

informing you

Quoted message said:

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

failure after 4 years?

This is a critical component on which our lives sometimes

depends. In

Quoted message said:

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

event of a failure causing a tragedy, I doubt a plaintiff's

attorney

Quoted message said:

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

take the same position as you. This is an excellent reason for buying a stem from a U.S.

maker who is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

within easy reach of the generous juries in our courts. U.S. makers are financially motivated
to keep us safe. A

little fear

Quoted message said:

can

Quoted message said:

be

Quoted message said:

a good thing...

It can also kill entire industries because of frivolous

lawsuits. Ask

Quoted message said:

Bell

Quoted message said:

helmets, an American company (the last I think, that produces

helmets..)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

nearly sued out of existence by what I think are safe to call

frivolous

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

lawsuits. Or the light aircraft industry. It's incredibly

myopic, but

Quoted message said:

all

Quoted message said:

too common, to think that any failure of any kind that can

result in an

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

injury or death must result in a lawsuit for negligence. Now

in this

Quoted message said:

case,

Quoted message said:

I think there may be a problem that could result in a

successful lawsuit

Quoted message said:

had

Quoted message said:

injury occurred.

A question here: can you not sue a company that sells

products in the

Quoted message said:

U.S.

Quoted message said:

but is based in a foreign country? I'm certain you must be

able to. For

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

instance, if your Hyundai explodes one day, I'm certain you

can sue

Quoted message said:

Hyundai

Quoted message said:

for damages, correct?

Cheers,

Scott..

Good question. Car makers generally import their own and do

business here.

Quoted message said:

Don't bike parts makers usually fill an order for an importer

and just mail

Quoted message said:

it to them? I'll bet it's easier to collect damages from a

domestic

Quoted message said:

producer, but I really don't know.

Most automobile manufacturers have American distribution companies, e.g. Honda America, American
Kawasaki, etc. These companies get sued all of the time and have registered agents in every state.
Getting jurisdiction over a smal bicycle OEM is a different matter. Depending on their distribution
network, it may be impossible to establish jurisdiction in the United States -- or at least in your
state. Also, the small Chinese and Korean OEMs often have sketchy insurance. And if you get a
judgment against one of these OEMs, it is unlikely that you will be able to collect it. This is how
the domestic seller and its insurer gets screwed -- the insurer for the mom-and-pop LBS ends up
paying the tab and then has to chase the OEM around for indemnity.

Quoted message said:

I agree that frivolous lawsuits are frustrating and expensive

for all of us.

Quoted message said:

Folks need to be responsible for their own actions, but that

includes

Quoted message said:

manufacturers too. We trust them with our safety.

Frivolous lawsuits are the ones where the plaintiff injures himself while attempting to shave with a
gas lawnmower, etc. When you get into parts that break while "just riding along" (for real, and not
just claimed), then you have plenty to talk about. I have defended stem and bar claims, some were
frivolous and some were not. The "were not" claims involved knock-off ultralight OEM parts spec'd
from a catalogue with no manufacturing or design oversight by the domestic seller. Much of the re-
branded OEM stuff we see now is produced in accordance with designs created in the United States and
with process oversight by the domestic seller. I would not worry about that stuff, especially since
it is such a large part of the market now. -- Jay Beattie.

"Jay Beattie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Benjamin Weiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4042ba72$1@darkstar...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The type of failure you had - threads stripping out of the

aluminum

Quoted message said:

body of the stem - could have happened in many stems, even the non-open-face quill type like old
Cinellis.

Actually, the Cinelli 1As had a steel bolt threaded into a steel sleeve. I have a number of these,
some almost 30 years old -- and the oldest ones were raced for many years. This was a great, long-
lived product Not all that convenient, but very durable. -- Jay Beattie.

The failures that get my attention are the ones that can cause a crash. But from that point of
view, minor things like a chain skip or cleat release can take you down. The extreme failures I've
had (no crashes so far, knock on wood): stem, axle, chain, seat rail, and frame failures, all have
been "fail-soft". I do worry about handlebar, crank spindle, crank pedal eye, and any kind of fork
failure though.

Hey Chris:

I haven't had this problem, but know that alum screws are a screw up. I stripped several threads by
not being careful. I striped my first screw on a cinelli 1A stem that I was trying to tighten to a
26.00 handlebar many years ago. I was ignorant about stem compatibility back then. I would replace
the alum screw with a SS one.

Andres

[email hidden] (Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"😉 wrote in message news:<9980-4041653A-23@storefull-
3174.bay.webtv.net>...

