gomango

The Highway 1s work great with Ergos.

I just ordered another set for a Tommasini I am putting together.

I am using them with a spare Cinelli 1a I have here, but they would likely look better with a Nitto Pearl.

The ride on your Colnago must be fantastic with those PRs.

I've had good luck with them.

RobbieTunes

So clean.
So balanced.
So practical.
So.....my size.....

That build is to the bone.

Amesja

'97 Trek Multi-Track frame with Shimano 105 5500/5503 9-speed triple group (RD is black 5700 GS upgrade to group)

Brakes are Cane Creek in back and Shorty 4 in front with Kool-Stop holders and pads.

Sugino triple External BB crankset, Alex wheelset w/Parallax hubs and Tiagra cassette.



Yes, I will probably be going to hell.

Amesja

bibliobob

Google Auto Awesome Effects?

bibliobob

De Rosa '57 Replica (made in '89?) with 9 spd. Record ti.

RaleighSport

I rather like it, what slicks are those on there and how does it ride? That's just a threaded to threadless adapter on the stem yes? (I'm seriously considering a very similar build so your feedback will be greatly appreciated)

Chitown_Mike

Ditto on the tires and stem....been pondering the threadless look for a while. Plus I could drop the bars lower.

Amesja

Those are Kenda Kwests that I use for slicks in the summer. On the other wheelset I have a set of Ritchey Speedmax CX tires. This winter I've got a set of Michelin Mud knobbies for when it is really slushy and thick snow on the second set of wheels.

The quill stem adapter is one of these. It's the tallest one I've found. Then it goes to the threadless CF stem and drop bars. The bike is a little on the small side for me, but that gives me a TON of under-crotch clearance for more muddy single-track adventures and slipping and sliding on icy/snowy roads in the winter without having to worry about the boys like I would be if I were riding a frame sized a little larger and fitting me better in those sloppy conditions. This is a 54cm and I usually like a 56-57 for regular riding.

Yes, bibliobob. That's a google auto-awesome gif. I had hoped it would scan back and forth but that's auto-awesome for you. You have no control how it comes out.

I've got a nicer Fuji 1" threaded CX fork I want to put on that bike but I need to have the threads extended or cobble a threadless 1" headset and a threaded one together into a riser headset to get the longer steer tube fork to work. A longer, higher fork and headset spacers would allow me to use a lighter conventional quill stem adapter and not that heavy long adapter. The stock Trek fork weighs nearly as much as the rest of the frame. It's REALLY over-built. It's also a bit too stiff. It's almost like the fork legs are solid instead of being hollow tubes.

himespau 

This adapter goes a little higher in my experience, but is a bit more expensive (and harder to find in silver)

Amesja

Whoa! That's a tall quill adapter. I wonder how much that has to weigh if it has a steel bolt that goes all the way down from the top to the quill wedge. Or does it have a shorter bolt sitting in a deep well?

That Dimension one I linked to has a long bolt. The bolt weighs more than the rest of the adapter (which is all alloy.) It's 8" long and is an M8 or something like that I think. It's well over 200g just for the bolt if I remember right.

ColonelJLloyd 

A better solution would be a Nashbar 1" carbon cyclocross fork with aluminum steerer.

Amesja

I had thought about that, but I'm not sure I could get the height I want/need out and off of that short head tube with a threadless headset and so much alloy steer tube sticking up. I think it would probably bend being that high under the spacers, even if the steer tube was long enough to get it up where I want it in this situation.

Chitown_Mike

So much win and learning in this thread. I was recently thinking about changing my drop bar convert to a threadless stem and possibly changing the fork.....looks like it would be easier than I expected!

Amesja....nice looking Trek! I have a early 90's 800, which seems like it would be the predecessor to yours. Love the way it rides, so glad I converted it too.

himespau 

I've used 2 on different builds and yeah, they're heavy.

gomango

Gorgeous!

Very understated, yet it looks like it's all business.

Turned out beautifully.

anixi

Heavy for back injury survivors like myself is a minor deterrent! I love how I can ride in the drops on flats and downhill and not change to the hoods. It's nice to have my hands near the high-power position on the brake levers most of the ride.

Antieverything

80s torelli with 5600 9 speed and Neuvation R28sl wheelset

himespau 

I'm not complaining either. The last one I used it on was a drop bar conversion of a mtb that was too small for me into a bomb proof commuter that had front and rear racks and metal fenders and probably weighed 50 lbs if it weighed an ounce, so a few extra ounces for the stem wasn't a big deal. Got the bars up where I needed them.

Chitown_Mike

If I understand their usage, the adjustment up and down comes from the stem still having to be raised or lowered within the steerer like the stock 1 piece stems are correct? And the reach adjustment comes from swapping out that part of the stem?

Want to make sure I don't venture into an area and spend money only to find out it doesn't work

himespau 

Yes, that is correct. It gives the up/down flexibility of a quill stem with the reach adjustment (assuming you're willing to drop the coin on different stems or can find 4 lengths of the same stem in a clearance bin for $8 like I did while trying to figure out fit) of multiple threadless stems (also the ease of swapping wrapped bars). As you go taller, you'll need a longer stem to compensate for the stem moving toward you and there are calculators out there to figure that out for you.

Amesja

Exactly. You are still limited by the same old things that quill stems are limited by like minimum and maximum insertion. Not only do you have the ability to adjust reach but you also have different angle threadless stems too, and can reverse the stems for positive or negative angle. It bears repeating that as you come up you are also coming back so a longer stem is usually warranted. Also for a bike that is a little too small height-wise it usually also has a too-small top-tube dimension as well which complicates it even more because it was too short to begin with and then raising it up also brings it back making the virtual top-tube length even shorter. Luckily there are some really long-reach stems out there to use for this -many of them are CF. Using a CF long-reach stem also will deaden a lot of sharp shocks and vibrations that get to the bars.

PhilPub

I keep coming back to this... I'm definitely using this as a reference for my bar swap-out when I get some Soma Hwy Ones, as this set-up is spot-on for me. This may seem a little OCD but I find it very pleasing that what looks like the correct bar angle (nice flat transition to hoods; drops just off horizontal and pointing to rear brake bridge) coincides with the bar ends being perfectly parallel to the head tube. Lovely.

Sorry, as you were!

shoota 

See, I can't decide which bars to get. The hwy ones seem to have a lot of drop and I think I'm looking for less drop. I need to research a little more. There's an old thread on here somewhere with several different compact bars listed. I'll look for it.

ColonelJLloyd 

Quite the opposite. The drop is so shallow and the bend so sharp as compared to classic bend drops that I came to hate them. The reach is virtually non-existent. I've tried the Hwy 1 and the Ritchey Classic Curve (not at all classic) and decided modern compact bars are not for me. I need more real estate and deeper drops. Compact bars are designed for riders who ride almost exclusively on the hoods. I want a more rounded hook. I put the Deda Newton Deep on my modern bike and it's better, but I still prefer the feel of a randonneur bend or classic shape like the B115.