Quill Stems

[MikeD]

I don't know why people think a threaded stem looks better. You've got those ugly threaded headset nuts to look at.

If you ride hard, you sweat and sweat drips down into the steerer tube on a threaded headset/quill stem and eventually will cause rust and if the stem is aluminum, it will corrode the stem to the steerer tube and you'll have to drill it out or resort to other mechanical machinations to remove it. You may be able to avoid some of that by frequent cleaning and greasing.

Bars are hard to remove and replace unless the stem has a removeable faceplate. Fitting a modern, compact bar through a stem without a removable faceplate requires spreading of the clamp; not what you should do if the stem is aluminum. Modern bars with a flat transition to the brake levers are so much more comfortable than the old style that slope down to the levers. Quill stems with removable faceplates are few and far between. Good luck finding bars for a quill stem, as bars have moved to 31.8mm instead of the old 26 or 25.4mm standard, although the Soma Hwy. 1 is one. There are a few quill stems that can take the larger bars, but the ones I've seen are butt ugly, although not as bad looking as some titanium forks I've seen.

Threadless headsets are easier to adjust with an Allen key instead of specialty wrenches, and you can adjust a threadless headset out on the road.

Many threaded headset/quill stem zealots say that the vertical adjustment is what they like. However, unless you're a bonehead and cut your steerer tube too short, threadless stems are plenty adjustable by swapping spacers around, flipping the stem, or getting a stem with a different rise.

Even Jobst Brandt, who was a curmudgeon on most changes with bicycles, thought the threadless headset was a noteworthy improvement. https://yarchive.net/bike/threadless_headset.html

[Mike V]

What specialty wrenches are you talking about?

[rice rocket]

Originally Posted by Mike V

What specialty wrenches are you talking about?

Large cone wrenches probably?

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by Mike V

What specialty wrenches are you talking about?

Two of these, but you can probably make due with one and a large open end wrench.

[Mike V]

Lol never thought of those as specialty. But I guess it would if I was purchasing now to work on one threaded headset.

All the problems above seam very trivial to me. It’s seems more prospective to me.

I like both threaded and threadless.

On a bike with a one inch head tube I’ll always go with threaded instead of threadless. It looks better.

[msl819]

The issue with quill stems for me has been the limitation on bar options. 31.8 bars are way more comfortable for my preference. I know there are some 31.8 removable quills stems like the ones posted but they tend to be very limited in sizes AND the 31.8 bar can look out of place on the skinnier steel tubes that usually accompany the quill stem. Quill stems can be a bit flexy for me too but they do look great though.

[palincss]

Originally Posted by cgates66

This is going to sound weird. I was putting together a kids bike with a quill stem, and I couldn't help but think: this is a WAY better design than the current clamp designs. I got into riding after quills disappeared from road bikes, but the elegance of the design was remarkable to me. No cutting, etc.

What am I missing here?

Besides the no cutting, you're missing that after the bike has been fitted for the first owner, a second owner (or a first owner who has aged a bit) needing to get the bars higher could, instead of replacing the fork, just buy a different stem, say something like a Nitto Technomic Deluxe that lets you get the bars up higher.

Now depending on your perspective, this making a bike no longer so disposable is either a bad thing (if your goal is selling new bikes) or a good thing (if you're a user).

That's not to say there aren't downsides to quill stems, threaded headsets, square taper bottom brackets and cranks. There are always trade-offs. But if you were to make a wild generalization, it would be that the trend with all the new stuff has been to provide benefits such as cost and time savings and de-skilling for the manufacturer and assembler that aren't passed on to the customer, in exchange for "benefits" that are mostly marketing hype and drawbacks that tend to make the bikes less useful for the consumer long-term.

[palincss]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

You're missing that threaded forks have to made in a variety of different lengths (instead of one length that works for all ) - and you still have to cut it. And also that due to dimensional constraints, you can't make threaded steerers out of anything but steel (so no aluminum or carbon).