Quoted message said:

I have, or rather had, a quill type road stem with a removable face (Kalloy UNO). Here's what this
stem looks like:

chucksbikes.comst002.htmOpen ↗

This is identical to similar stems made by Profile Design and "Zoom" (A Performance brand name). I
have owned it barely four years, when it failed last week. The top bolt pulled out (stripped).

This did not occur while tightening the bolt, It failed during use. It was not over tightened. Nor
had it been frequently loosened and re-tightened. I am not an overly heavy rider, I weigh 175 lbs
soaking wet. I am not a particularly strong rider, but a tourist/recreational/endurance cyclist.
And while I do like hills, I conquer them with low gears, not by standing and torqueing my bike
into a pretzel. In any case, the failure occurred while riding casually (13 MPH) on level
pavement. My handlebars just started twisting downwards, as the retaining cap came loose. I was
able to finish the short ride safely, by riding carefully, bearing as little weight on the bars as
possible.

When I got home, I saw the top bolt had pulled out, stripping the hole. The fit of the bottom bolt
was also sloppier than I felt it should be, like the hole was too big. Although this may have
resulted from having to ride the bike with the top bolt kaput. The bolts were tight when I left,
and there were the remains if five or six threads on the bolt. This was the same depth as the
bottom bolt. Further examination of the stem and how it failed led me to believe that this _may_
have been due to a flaw in the design. Here is my reasoning:

1. Unlike the MTB stems these are based upon, they only have two bolts, not four. Each bolt,
therefore has to bear twice the load.

2. They are parallel to the ground, not angled upwards, so the retaining cap must bear the entire
load of the rider.

3. The road rider is also leaned further forwards than on an MTB, so there is more weight for the
stem to bear in the first place.

As a result, this greater weight bourne by the handlebars is transmitted to the stem via the
bottom portion of this cap. Actually, through the 5-6 aluminum threads the steel bolt was holding
on to. This "force vector" would appear to be trying to "peel" the cap off the stem, in a
downwards and forewards direction. In addition, every jolt from the road would force the steel
bolts into the bottom of the threaded holes, gradually elongating them.

By this action, the top bolt _would_ give away first, since it is bearing the greatest strain
(both down and out, instead of just mostly down, like the bottom bolt). This is what eventually
happened. Fortunately, it did not happen during a panic stop or on a steep decent.

Anyway, this is my "barnyard engineering theory". If anyone here really IS an actual engineer, or
has had the proper training in engineering or forensic science, and can confirm, or correct this
theory, their input is welcome.

More importantly, if anybody else has, or knows someone who has experienced failures like this on
similar stems, I would definitely like to hear from them.

"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 geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗

I had a KORE 3 that did exactly the same thing, although it stripped during a crash.

j.

Jay Beattie said:

Actually, the Cinelli 1As had a steel bolt threaded into a steel sleeve. I have a number of these,
some almost 30 years old -- and the oldest ones were raced for many years. This was a great, long-
lived product Not all that convenient, but very durable. --

Thanks for the correction, Jay. I was thinking of many quill stems which probably resembled the
Cinellis, but had threads in aluminum. These rarely failed, either - rare failures do happen
but don't necessarily indicate a design flaw. OTOH, quill stems of that type usually used a
single M8 clamp bolt - open face stems tend to use two M6 bolts, which probably means less
depth in the threads.

"S. Anderson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:20355-4042697B-51@storefull-
3178.bay.webtv.net...

Quoted message said:

A better designed stem is the way I'm going, I just wanted to know if the failure is consistent
with this front mount design.

First off, and with absolutely no offence intended, I'm not sure we're qualified to decide which
stem is "better designed". You can choose a different stem and if you're more comfortable with it,
that's fine. But I'm not sure you're going to get a "better design" without some thoughtful
calculations. There's probably nothing wrong with a 2-bolt front faceplate design. The execution
may be somewhat questionable in this case, and that can range from quality of construction to
quality of materials to quality of design. I assure you though, a 2-bolt design such as that can
be made to take considerably more abuse than a cyclist can dish out.

Hmmm... I'm not a designer, but I've been around for quite a piece, and I was chatting with a bike-
parts building friend of mine about 1-bolt vs. 2-bolt faceplates recently. (Pat Franz of Terracycle
if you have to know.)

With a 1-bolt stem, the handlebar clamp contracts relatively evenly all the way around the
handlebar. This puts a fairly equal grip all the way around the bar.

