In my opinion, the design flaw on that bike is chain stays that are too short. Horizontal dropouts would just make it impossible to get the wheel in and out, unless the stays were much longer.

yeah well everything can be learned, i guess - the question was, why didnt it catch on, and i guess the answer is, the solution that almost every frame has today, vertical dropout inside the rear triangle, does the exact same thing as the Klein one, but allows for easier wheel change and possibly more variation on the dropout shape itself.
Also the Klein variant seems to put the rear axle in a different position in relation to the RD hanger eyelet (right?) this might mess with the RD geometry,

While the issue I have with this frame is not removal of the wheel, but rather non original spec tires rubbing on the stays, I went back and looked at the frame in question as well as others, and agree that longer stays would have solved the problem. In retrospect, it’s this frame that turned me off on vertical dropouts. Between the short stays and my poor grasp of dishing wheels during the time I regularly rode this frame, the tire clearance issues I encountered have made me avoid vertical dropouts in the years since.
They may have some utility after all.

Not racers doing that replacement though.

If I was ever unfortunate enough to get a bike with vertical dropouts, I'd be calling the Butcher.

Several years ago, back in Cali I was on a long ride and caught up with a group of riders headed my way. One of them was complaining about the road surface condition, and asked me what I thought of it. I was riding 35mm wide tires, no problems I said. He couldn't get anything wide than 25's due to clearance issues. For the life of me I don't see any real advantage of having 1mm of clearance between tire and brake (which is what he had). Maybe a split second on a 40km time trial due to better aerodynamics?

Again, your issue on that bike is that the chain stays are too short. I can't see how horizontal dropouts would cure that - in fact, would make it worse with the same chain stay length.
Not sure what you mean. I find it easier to replace a rear wheel with vertical dropouts vs horizontals. Pic courtesy of [MENTION=202770]djkashuba[/MENTION]


1979 Centurion ProTour: Easy on, easy off

Oh, many have asked, very few have actually had me do it after quoting the price. It's a pain in the rear. The few times I have done it I've found it easier to remove the seat stays, braze in the new dropouts onto the chain stays, then braze in the seat stays. Getting 4 points of connection nailed down perfectly so the wheel is centered and not tilted using original stays is damn hard. My point is that there are many people with horizontals wanting verticals, but I haven't found the reverse. Especially here in the PNW where more months are ridden with fenders than without, getting a rear wheel out with verticals is a snap. With horiziontals, the fender often makes it nearly impossible to remove a rear wheel unless you let the air out.

The horizontal dropouts on my Columbus SLX Tommasini were chrome-plated. No matter how tight I made the QR skewer, the nuts would not bite, even if they were knurled. Over-tightening the QR caused the rear axle to bend or even break. It was a nightmare. I sold the frameset to a guy who converted it into a fixie.

My Campy horizontal dropouts are chrome plated. Never had a problem.

Now if you just use horizontal dropouts the open down, not to the front, you get the SS/fixed ability, the ease of vertical entrance (especially with short chainstays and by using the old screws, the ability to both place the hub best for derailleur use and eliminate the need to have tight tolerences for chainstay length. Easy building, versitile, fast wheel changes, what's not to like? And you don't even need those fancy screws. They are a standard thread. Ace hardware and a small nut instead ot the spring and you are done.

Oh, those dropouts are hard to find? You mean in 120 years, no one has made a pile of them? Shame. I'm not the entrepreneur. I just drew up mine and had TiCyles build it. Outside of it being ti, there is nothing about it that couldn't have been done early last century with hand tools.

That's so ugly, I'm not convinced that even it's mother can find it attractive. Looks like IKEA tried to redesign a 1980's Volvo.

Lots of good points,

In 1974 I tried my hand at racing. I was 30 years old and a masher. In short order I learned to spin and also learned "souple" French for supple meaning pedaling smoothly.

CADENCE is a term I rarely see used these days. When spinning (while riding) I also learned about Cadence. I was soon able to pedal at a cadence of 90 rpm all day long on the flats and rolling hills.