With threadless steerers, you can make one size fork with one length steerer, and then cut it down to size. With threaded forks, only the top 50mm or so of the steerer can be threaded, so to match different size frames, the fork manufacturer has to make a variety of of different models of the fork, all with different length steerer tubes. After selecting the fork with a steerer tube of the closest length, you then have to cut down the fork the last few centimeters to match the frame. So you still end up having to cut the steerer.

Why not thread the entire length of the steerer, so that a single fork can be sized to any frame? Because the steerer is weaker in the threaded area, and if you tightened down the stem's expander wedge in the threaded section, you risk cracking the steerer. This is part of the reason that stem quills have minimum insertion lengths - so you don't tighten the wedge in the threaded section.

You only mentioned the issue of having to cut the fork, but there are many other disadvantages of threaded steerers/quill stems as well. I say good riddance.

These are examples of advantages for the manufacturer and distributor that result in cost savings to them that aren't passed on to the consumer, in trade for disadvantages to the consumer.

[Wakatel_Luum]

Originally Posted by MikeD

I don't know why people think a threaded stem looks better. You've got those ugly threaded headset nuts to look at.

If you ride hard, you sweat and sweat drips down into the steerer tube on a threaded headset/quill stem and eventually will cause rust and if the stem is aluminum, it will corrode the stem to the steerer tube and you'll have to drill it out or resort to other mechanical machinations to remove it. You may be able to avoid some of that by frequent cleaning and greasing.

Bars are hard to remove and replace unless the stem has a removeable faceplate. Fitting a modern, compact bar through a stem without a removable faceplate requires spreading of the clamp; not what you should do if the stem is aluminum. Modern bars with a flat transition to the brake levers are so much more comfortable than the old style that slope down to the levers. Quill stems with removable faceplates are few and far between. Good luck finding bars for a quill stem, as bars have moved to 31.8mm instead of the old 26 or 25.4mm standard, although the Soma Hwy. 1 is one. There are a few quill stems that can take the larger bars, but the ones I've seen are butt ugly, although not as bad looking as some titanium forks I've seen.

Threadless headsets are easier to adjust with an Allen key instead of specialty wrenches, and you can adjust a threadless headset out on the road.

Many threaded headset/quill stem zealots say that the vertical adjustment is what they like. However, unless you're a bonehead and cut your steerer tube too short, threadless stems are plenty adjustable by swapping spacers around, flipping the stem, or getting a stem with a different rise.

Even Jobst Brandt, who was a curmudgeon on most changes with bicycles, thought the threadless headset was a noteworthy improvement. https://yarchive.net/bike/threadless_headset.html

I agree with everything you say except IMO quill stems just look nicer.

[fourflys]

Originally Posted by palincss

These are examples of advantages for the manufacturer and distributor that result in cost savings to them that aren't passed on to the consumer, in trade for disadvantages to the consumer.

yep, you can bet, in the end, it comes down to $$..

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by palincss

Besides the no cutting, you're missing that after the bike has been fitted for the first owner, a second owner (or a first owner who has aged a bit) needing to get the bars higher could, instead of replacing the fork, just buy a different stem, say something like a Nitto Technomic Deluxe that lets you get the bars up higher.

I'm not sure why you are claiming that threaded steerers don't have to be cut, because they do. If you have every replaced threaded fork, you'd know that. And just as with a threadless fork, you can either cut it only just long enouigh, or you can cut it a little bit longer and add spacers for extra height. The difference is that with a threaded fork, there is a less leeway for how much extra spacers you can add (at least without cutting more threads on the steerer, which is a more difficult task).

And just as with threaded forks, there are tall stems to get the handlebars higher with a threadless fork. For example, the Velo Orange Cigne threadless stem will get the handlebars just as high as with a Nitto Technomic stem.

The inability to adjust handlebar height on a threadless fork is largely exagerated (and sometimes exacerbated by overzealously cutting steerers too short). By moving spacers above and blow the stem and flipping stems up and down, the same amount of height is adjustment is possible as with a typical quill stems. And likewise, even more height can be added by replacing the stem.

