![]() |
Originally Posted by icemilkcoffee
(Post 23686584)
The reason to have different angle threadless stems, is so you can adjust the height of the bar, right? With a quill stem, you can adjust the height by loosening one screw and raising and lowering the stem.
|
Originally Posted by nlerner
(Post 23686588)
Ah, yes, of course. The limit there is how long/high your stem is and do you need a Technomic to get your bars level with your saddle (which I do). My larger point is to respond to the often-expressed thought in this forum that older is better/simpler. When it comes to stem height and angles, I don't think that's true.
|
Originally Posted by Steel Charlie
(Post 23686644)
And you just continue to get sucked in. It's getting difficult for me to feel sorry for you. :foo:
|
Originally Posted by nlerner
(Post 23686521)
Sure, and my point is that there are lots more angles available in threadless stems.
|
Originally Posted by Kontact
(Post 23686693)
The angle itself has no function. As long as you can locate the bar where you want it, the way you get there is immaterial.
|
Originally Posted by nlerner
(Post 23686701)
Aren’t you contradicting yourself with those two sentences? The stem angle allows you to “locate the bar where you want it.” I’d call that a “function.”
What you're really talking about is that if you buy a bike that doesn't fit you and has a threadless fork that is cut too short, a high angle stem will accomplish what a quill stem used to. Which is true, but it all starts with a bike that doesn't quite fit. |
Originally Posted by Kontact
(Post 23686723)
And the quill doesn't perform the same function?
What you're really talking about is that if you buy a bike that doesn't fit you and has a threadless fork that is cut too short, a high angle stem will accomplish what a quill stem used to. Which is true, but it all starts with a bike that doesn't quite fit. |
Originally Posted by nlerner
(Post 23686761)
Thank you for telling me what I’m “really talking about.” But where did I say “a quill doesn’t perform the same function” as a threadless stem? We’re talking about two different systems for bikes specifically designed for two different systems. What you really seem to be doing is creating an argument when none existed in the first place.
And ........ I told you so. No matter how low your expectations are, there's always someone who can meet them. |
Originally Posted by Steel Charlie
(Post 23686769)
And ........ I told you so. No matter how low your expectations are, there's always someone who can meet them. |
For people who like a very upright riding position and want a lot of rise without a lot of reach, I wonder if there's some potential weight savings to threaded. Just the quill stem has to extend very long above the headset in that case. Basically a single pipe.
With threadless, both the steerer (or worse, the steerer plus steerer extension) have to extend very long above the headset, but then also the spacers surrounding those have to proceed all the way up from the headset to where the bottom of the stem is clamped. So a double pipe. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:53 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.