I-Like-To-Bike

If Q/R releases were only installed on new bikes as an option, only on full size adult bikes, and only by specific customer request, more than likely a lot of of nasty accidents could be avoided. But then there is no end to bicycling marketer ineptness and/or insensitivity to the actual needs of their customers.

cudak888 

Ridiculous. The accidents can be avoided by learning how to use the quick release properly, i.e.: if you can't operate it safely, don't use it.

No excuse exists to justify the development of mechanical workarounds to compensate for blatant stupidity.


Absolutely, completely, and positively incorrect in this case. Even the casual cyclist has come to demand them for convenience of shoving their bicycle in the trunk of something the size of a Mazda Miyata, even though half of them don't understand how to operate the Q/R skewer.

The funny thing, while neither are in the least bit difficult to learn, I've seen folks literally freak out at the concept of a 9/16" wrench (or 14mm, for that matter) to loosen and tighten the axles - the easier of the two methods, mind you - and yet, the same individuals are quite content with a quick release lever which they can't operate correctly no matter how many times its operation is explained to them.

-Kurt

I-Like-To-Bike

Granted the situation is as you describe, a responsible bike industry would refuse to sell any bike with a fashionable Q/R to the general public since it is obviously a notoriously unsafe counter intuitive design being foisted on the public that is unwilling/unable to correctly operate them.

cudak888 

Only because folks refuse to take responsibility for leaving their quick release levers open.

If the world was perfect, bicycle manufacturers would be telling these blockheads that they can either learn how to use them properly, or bugger off.

Protecting the public from their own stupidity only increases overall ignorance.

-Kurt

I-Like-To-Bike

I assume you are all for removing any and all safety requirements on any product offered to the public. Let 'em learn the tricks and intricacies of non standard, counter intuitive design gaffes, or suffer the well deserved consequences of their ignorance, eh?

cudak888 

No. I am only applying this to obvious cases wherein the user, not the product, is at fault.

There isn't anything faulty about the design of the quick-release either. They work most adequately when operated by any half-competent dimwit.

-Kurt

srmatte

[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.]

My former bike only had the curved lever for a release, now totaled. I was just getting into cycling at the time and didn't do much for maintenance besides air in the tires and making sure the brakes worked. It was also the first day I ever wore a helmet.

[Neither is a bike itself fast - the rider determines the speed.]

As opposed to my current hybrid that weighs a ton.


[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.]

Your talking about my wife...mechanical is not in her vocab.

[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.]

Do you check every time? I check them everytime I add air, that's about once a week. They are no longer just a curved levers, there is a nut that has to be loosened first.

cudak888 

Most are curved in one manner or another today - I was referring to the change from flat quick releases in the late 70s to rounded, after the CPSC started complaining.


They'll still move if you sprint them, though not an issue here.


No comment.



Every time, and mind you, I have 10 machines with Q/R's in my fleet. It's five seconds of my life, no more, and it can save you from far worse.

I'm not sure I follow you. The typical quick release has a nut that usually needs to be loosened after the lever/cam has been opened. If you haven't been adjusting that nut each time, you haven't been using it properly.

-Kurt

Kurt Erlenbach

A perfectly ridiculous position. People make mistakes. That does not make them dimwits. When small engineering changes can prevent serious injury when a person makes a mistake, the manufacturer should do it. That makes all of us safer.

Another example of tiny engineering chagnes that make a huge impact on safety is the valve now put on inflatable toys. Used to be that when you pulled the plug on an inflatable raft, or ring, or other toy, all the air would come out. Children drowned as a result. Now the valve has a stopper that requires you to squeeze it to let the air out (or put the air in). Those toys are much safer now. I suppose one could take the attitude that a parent who can't figure out how to close the valve properly should stop whining about the death of their child, but fortunately we aren't quite there yet.

Protecting the public "from their own stupidity", especially when such protection costs next to nothing, is exactly what a responsibile, caring society does.

genec

Yeah, it's freakin' hassle dealing with having to unscrew the QR and then readjust them again. I have two bikes without the LLips... both well over 25 years old... they have never failed me, and they are easier to release the front wheel for transport. None of the bikes has ever fallen off the bike hooks in my garage either.

