Bike Forums - Quick release knackered? Or just the casing?

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)

- Bicycle Mechanics (https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/)

- - Quick release knackered? Or just the casing? (https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/1299805-quick-release-knackered-just-casing.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by 13ollocks (Post 23344022)

....and whack your knackers on the stem as you go down.....:twitchy:

Nah! More likely to whack his bollocks on the top tube on his way down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sweeks (Post 23344138)

I confess to finding it plausible that the internal-cam skewers create more clamping force than the external-cam type, but it *would* be interesting to see some actual measurements.

Two of my frequently-ridden bikes have the internal type. My main road bike came with Ultegra hubs and their internal skewers, but as I was more or less custom-ordering the bike, I opted for the titanium "Airborne" branded skewers which were of the external type. I've used these external skewers for 23 years with no wheel slipping. The bike has vertical rear dropouts, and the front has "lawyer lips", so the acceptable performance is not surprising.

What kind of data would be needed here? Would a measurement of the displacement of the skewer's rod by the cam be a reasonable proxy for clamping force?

I think the only data that matter are those speaking to the retention of the wheel. I think most people would accept that the design of the internal-cam skewer enables it to clamp more forcefully onto the dropout/fork end faces. However, does all this extra clamping impart any real advantage or is it simply overkill? I challenge anyone to pull a properly installed external-cam-secured wheel out of a frame. If that can’t be done, what « extra » is the internal-cam QR bringing to the table to prompt people to reject external-cams out of hand without any reason except « they’re not as good as internal cams ». I don’t get it. If external-cam QRs were so bad, why would any number of legit companies (Campagnolo for example) expose themselves to huge liability by making and selling an inherently unreliable - yet safety-critical - component?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpetry912 (Post 23343844)

Maybe. on some stuff like quick release skewers, brake blocks etc I consider those safety critical failure points so I don't take chances and I suggest you not do so either.
People normalize failures and eventually something bad happens. Pilots pre-flight their airplane before every flight. Its not a bad practice for bike riders too.
while I agree that this particular part is non structural, as a general rule, if a part shows a crack or defect, I replace it. People have posted pictures of cracked frames, rims etc askiing "is this OK to ride?"
Frankly if you have to ask, it probably isn't ! But you do you
/markp

I'm glad to see that you're sticking to your guns after being called out for being wrong. Would it really kill you to just admit you gave bad advice based on lack of information and move on? Why persist with the "I might have been wrong but in some ways, spiritually, I see myself as right"?
If someone has to ask they probably want advice from someone who has a clue, which in this case excludes you.
But you do you - truly the hallmark line from the stubbornly ignorant.

Have replaced them.

From looking at it I would say that the crack is in a non-structural/'crucial' part of the mechanism but I'm not taking any chances.

Thank you for all the jokes about the word 'knackered' - made me laugh!