[coffeecherrypie]

Originally Posted by mistermo

Where does this animal exist (at a reasonable cost, without going custom)?

Here’s a very nice removable faceplate quill stem (for 31.8 bars), I don’t think these were posted yet. Unfortunately +10 degrees only or I would own one https://www.rivbike.com/products/stem-546aah-l982kr

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by palincss

These are examples of advantages for the manufacturer and distributor that result in cost savings to them that aren't passed on to the consumer, in trade for disadvantages to the consumer.

There are multiple advantages of threadness steerers to the user, not just the manufacturer. Here are just a few more:

The aftermarket replacement fork market became far more practical with threadless steerers. Instead of the manufacturer having to produce an array of different threaded forks with every combination of steerer length and offset, they now only have to produce one model for each offset, which improves the availability of suitable forks to the consumer. In addition, consumers can replace their own forks with common everyday tools (with threaded forks, cutting the end of the steerer square is more important for the locknut, plus you need special dies to clean up the threads after cutting).

Threaded headsets are prone to loosening. On road bikes this generally isn't a big problem, but the extra shock and vibration on MTBs made loose headsets a common occurence offroad. Many MTB'ers took to carrying headset wrenches with them due to the frequency of loosening headsets. This problem was largely cured with threadless stems. And even if a threadless headset loosenings up, it can be re-adjusted with a small simple tool.

Some cyclists are weight conscious, and threadless steerers made lighter forks possible, in several ways: Lighter materials (such as carbon and aluminum) can be used for steerers; and even steel steerers can be lighter, since they don't have to be thick enough to be be threaded or to bear the wedging forces of a quill stem.

I had used threaded forks and headsets for a couple of decades before threadless became common, and given a choice I won't go back.

[palincss]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

I'm not sure why you are claiming that threaded steerers don't have to be cut, because they do. If you have every replaced threaded fork, you'd know that.

I never said that, and it distorts my point. I got a frame back in 2002 from a guy who rode it for many years with the stem almost slammed. I built it with a Technomic Deluxe stem and rode it with the bars several inches higher than the original owner. There was no need for me to replace the fork. That clearly isn't the case with threadless, as I'm sure you know.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

And just as with a threadless fork, you can either cut it only just long enouigh, or you can cut it a little bit longer and add spacers for extra height. The difference is that with a threaded fork, there is a less leeway for how much extra spacers you can add (at least without cutting more threads on the steerer, which is a more difficult task).

The spacers with the threaded fork have little to nothing to do with whether you can raise the bars or not.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

The inability to adjust handlebar height on a threadless fork is largely exagerated (and sometimes exacerbated by overzealously cutting steerers too short). By moving spacers above and blow the stem and flipping stems up and down, the same amount of height is adjustment is possible as with a typical quill stems. And likewise, even more height can be added by replacing the stem.

Or by the fact that a carbon steerer cannot have more than 3 cm of spacers above the headset. And given that fact, a more accurate statement of your thesis might be that "By moving spacers above and blow the stem and flipping stems up and down, the same amount of height is adjustment is possible as with a typical quill stems of the 1960s and 1970s, but that adjustment range falls far short of what is possible with a stem like a Nitto Technomic or Technomic Deluxe."

[El Chaba]

Threaded headsets/quill stems and threadless headsets/clamp on stems both work just fine if the materials and execution are good-that factor being far more important than the one system or the other. The advantages of the threaded system is the adjustability after installation and the advantage of the threadless system is that it can be used with a carbon or aluminum steerer saving a fair amount of weight( most of which is traded back with recent bikes for the beefy fork blades needed for disc brakes) . Having said all of that, I have observed that threadless systems are FAR more likely to suffer from chronic loosening issues than threaded systems. Around here, I have made it a bit of a specialty to sort out chronic threadless adjustment issues that the local bike shops can’t or can’t be bothered to sort out.