hopperja

I have a stock 1985 Trek 300 that was recently gifted to me. I'm wondering if the Nitto Periscopa would fit the original stock drop bars. From my measurements using precision machinist calipers, the bar clamp diameter is .997" = 25.3238 mm, which would fit the Periscopa. However, I've been told my Mark, the lead mechanic at Rivendell Bikes, that most drop bars are 26 mm, but he didn't know for sure for my Trek 300.

Anyone out there know for sure?

Worst case scenario, I'd just have to buy the Nitto Dirt Drop ($55) and buy the shim for 25.4 mm bars ($8), just in case. This is nearly twice the cost of the Periscopa ($32).

Thanks!

demoncyclist

There certainly are 25.4 road bars out there, even available brand new. There are also the newer 31.8 bars. "Most" was factually incorrect.

zzyzx_xyzzy

I would believe your calipers.

adaminlc

It's highly possible that the bike has been changed around since it was new. A lot can happen 20 years. Like was said, go with what is there and you can be sure that it will fit.

arborohs

wow, lead mech. bad press

hopperja

No bad press intended...

Just to clarify, I didn't give Mark my measurements, as I hadn't measured it yet. I emailed him and thought he'd know what my stock Trek had, but he didn't. Either way, I ordered the Periscopia from Rivendell and am looking forward to putting it - the bike and new stem - to good use.

well biked

The key point is that it's a 1985 bike. Most handlebars at that time were 25.4mm. The Italian standard was 26.0 (except for Cinelli, which was 26.4mm).

Grand Bois

The Dirtdrop is worth the extra money because it has a better finish and it's cold forged.

JiveTurkey

Shameless self-promotion.

meb

Wow-straight from the horse's mouth!

hopperja

Sorry Dirtdrop, I ended up ordering the Periscopia. And, now that it's arrived, I installed it today. What a difference! The bike fits me perfectly now!

On a side note, anyone have any good argument why the bicycle industry went to threadless stems? It just seems to me that the quill stems are more functional because they are inherently more adjustable. Serious question: are threadless stems just a gimmick that stuck?

silver_ghost

Threadless stem/headset systems are a fair bit lighter than their threaded/quill counterparts if that is important to you. If you look at a threadless stem you'll see that it is usually drilled out lengthwise through the center. More importantly though, I think, is that threadless headset bearings are easier to adjust (using an allen key or two vs specific headset spanners, of which there are many different sizes) and they seem to hold the correct preload longer.

Bar height is still adjustable to an extent through moving spacers above or below the stem, but I agree it isn't as elegant as a quill.

I'm a commited luddite for the most part but I've been convinced that threadless headsets are useful enough to transend "gimmick" status.

joejack951

Don't forget how much easier it is for manufacturers as not only do they no longer have to worry about threading steerer tubes, they also only need to make one size which can be easily adjusted for use on any size bike. Threadless systems can also be a lot lighter because the unthreaded steerer tube can be made from aluminum or carbon fiber instead of steel. Threadless also doesn't seem to be as susceptible to corrosion as quill stems.

ParaWK4

I had a Trek 600 from that era with 25.4mm Belleri handlebars - not that the info is of much value to you at this point...

silver_ghost

Of course. I wouldn't be surprised if this is in fact THE reason the industry switched over and all the other advantages are happy accidents