Through axles for dummies?

[paredown]

Saw the PSA for the Strong, and posters noted the lack of through axles as a deal-breaker.

Anyone want to try for the short version of the how and why of through axles?

(Presume I know nothing about disk set ups, because that would be correct.)

Thanks!

[fignon's barber]

Try this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w6uqN_Pips

[josephr]

understanding thru-axles isn't that hard, especially after having a bike that had them and then take the wheel off. Are they better? I dunno....personally I think they're completely over-rated as since folks have been using tried and true QR skewers forever with few problems. The marketing materials say thru axles allow carbon fiber fork designers to optimize stiffness without accommodating QR clamping force/flex....plus also lightens the fork as there's no more lawyer tabs.

Lots of gobbledy-gook out there ---- if I saw a sweet deal on a used bike, lack of thru-axles wouldn't stop me. But, if I was a guy shelling out $3k-$5k, I might be a bit more insistent about having the latest greatest.

[paredown]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

Try this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w6uqN_Pips

Excellent!

Are there standard lengths, or is it going the way of bottom bracket "standards"?

[FriarQuade]

Originally Posted by paredown

Excellent!

Are there standard lengths, or is it going the way of bottom bracket "standards"?

While the over locknut lengths are one of a few options the actual length of the axle is all over the map. Thread pitch is one of 4 options as well. TLDR, don't loose your factory supplied thru axle, they can be a pain to replace.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by josephr

understanding thru-axles isn't that hard, especially after having a bike that had them and then take the wheel off. Are they better? I dunno....personally I think they're completely over-rated as since folks have been using tried and true QR skewers forever with few problems. The marketing materials say thru axles allow carbon fiber fork designers to optimize stiffness without accommodating QR clamping force/flex....plus also lightens the fork as there's no more lawyer tabs.

Lots of gobbledy-gook out there ---- if I saw a sweet deal on a used bike, lack of thru-axles wouldn't stop me. But, if I was a guy shelling out $3k-$5k, I might be a bit more insistent about having the latest greatest.

‘Probably’ a good idea with disc brakes. For wheel retention, stiffness and for ensuring rotor is the right place each time. No personal experience, own no disc stuff. But going the way of B.B. ‘standards’, not quite as bad but it’s early.

[fignon's barber]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

‘Probably’ a good idea with disc brakes. For wheel retention, stiffness and for ensuring rotor is the right place each time. No personal experience, own no disc stuff. But going the way of B.B. ‘standards’, not quite as bad but it’s early.

This. I've got a disc cross bike with QR. I can flex the fork when standing to make the rotor hit the pads.
As for road bikes, I would personally hold off a few years. Discs are in their infancy, and my guess is a that a disc road bike will look very different in 4 or 5 years as they iron out the kinks.

[berserk87]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

Try this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w6uqN_Pips

Thanks for posting this. This brought me up to speed on this through axle business.

[eBAUMANN]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

Discs are in their infancy, and my guess is a that a disc road bike will look very different in 4 or 5 years as they iron out the kinks.

What would you say are the "kinks" that exist for road disc that dont/didnt for mtb/cx?

Besides the industry-standard kink of having too many damn "standards"... I cant really see them evolving all that far from the current DA/eTap flat-mount forms.
T-A's were ironed out long before they came to CX (let alone road) bikes...then they were unnecessarily f*cked with in the name of "innovation" because the industry has to find a way to make a buck...

T-A are great. QR's work fine, yes, but T-A are just a bit fine-er.

[ergott]

This is the best resource for compatibility.
http://blog.fairwheelbikes.com/revie...ut-thru-axles/

[ptourkin]

Originally Posted by eBAUMANN

What would you say are the "kinks" that exist for road disc that dont/didnt for mtb/cx?

Besides the industry-standard kink of having too many damn "standards"... I cant really see them evolving all that far from the current DA/eTap flat-mount forms.
T-A's were ironed out long before they came to CX (let alone road) bikes...then they were unnecessarily f*cked with in the name of "innovation" because the industry has to find a way to make a buck...

T-A are great. QR's work fine, yes, but T-A are just a bit fine-er.

This. Discs, TAs, 1x are not new things although people here are freaking out as they are applied to the road. They've been thoroughly worked through in MTB and the road applications are already pretty consistent. Now that Shimano has declared flat-mount to be the standard, that's what we're seeing. This is how bikes are going to look for the lifetime of 9100 and probably the next-gen too. If you want to see the next few years of road bikes, look at the new Cannondale Synapse. This is how everything will be.

[William]

New rack mounts for the car as well....







William

[fignon's barber]

Originally Posted by eBAUMANN

What would you say are the "kinks" that exist for road disc that dont/didnt for mtb/cx?

Besides the industry-standard kink of having too many damn "standards"...

I would say probable real application issues. I've read reports of high speed shuddering on some disc frames. It would make sense given the additional torque placed on the fork that some of that force would transfer to the frame and place different demands on the frame. Many bike makers are so quick to jump on the disc bandwagon that they are simply slapping disc mounts on existing designs. There aren't many disc road bikes on the road and road application is different from mtb (higher speeds, more aerodynamics, importance of road feel). It's only logical that design will evolve..
Secondly, as you mentioned, the "standards kink". I still don't forgive the bike industry for the press fit BB. Is it 12mmor 15mm? Is it Beta or VHS?
I'm not against disc at all. I'll just let the dust settle and see what evolves.

[ntb1001]

Originally Posted by William

New rack mounts for the car as well....







William

This....

I guess any fork mount rack is obsolete.

Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk

[eBAUMANN]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

I'm not against disc at all. I'll just let the dust settle and see what evolves.

For me, the dust settled a long time ago (as far as T-A's are concerned) on 15mm front and 142x12mm rear.

Why?

Because these numbers represent a perfect middle ground, the center of the Venn diagram for road/cx/mtn.

Maybe if you only have one of each of these bikes, standardization doesnt matter as much to you, but for me, its a godsend.
similar to the cross-compatibility of 11s drivetrains.

Unfortunately, things that are good for the consumer are rarely good for the industry, and so, another standard (or 3) have been foisted upon us in the name of "innovation"

Give me the choice of standardizing wheels across every bike I own and a 10g weight savings on a 12mm thru axle...yea, i know what im picking