A question about lawyer lips
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
A question about lawyer lips
or lawyer tabs, or what ever you call the annoying things on the forks dropouts that prevent the quick release from working the way it should.
When did they start appearing on bikes?
Is it mandatory for the manufacturers to put them there?
If so, when did that become mandatory?
Thanks
When did they start appearing on bikes?
Is it mandatory for the manufacturers to put them there?
If so, when did that become mandatory?
Thanks
#3
Senior Member
In the 1970s, bicycle manufacturers started to push "racing" 10 speeds on the public that were equipped with quick releases on the wheels. Before that, most bikes had bolted on wheels, which are very secure and which most people knew how to put on and take off.
Many people did not know how the quick releases worked and there were several incidents of front wheels coming completely off the bike because the quick release wasn't properly secured, leading to serious injuries.
The lawyers for the bicycle manufacturers told them to design the front fork with some kind of mechanism that would keep the wheel from coming out of the front fork, even if the quick release was not properly tightened, hence the term "lawyer lips".
I don't know that there are any laws which require that bikes have lawyer lips, I think it's just prudence on the part of bicycle manufacturers to avoid liability.
If you don't think proper quick release use is a problem, just do a search on quick releases here and you will see many posts where people are asking for instructions on how to use them.
I always file off the lawyer lips, but I'm a lawyer so I can do this.
Many people did not know how the quick releases worked and there were several incidents of front wheels coming completely off the bike because the quick release wasn't properly secured, leading to serious injuries.
The lawyers for the bicycle manufacturers told them to design the front fork with some kind of mechanism that would keep the wheel from coming out of the front fork, even if the quick release was not properly tightened, hence the term "lawyer lips".
I don't know that there are any laws which require that bikes have lawyer lips, I think it's just prudence on the part of bicycle manufacturers to avoid liability.
If you don't think proper quick release use is a problem, just do a search on quick releases here and you will see many posts where people are asking for instructions on how to use them.
I always file off the lawyer lips, but I'm a lawyer so I can do this.
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
#4
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 19
Bikes: Trek 830 mountain bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
"I always file off the lawyer lips, but I'm a lawyer so I can do this."
This must make it tough for your "significant other" to kiss you. lol.
This must make it tough for your "significant other" to kiss you. lol.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I don't know anythng about the fork thingies of which you speak, but I know a bit about PI lawsuits. Assuming San-R's explanation is correct, the lawyer lips innovation is a perfect example of how and why product liability lawsuits are a good thing.
Bolting on a wheel was a good way to connect the wheel to the fork, but a quick release greatly increases the functionality of the bike. It made it much easier to transport, easier to change a tube or a tire, and otherwise was a very good innovation. I also understand how they would be easy to mis-use, or to at least install incorrectly. No need to bash the end user who does it wrong as an idiot who deserves to be hurt - from the manufacturer's perspective, someone out there was going to do it wrong, the wheel was going to fall off, and the guy was going to be hurt, maybe seriously. So, why not make a simple change and fix it, and thereby make your product signficantly safer?
So the manufacturers make a small, almost costless change to their forks and the problem largely goes away. It's true that it makes it a bit harder to get the wheel on and off, but that price is inconsequental when compared to the people who are not hurt when they don't use the quick release properly, but whose wheel does not fall off. Making a small change results in a signifcant increase in safety at almost no cost. All thanks to the threat posed by personal injury lawsuits.
Remember this story the next time someone starts bashing ambulance chasers. It's because of them that the world is much safer than it would be otherwise.
Bolting on a wheel was a good way to connect the wheel to the fork, but a quick release greatly increases the functionality of the bike. It made it much easier to transport, easier to change a tube or a tire, and otherwise was a very good innovation. I also understand how they would be easy to mis-use, or to at least install incorrectly. No need to bash the end user who does it wrong as an idiot who deserves to be hurt - from the manufacturer's perspective, someone out there was going to do it wrong, the wheel was going to fall off, and the guy was going to be hurt, maybe seriously. So, why not make a simple change and fix it, and thereby make your product signficantly safer?
So the manufacturers make a small, almost costless change to their forks and the problem largely goes away. It's true that it makes it a bit harder to get the wheel on and off, but that price is inconsequental when compared to the people who are not hurt when they don't use the quick release properly, but whose wheel does not fall off. Making a small change results in a signifcant increase in safety at almost no cost. All thanks to the threat posed by personal injury lawsuits.
Remember this story the next time someone starts bashing ambulance chasers. It's because of them that the world is much safer than it would be otherwise.
#6
Cycle Year Round
#7
Senior Member
What would you, as a lawyer, charge to file these off for me? (Just some fun lad, no harm intended).
Seriously though, I always file mine off, wheel has never popped out on me yet.
You think the LBS would show people how to do this, or ask if they know how.
#8
benter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 72
Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur w/ GMAC, Bacchetta Giro 20, Specialized AWOL, Breezer Downtown EX
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The thing I don't get about the CPSC with regard to bicycles is why so many violations (that the bike shops & customers don't really care about) slip by, then there's a recall.
Here's the law on hub retention. Strangely, it seems like retention for loose solid-axle nuts is required, but not "lawyer lips."
