loose quill stem?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
@young Ed I'm not sure what to suggest other than to disassemble, clean lovingly, talk kindly to it, reassemble and fiddle randomly.

@Widge I would respectfully take issue with the idea that threadless headsets are inherently better than threaded. They're different, sure, but "far simpler and reliable user friendly"? I'm not so sure.

Adjusting the bearings on a threadless requires fewer tools - just an Allen key as opposed to two spanners - but it's an easy job in both cases.

Adjusting the height of the bars is way easier on threaded headsets with quill stems - no faffing around with spacers or resetting the bearing preload. It's just undo, bash, fiddle, tighten.

Adjusting for reach by replacing the stem is awkward on both, more so on threaded because quill stems tend not to have faceplates so you have to thread them onto the bars.

I've never serviced a threadless headset, but if it's easier than a threaded one then it must be very easy as that's one of the easiest jobs there is.

And then there's what I think is the Achilles heel of the threadless - If you cut the steerer too short you are stuffed. Threaded ones are endlessly adjustable.

And of course there's the other Achilles heel of threadless: looks. A nice quill stem is a thing of beauty but the best that the nicest Ahead set can aspire to is "rather unattractive".

Lastly, there's production costs. I guess that threadless are probably cheaper as there's no need to cut a thread in the steerer or to manufacture batches of forks to match the head tubes of batches of frames.

So are threadless "simpler"? Not in my opinion. More reliable? I've never found threaded headsets to be unreliable. Granted Ed has a problem with one now. Like knees, they can sieze up with age. More user friendly? Well, depends what you mean. They require fewer/different tools, it is true. But it's not like comparing cottered with cotterless cranks.

One thing which is not a matter of opinion, but which is an incontrovertible FACT is that a beautiful quill stem is at least a million times nicer looking than a cumbersome new stem all covered with allen bolts.

Phew, I'm glad I got that off my chest. ;)
 
Last edited:

PpPete

Legendary Member
Location
Chandler's Ford
it may be FACT, but it's incontrovertible :laugh:
 

Widge

Baldy Go
@young Ed I'm not sure what to suggest other than to disassemble, clean lovingly, talk kindly to it, reassemble and fiddle randomly.

@Widge I would respectfully take issue with the idea that threadless headsets are inherently better than threaded. They're different, sure, but "far simpler and reliable user friendly"? I'm not so sure.

Adjusting the bearings on a threadless requires fewer tools - just an Allen key as opposed to two spanners - but it's an easy job in both cases.

Adjusting the height of the bars is way easier on threaded headsets with quill stems - no faffing around with spacers or resetting the bearing preload. It's just undo, bash, fiddle, tighten.

Adjusting for reach by replacing the stem is awkward on both, more so on threaded because quill stems tend not to have faceplates so you have to thread them onto the bars.

I've never serviced a threadless headset, but if it's easier than a threaded one then it must be very easy as that's one of the easiest jobs there is.

And then there's what I think is the Achilles heel of the threadless - If you cut the steerer too short you are stuffed. Threaded ones are endlessly adjustable.

And of course there's the other Achilles heel of threadless: looks. A nice quill stem is a thing of beauty but the best that the nicest Ahead set can aspire to is "rather unattractive".

Lastly, there's production costs. I guess that threadless are probably cheaper as there's no need to cut a thread in the steerer or to manufacture batches of forks to match the head tubes of batches of frames.

So are threadless "simpler"? Not in my opinion. More reliable? I've never found threaded headsets to be unreliable. Granted Ed has a problem with one now. Like knees, they can sieze up with age. More user friendly? Well, depends what you mean. They require fewer/different tools, it is true. But it's not like comparing cottered with cotterless cranks.

One thing which is not a matter of opinion, but which is an incontrovertible FACT is that a beautiful quill stem is at least a million times nicer looking than a cumbersome new stem all covered with allen bolts.

Phew, I'm glad I got that off my chest. ;)


OK!
 
OP
OP
young Ed

young Ed

Veteran
i'm back, after a bit of fun with a crowbar breaking up euro pallets if you must know!

sorry if i came across cocky,full of my self, big headed or anything else related as i didn't mean to! :sad:

i may have exaggerated on one or two things a tiny bit with out realizing such as i don't live in a fully parktools kitted out bike specific workshop :sad: and i am not a fully trained bike mechanic :sad: but i do have most of the basic tools to rebuild a bike and have most of the basic knowledge to do so
also the stem isn't very loose just a weee bit of wiggle at the top where it exits the fork but fairly solid enough at the actual expander wedge and enough so for me to have fine steering it is just when i stand up on the pedals and end up naturally pulling up slightly more on the bars the you can hear it almost rattling

i shall dis-assemble, inspect, clean, grease and re-assemble if i get the time tomorrow


my vote on threaded v.s threadless/a-head is vintage bikes must have a proper nice threaded with a nice quill stem but it is just simply wrong on a modern bike
mine is neither mine only has threaded and quill as it is cheap as chips :cry:
Cheers Ed
 
Top Bottom