Old 01-12-26 | 06:52 PM
  #23  
Kontact's Avatar
Kontact
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,629
Likes: 4,781
Originally Posted by merziac
BS, you clearly stated that "you HAVE TO HAVE the quill stem expander wedge pressing against the inside of the steerer threads - and that has never been considered safe."
when you had no idea what was really going on.

What was gained is the balance of HT extension and spacer instead of an even more freakishly long HT that IMO, the only one that matters was already long enough.

I can't imagine why you would care how I built this frame, the HT was already very long so we added the spacer as it has been common practice for a long time in certain cases such as this.

Hetchins did this and was the inspiration, these were done by Creekside but Hetchins also did it.



Hetchins Duel

Also can't imagine why anyone would care so much to PM you about my bike. I'm fully aware it is not everybody's cuppa but I can tell you that it gets plenty and mostly very positive reviews all the way around, where ever it goes, period, hands down.

And while I took it to an extreme, it works great, solved a problem with zero risk and turned out exactly how I wanted it to.

You shouldn't worry about it as it doesn't concern you in the least, despite your misguided opinion to the contrary.
You didn't read the whole quote:
"For there to be any height advantage, you have to have the quill stem expander wedge pressing against the inside of the steerer threads - and that has never been considered safe."

In other words, for a spacer to allow your stem to go higher than they otherwise would, you would have to put the wedge under threads.

But you didn't get any height advantage, because you you shoved your stem down about as far as if you had cut the steerer normally.

So my statement is entirely correct. And you keep being rude.
Kontact is offline  
Reply