[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 16, Volume 2]
[Revised as of January 1, 2008]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 16CFR1512.12]
[Page 565]
TITLE 16--COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
CHAPTER II--CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
PART 1512_REQUIREMENTS FOR BICYCLES--Table of Contents
Subpart A_Regulations
Sec. 1512.12 Requirements for wheel hubs.
All bicycles (other than sidewalk bicycles) shall meet the following
requirements:
(a) Locking devices. Wheels shall be secured to the bicycle frame
with a positive lock device. Locking devices on threaded axles shall be
tightened to the manufacturer's specifications.
(1) Rear wheels. There shall be no relative motion between the axle
and the frame when a force of 1,780 N (400 lbf) is applied symmetrically
to the axle for a period of 30 seconds in the direction of wheel
removal.
(2) Front wheels. Locking devices, except quick-release devices,
shall withstand application of a torque in the direction of removal of
17 N-m (12.5 ft-lb).
(b) Quick-release devices. Lever-operated quick-release devices
shall be adjustable to allow setting the lever position for tightness.
Quick-release levers shall be clearly visible to the rider and shall
indicate whether the levers are in a locked or unlocked position. Quick-
release clamp action shall emboss the frame or fork when locked.
(c) Front hubs. Front hubs not equipped with lever-operated quick-
release devices shall have a positive retention feature that shall be
tested in accordance with the front hub retention test, Sec.
1512.18(j)(3), to assure that when the locking devices are released the
wheel will not separate from the fork.
Here's the law on hub retention. Strangely, it seems like retention for loose solid-axle nuts is required, but not "lawyer lips."
[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 16, Volume 2]
[Revised as of January 1, 2008]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 16CFR1512.12]
[Page 565]
TITLE 16--COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
CHAPTER II--CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
PART 1512_REQUIREMENTS FOR BICYCLES--Table of Contents
Subpart A_Regulations
Sec. 1512.12 Requirements for wheel hubs.
All bicycles (other than sidewalk bicycles) shall meet the following
requirements:
(a) Locking devices. Wheels shall be secured to the bicycle frame
with a positive lock device. Locking devices on threaded axles shall be
tightened to the manufacturer's specifications.
(1) Rear wheels. There shall be no relative motion between the axle
and the frame when a force of 1,780 N (400 lbf) is applied symmetrically
to the axle for a period of 30 seconds in the direction of wheel
removal.
(2) Front wheels. Locking devices, except quick-release devices,
shall withstand application of a torque in the direction of removal of
17 N-m (12.5 ft-lb).
(b) Quick-release devices. Lever-operated quick-release devices
shall be adjustable to allow setting the lever position for tightness.
Quick-release levers shall be clearly visible to the rider and shall
indicate whether the levers are in a locked or unlocked position. Quick-
release clamp action shall emboss the frame or fork when locked.
(c) Front hubs. Front hubs not equipped with lever-operated quick-
release devices shall have a positive retention feature that shall be
tested in accordance with the front hub retention test, Sec.
1512.18(j)(3), to assure that when the locking devices are released the
wheel will not separate from the fork.
#9
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times
in
2,497 Posts
The original solutions bike manufacturers came up with were much worse. Front wheel retention came about due to the CPSC, not because of lawyers. The solution has changed over the years. The lips are actually a lot better than the early methods. I noticed Peter White advocates using lawyer lipped forks if you have a front disk.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Not everyone knows how to use a quick release. About 10 years ago on a racing club ride I saw a guy bunny hoppy some water at about 25 mph. His front wheel fell off, and his early shell-less styrofoam helmet exploded the second time his head hit the pavement. Off to hospital for him...
You and me can file the wheel rentention bumps off, but some people need all the help they can get.
You and me can file the wheel rentention bumps off, but some people need all the help they can get.
#11
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
I don't know anythng about the fork thingies of which you speak, but I know a bit about PI lawsuits. Assuming San-R's explanation is correct, the lawyer lips innovation is a perfect example of how and why product liability lawsuits are a good thing.
Bolting on a wheel was a good way to connect the wheel to the fork, but a quick release greatly increases the functionality of the bike. It made it much easier to transport, easier to change a tube or a tire, and otherwise was a very good innovation. I also understand how they would be easy to mis-use, or to at least install incorrectly. No need to bash the end user who does it wrong as an idiot who deserves to be hurt - from the manufacturer's perspective, someone out there was going to do it wrong, the wheel was going to fall off, and the guy was going to be hurt, maybe seriously. So, why not make a simple change and fix it, and thereby make your product signficantly safer?
So the manufacturers make a small, almost costless change to their forks and the problem largely goes away. It's true that it makes it a bit harder to get the wheel on and off, but that price is inconsequental when compared to the people who are not hurt when they don't use the quick release properly, but whose wheel does not fall off. Making a small change results in a signifcant increase in safety at almost no cost. All thanks to the threat posed by personal injury lawsuits.
Remember this story the next time someone starts bashing ambulance chasers. It's because of them that the world is much safer than it would be otherwise.