For most cyclists in the US, a derailleur enabled the use of low gears for climbing hills. During the Bike Boom Fad, Alpine gearing with a 14-28T 5 Speed FW and 52-42T chain rings (also 40T & 36T) became the standard. Back then bike racing was almost unknown in the US market even though the buzz word was "10 Speed Racing Bike"! "Eddy WHO!"

For competitive cyclists who were fairly uncommon in the US back then, a 13-21T FW with 52-42T chainrings were De rigueur! Anyone using a 23T or 24T large sprocket was a gurly man!

The idea behind close ratio gearing was a rider could maintain the same Cadence over varying terrain and only went to the "low" gears for climbing!

Jobst Brandt and a friend riding the Alps with 13-22T FWs and 53-42T chainrings. He and his friends used to ride all over the passes in the Alps every summer. They did "Credit Card Touring".



The destruction that occurred in Europe during WWII left most of the economies in shambles. Financial recovery in those nations didn't start for "working folks" until the late 60's to early 70's. In France many towns had at least one constructeur who built custom bikes and frames. They were expensive and intended to last for years. Think Herse and Singer...

A lot of those frames were built with vertical dropouts most likely for use on bikes with fenders also randonneur bikes with bags. Simplex and Huret produced vertical dropouts but many constructeurs made their own. For the most part, horizontal were far more popular.

Simplex vertical dropouts.



Things were similar in the UK but amateur bicycle competition seems to have been more popular than in some other countries. A customer bought a bike for transportation as well as for sport. As I mentioned above horizontal dropouts allowed a cyclist the flexibility to use fixed gears or a single speed freewheel, an internal gear hub or a derailleur with a multi sprocket freewheel.

Attachments were available that mounted on the forks for carrying "sprints" - tubular wheels so they could ride to a race on clinchers and then switch wheels for the competition.

Time Trials, criteriums and similar types of events were very popular. Many bikes made for those events had short wheelbases for stiffness including very short chain stays. Vertical dropouts became very popular because you could change rear wheels without deflating the tire. A lot of those frames came with Campagnolo 1060 stamped steel dropouts.

An "Alpine" criterium frame that I had that was made in the UK with 75° angles and a super short wheel base plus lots of toe clip overlap.




A lot of frames and bikes made during the 1980's had short rear triangles for use with 20mm-23mm tires. They would have been better served with vertical dropouts.

For example my 1983 Colnago Super...



verktyg

I'm afraid I'd be using 'gurly' ratios, but I did have a Renault 12 estate like the one pictured.

Thanks!….Glad you like it!….

This thread makes me more comfortable with my dropout choice for my frame. I'm still waiting for them to arrive, but I got vertical dropouts in stainless steel. The bike will have fenders, and I like the idea of not wrecking the paint when securing wheels to the frame.

[QUOTE=gugie;22493868]Several years ago, back in Cali I was on a long ride and caught up with a group of riders headed my way. One of them was complaining about the road surface condition, and asked me what I thought of it. I was riding 35mm wide tires, no problems I said. He couldn't get anything wide than 25's due to clearance issues. For the life of me I don't see any real advantage of having 1mm of clearance between tire and brake (which is what he had). Maybe a split second on a 40km time trial due to better aerodynamics?

Again, your issue on that bike is that the chain stays are too short. I can't see how horizontal dropouts would cure that - in fact, would make it worse with the same chain stay length.

Not sure what you mean. I find it easier to replace a rear wheel with vertical dropouts vs horizontals. Pic courtesy of [MENTION=202770]djkashuba[/MENTION]


1979 Centurion ProTour: Easy on, easy off

I am speaking of the difficulties of fast change with the rearward facing Klein dropouts. No issue with forward facing vertical dropouts.

[QUOTE=MCHunt;22495109]Thanks for the clarification. I didn't remember the Klein dropouts, but I can see the issue.

that's what I did for my touring/commuting frame 22 years ago. No regrets at all... other than not anticipating the trend towards very wide tires. I'm still happy with 28 mm tires, fortunately.






Steve in Peoria