The one new bike with the LLips takes more time and I actually have to be more careful to ensure that I am putting the skewer above the LLips... and NOT locking down on the stupid things, which would actually end up leaving the whole affair much looser.

With the old fashion QR levers... little readjustment is needed.

Yeah yeah I am not a racer, so what is a minute or two compared to the seconds it might otherwise take? In the overall scheme of things, it doesn't mean squat... but to me, it was "fixing a problem" that wasn't ever a problem... it's like seat belts on a bicycle.

Mr. Fly

What you don't fully understand is that having these contraptions on the fork ends basically makes the quick-release a non-quick-release. The "lawyer lips" are not innovations and solely serve to castrate the effectiveness of the quick-release skewer by 1. making everyone wingnut the skewer to get the wheel off, and 2. making everyone wingnut the skewer to get the wheel on. One might as well use a bolt-on axle and carry a 15mm spanner! It may be a "simple change" to the fork dropouts, but that change almost completely defeats the real innovation that is the quick-release. Two steps forward, three steps back, anyone?

This really isn't a display of why product liability lawsuits are a good thing but a display of how we tend to require everyone to demote themselves to the lowest common denominator. Why can't we aspire to be educated/learnt, and to use tools as they are meant to be used without crippling them? (and the quick-release is a tool) Learning to use a quick-release is not rocket science, and to make it seem like so only demonstrates how oppressed we've become to the tyranny of liability lawsuits.



Peter White is advocating using lawyer lipped forks for disk brakes because the braking action of disk brakes with the brake caliper at the back of the left fork blade will direct a force towards pushing the wheel out of a conventional fork dropouts. Simply put, braking will produce a force that pushes the wheel out of the dropouts. If you know how to draw a free-body diagram, doing so will illustrate this very clearly.

Obviously, the best solution is not to specify lawyer tabs but solve the force directionality issue by either not having the dropouts face ~45* forwards, or moving the brake caliper to the front of the left fork blade. Where are the lawyers now?

cudak888 

Good. I hope you will be the first to suggest the immediate worldwide adoption of the following:

Rubber automotive bodyshells
Blunt-ended nails
Closed balconies
Power tool ban
Padding for interior and exterior wall-mounted protrusions of any kind
Catalyst (for paint curing) ban
Ban on 110v AC electricity
and...
The removal of STI shifters from the market for because of the potential of skin becoming pinched between the moving levers and fixed lever body.

-Kurt

cudak888 

Better yet, go right back to the wingnuts of the 1930's and '40s.



-Kurt

Camilo

SeattleShaun

Maybe the next STI upgrade should include airbags...

cudak888 

Disrespect to an Immoderator? We'll have to see about that!

-Lord Dark Helmet
"Your Posts Are Our Business, Especially In April"
or
"Lawyers don't give Dark Helmet no lip!"

I-Like-To-Bike

Assuming that:

1. The principal use of Q/R's are for taking a wheel off for transport on/in a motor vehicle
2. Saving a few seconds when fixing a flat away from home is not that critical for most cyclists
3. Carrying a 15mm wrench or 6" adjustable is not that great a burden, especially in a motor vehicle
4. Cudak888 is correct in that many bicyclists do not understand how to properly operate the Q/R
5. An improperly adjusted Q/R is a catalyst for disaster

It seems an awful lot of crocodile tears are being shed for a sensible built in counter measure for the risks of a quirky feature of insignificant value that the manufacturers put on their bikes willy nilly despite their customers' track record of inability to safely use it.

mandovoodoo

I suspect many of the responses tell us more about the posters than the subject matter.

I'm familiar with a good number of safety features introduced to protect against hazards that seem easily avoided by cognizant users. Fairly often, these features can be modified to allow an advanced user greater access or funtionality considering their content. Lips on forks. Various guards on power cutting equipment. All that extra crap on cars.

That some people don't see the need for some of these safety features doesn't mean they're not useful. It's always a compromise.

I find the biggest hassle is the need to readjust my Thule rack fork mount all the time.