By contrast, the front and back plates of a 2-bolt stem are more rigid and squish the handlebar
between them, kind of like this: ->(O)<- ovalizing the handlebar slightly. It seems to me that this
could damage the handlebar more easily than the 1-bolt stem, assuming equal resistance to handlebar
rotation. *I* think that the 2-bolt clamps are inferior to 1-bolt clamps.

BTW: Chris's original assertion that "Zoom" parts are a Performance brand is incorrect. Zoom is a
brand used by Hsin Lung parts in the U.S.- they began to establish this brand in 1991 or 1992 or
thereabouts. Take a look at hlcorp.com.twhlcorp.com.twOpen ↗ .

Jeff

With respect to the problem cited by the original poster:

I have a Dimension version of the stem (same as the Zoom and Profile stems). Based on your posting,
I took a very close-up look at my stem. In particular, I looked at the exposed threads (ie, the
threads between the faceplate and the stem body) on the top bolt.

I found some metal filings which looked to me like the shredded bits of metal you get when you cross-
thread a bolt and ream the threads. Since I have not cross-threaded the bolt, I'm "guessing" that
the aluminum in the stem is pretty soft and normal torqueing of the bolt can shred the threads.

So in answer to your original question, I vote for "bad design".

Jean

"David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>... <snip>

Quoted message said:

I disagree. Were it that the only effect on the bars was the clamping, you might have a point, but
even then the roundness of a 1-bolt system would have to be perfect to give you an advantage
there. But the big difference, for road bars, is the damage you do installing them in the stem.
All those scratches are stress risers. Two-bolt stems avoid that completely.

Good point. However, I learned to install handlebars without scratching them 25 years ago, so *for
me* it's a moot point.

Jeff

salsa make a nice two bolt front plate type quill stem. it's called the stiff upper lip, or s.u.l.
it's steel so you won't need to worry about it it's not super light but it certainly is not a heavy
piece. it's light enough

dave

"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9980-4041653A-23@storefull-
3174.bay.webtv.net...

Quoted message said:

I have, or rather had, a quill type road stem with a removable face (Kalloy UNO). Here's what this
stem looks like:

chucksbikes.comst002.htmOpen ↗

This is identical to similar stems made by Profile Design and "Zoom" (A Performance brand name). I
have owned it barely four years, when it failed last week. The top bolt pulled out (stripped).

This did not occur while tightening the bolt, It failed during use. It was not over tightened. Nor
had it been frequently loosened and re-tightened. I am not an overly heavy rider, I weigh 175 lbs
soaking wet. I am not a particularly strong rider, but a tourist/recreational/endurance cyclist.
And while I do like hills, I conquer them with low gears, not by standing and torqueing my bike
into a pretzel. In any case, the failure occurred while riding casually (13 MPH) on level
pavement. My handlebars just started twisting downwards, as the retaining cap came loose. I was
able to finish the short ride safely, by riding carefully, bearing as little weight on the bars as
possible.

When I got home, I saw the top bolt had pulled out, stripping the hole. The fit of the bottom bolt
was also sloppier than I felt it should be, like the hole was too big. Although this may have
resulted from having to ride the bike with the top bolt kaput. The bolts were tight when I left,
and there were the remains if five or six threads on the bolt. This was the same depth as the
bottom bolt. Further examination of the stem and how it failed led me to believe that this _may_
have been due to a flaw in the design. Here is my reasoning:

1. Unlike the MTB stems these are based upon, they only have two bolts, not four. Each bolt,
therefore has to bear twice the load.

2. They are parallel to the ground, not angled upwards, so the retaining cap must bear the entire
load of the rider.

3. The road rider is also leaned further forwards than on an MTB, so there is more weight for the
stem to bear in the first place.

As a result, this greater weight bourne by the handlebars is transmitted to the stem via the
bottom portion of this cap. Actually, through the 5-6 aluminum threads the steel bolt was holding
on to. This "force vector" would appear to be trying to "peel" the cap off the stem, in a
downwards and forewards direction. In addition, every jolt from the road would force the steel
bolts into the bottom of the threaded holes, gradually elongating them.

By this action, the top bolt _would_ give away first, since it is bearing the greatest strain
(both down and out, instead of just mostly down, like the bottom bolt). This is what eventually
happened. Fortunately, it did not happen during a panic stop or on a steep decent.

Anyway, this is my "barnyard engineering theory". If anyone here really IS an actual engineer, or
has had the proper training in engineering or forensic science, and can confirm, or correct this
theory, their input is welcome.

More importantly, if anybody else has, or knows someone who has experienced failures like this on
similar stems, I would definitely like to hear from them.

"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 geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