Bolting on a wheel was a good way to connect the wheel to the fork, but a quick release greatly increases the functionality of the bike. It made it much easier to transport, easier to change a tube or a tire, and otherwise was a very good innovation. I also understand how they would be easy to mis-use, or to at least install incorrectly. No need to bash the end user who does it wrong as an idiot who deserves to be hurt - from the manufacturer's perspective, someone out there was going to do it wrong, the wheel was going to fall off, and the guy was going to be hurt, maybe seriously. So, why not make a simple change and fix it, and thereby make your product signficantly safer?
So the manufacturers make a small, almost costless change to their forks and the problem largely goes away. It's true that it makes it a bit harder to get the wheel on and off, but that price is inconsequental when compared to the people who are not hurt when they don't use the quick release properly, but whose wheel does not fall off. Making a small change results in a signifcant increase in safety at almost no cost. All thanks to the threat posed by personal injury lawsuits.
Remember this story the next time someone starts bashing ambulance chasers. It's because of them that the world is much safer than it would be otherwise.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Montreal
Posts: 6,521
Bikes: Peugeot Hybrid, Minelli Hybrid
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
This is the requirement for lawyer lips:
1512.18(j)(3), to assure that when the locking devices are released the
wheel will not separate from the fork.
1512.18(j)(3), to assure that when the locking devices are released the
wheel will not separate from the fork.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
AFAIK, the lawyer lips are not a specific requirement of the CPSC, but are a response to a costly lawsuit where there was supposedly expert testimony that even a properly adjusted quick-release mechanism could come loose due to vibration and shock while riding and result in loss of the front wheel if the bike then hit a big enough bump. Personally I can not see this happening with a properly used quick release with the possible exception of bikes that use a front disk brake where the calipers are behind the dropout resulting in a reaction force to braking that tends to push the hub down and out of the dropout. Even in that case a good quick release should provide adequate retention, but some models on the market do not.
(None of my bikes have lawyer lips.)
#15
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
1,031 Posts
Can you explain the rationale of the enthusiasts who go to the bother of filing them off? Weight savings, micro second time savings when removing the wheel, or what?
#16
Primate
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: gone
Posts: 2,579
Bikes: Concorde Columbus SL, Rocky Mountain Edge, Sparta stadfiets
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
^Changes it to a 'not-quite-as-quick release'. Feels regressive once you've enjoyed actual quick releases.
#17
Senior Member
Some cyclists know how to use a quick release properly and a smaller group races. Wingnutting over lawyer lips is a delay and an annoyance.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,589
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 239 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
File em off cause it's a pain in the ass to find that after flipping the QR lever, the wheel is not in fact free to remove yet; still have to mess with unscrewing the nut on the other end.
So in a way they defeat the 'quick' aspect of the QR. Filing them down fixes the paradigm.
So in a way they defeat the 'quick' aspect of the QR. Filing them down fixes the paradigm.
#19
Senior Member
LAWYER LIPS:
If a Lawyer's lips are moving, he's lying.
ha ha ha.
If a Lawyer's lips are moving, he's lying.
ha ha ha.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 602
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Are those supposed to be on both sides? If so then I'm missing one on a jogging stroller we bought off of craigslist. I wouldn't worry about it but the spring on the skewer looks to be overly compressed on that side which makes me think it needs a spacer. rather than just putting a washer on I might as well put the original thing on so its there in a few years when I sell it.
#21
smatte
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central Ma
Posts: 166
Bikes: diamondback - sherwood
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I used to have a fast bike with no safety quick releases. When my kids were little my wife noticed one of my releases was undone after the kids were playing near there. I got home sooner than she expected and went for a ride before she could tell me (mid 90's, no cell phone). I hopped out of the front wheel at a high speed, I still can't remember the crash. I smashed my helmet to bits, got a serious concussion, fractured 2 vertebrae, messed up my wrist, and lost a fair amount of face skin. I keep the safety things on my wheels now, and check them every so often. But that's just me.
#22
www.theheadbadge.com
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Posts: 28,496
Bikes: https://www.theheadbadge.com
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2401 Post(s)
Liked 4,350 Times
in
2,075 Posts
There is no such thing as a "safety" quick release (unless you consider curved levers a "safety" Q/R) - only tabbed washers and extruded dropout edges.
Neither is a bike itself fast - the rider determines the speed.
Is there no end to basic mechanical ineptness? If she had known how to tighten a Q/R skewer, a nasty accident would have been avoided.
You're not solving the problem by relying on the stupidity clips (sounds to me as if you have tabbed washers) to compensate. Check your Q/R skewers just before you mount up, every time. Period.
-Kurt
Neither is a bike itself fast - the rider determines the speed.
-Kurt
#23
Team Fat Boy
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 194
Bikes: Bridgestone MB3 Commuter, Surly Long Haul Trucker, and Custom Ti roadbike by High Ti Cycles
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
check them every so often. But that's just me.
You crashed because you failed to check your QR skewers and now you only check them every so often?
You crashed because you failed to check your QR skewers and now you only check them every so often?
#24
www.theheadbadge.com
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Posts: 28,496
Bikes: https://www.theheadbadge.com
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2401 Post(s)
Liked 4,350 Times
in
2,075 Posts