Charles, ever tried to put threads on a carbon fiber steering tube:)? All the factors you named are true, but the weight savings are quite good too.

next up ...

least ugly cleft palate
least ugly pt cruiser model
least ugly (on the surface) classic existential philosopher
least ugly frank gehry building
least ugly croc
least ugly michael jackson cosmetic surgery
least ugly ted nugent quote or lyric
least ugly arizona governor
least ugly toothbrush moustache
least ugly flesh eating disease

decisions, decisions ...

What a helpful, insightful post.

Threadless actually takes stupidity into account, making it easy--even for the stupid--to adjust, with nothing more than a 6mm hex key. You can adjust a threadless headset while out on a ride without needing to carry two 32mm headset wrenches in your saddlebag.

Is it a case of manufactured obsolescence for the consumer? Or a case of making specialized tools obsolete?

Just because people like the looks or functionality of one design doesn't mean that another is without merit. I get annoyed by the hyperbole that comes with threads like this. Threaded and threadless both have advantages and disadvantages - both are fine.

here's a painted kelly:
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/k...4022012441.jpg
another one
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/k...2012012398.jpg
and a black one !
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/k...9032012478.jpg

heh. you've your work cut out for you if you're going to call out all the attempts at humor around here. i just hope i didn't hurt your feelings. if you tap your crocs to ted nugent in your pt cruiser while playing with your toothbrush moustache dreaming of threadless stems, carry on. and while i may find it 'ugly' and 'repugnant' (your words describing such stems), that's your business. i did find the title of your post to be a wonderful lead-in to additional 'least ugly' of our overtly unattractive consumer choices. how could one refuse? so i gave mine. next time, i'll try to be more 'helpful, insightful' like all your other posts on this forum, regardless of their readability. oh, and if it means anything to you, i think you're on to something concerning these stems and the modern bicycle esthetic: ugly. repugnant, even.

I have a rotor stem, sx2, it is just a very cool stem to hold and wonder how it could ever be so light-just 100 grams of spanish cnc envelope pushing. I like things that are nicely made and fully thought out to the end of the requirement specs; this is one example. That gives it a sort of beauty in itself. Do I prefer t over a 1A? No, but it's the right stem for the right bike. Just go with the stem that was technologically the cutting edge at the time of manufactoring of the frame is my opinion.

Whether the advantages of threadless over threaded are important to you is a personal matter and all but one of my own bikes uses a threaded fork and headset. But, yeah, they simply are functionally superior; it's not debatable.

Colonel, thank you for speaking the truth.

There is a lot of auto erotic behavior going on in this thread.

Agreed - there is absolutely no debate. And aesthetics is a completely different issue which is very clearly left up to personal taste. Just for a bit of perspective, I've got some nicely designed (as well as butt ugly) examples of both threaded and threadless pieces.

Pretty is as pretty does. I'm a convert to threadless stems and have converted my bikes to VO threadless stem adapters. It's the best of both worlds, I can raise and lower the quill portion and easily flip or swap out the stem.

Yes, I agree. I did the same thing to my gravel grinder. It gives me the versatility of switching stems plus, with the long VO adapter, I can easily adjust height up to 3 inches to meet riding conditions.

Threadless stems have advantages, particularly ones with face plates. I personally don't care for the aesthetic, and the advantages aren't enough to outweigh that for me. If I have to use one (and I do in this case), I want one that is as neat looking as possible. You are welcome to come down differently on the aesthetics vs. utility balancing act. I come down on the side of quill stems.

I'd like to thank the folks who actually helped me learn about some decent threadless stem options - as opposed to folks who just wanted to argue or defend their stem choices (sort of the definition of self indulgent auto-play).

It's not as though one has a choice. It's a fork/headset/stem system and unless you're having the bike built for you or are willing to change the fork, it is not a choice. I generally prefer the aesthetics of quill stems too despite the fact that they are functionally inferior. Both quill and threadless stems are available with or without removable face plates; this is not reliant on the fork/headset system. If you think the greatest advantage of a threadless system is the removable face plate on a stem you're missing the point.

The bikes I've had with threadless stems all had the steerers cut...thus minimizing the versatility advantage. Outside of weight, I haven't seen much advantage.

I've never owned a quill stem with a faceplate, though I am aware that they exist. I find the face plates unattractive, but I love the advantage.

While you may not like how they look, there are threadless stems produced in just about any angle/length combination to put the bars just where you want them. So, they're just as versatile even with a cut steerer.

They are stiffer (have MUCH less flex). For the great majority of riders, this is an advantage.

They are much easier and faster to adjust and, most importantly, to adjust properly. How many threaded headsets have you seen that weren't properly adjusted? I've seen a lot more than mis-adjusted threadless systems.

The bearing systems are superior.

There are no threads to tap or become damaged.

These advantages may not matter to everyone, but they are real so they're worth mentioning. I'm not trying to sound like they're the greatest thing since sliced bread, but to argue that a threadless system is not superior to a threaded one is disingenuous.

I don't disagree with anything you wrote...nor am I arguing that they aren't superior in utility. They are. It's a balancing act to me...and those advantages don't overcome the aesthetic disadvantage (which is subjective). There are plenty of times that utility outweighs the aesthetic - like SPDs. Of course I think clips look more elegant. I hate having Shimano SPDs on my otherwise campy Marnati...but I love SPDs and their utility outweighs aesthetics.

I am NOT a Luddite! I don't think anything is as beautiful as barcons and non-aero cable routing, but I'm unlikely to ride a bike with those features. Mustache bars look amazing to me and I want to like them, but I don't. Everything is a balancing act and compromise. Strictly on aesthetics, my Raleigh International may have been the most beautiful bike that I've ever owned. It's gone because I didn't like the ride.

And I appreciate that you offered several useful suggestions...your input on this thread was nothing but helpful. I don't know much about threadless stem options - and now I know a lot more.

I was just playing devil's advocate. Eff threadless, man.

:lol:

Threadless for the win. Colonel hit it on the head, besides "eff threadless" :P

I skimmed the thread, but didn't see any mention of Thomson. Thomson X2s are the absolute best for me.

As for headsets, I prefer Chris King. Functionally, they are the same as any FSA or CC cartridge headset, but it certainly has bling factor. I've never heard anyone call the fugly...

Oh lord look at that seatpost and all those spacers below the headset.

Why thanks for your astute, erudite and unsolicited opinion. Apparently you know nothing about modern MTBs and compact geometry.

Unicorn.

Everyone seems so sensitive in this thread, is it because of the solar eclipse? And just to add to the topic, I like the threadless cinelli grammo although it doesn't have a faceplate (that's part of the reason why I like it).