Here's an interesting bit of news.

Montague -- builders of the military "Hummer" bikes -- has announced a new type of wheel quick release. Pacific announced they'll use Montague's new QR on next year's Schwinn, GT, and Mongoose bikes.

Before you snicker too much about Wal-Goose Bike-Shaped-Objects, realize that GT bikes are now sold only through the IBD channel. There are no GT bikes sold in the mass market channel (e.g. Wal-Mart) any longer.

Unfortunately, no details of this new style of quick release are available.

Hmmm, interesting.. My guess is that it's some kind of locking mechanism between the hub and fork. Kinda like ski-bindings & clipless-pedals.

Probably aimed at all those idiots who's wheels fell off because they where too stupid to attach them properly. Then they turned around and sued Wallmart.

Are Americans out to destroy the bicycle market as we know it? Lawyer tabs are bad enough.

Litigation is no longer limited to the U.S. these days. I hear it is all the rage in Europe.

Yeah, we decided to export our single best-selling product "notmyfault".

So far it's all ther rage in europe...and soon enough we will have the ultimate goal: every human being in the world suing each other...imagine the beauty of it, every man, woman , and child..of every single race, culture, and creed...all gleefully entangled in layers of litigation with each other...it will be like woodstock with suits and gavels.

...yes, this is good carpet I am smoking....

When does someone tell the plaintiffs' lawyers that they don't have a case? Any cyclist is expert enough when it comes to knowing that there is a considerable recess in the dropouts of a front fork and you have to perform quite a bit of tedious unscrewing of a QR to remove the axle from the fork.

But what if this new quick release really is quicker and easier than the traditional cam levers?

If you don't lawyer tabs, just file 'em off.

Not necessarily... Human error is a common cause of industrial accidents, and all the training in the world won't change it. Any time we can engineer a system that is "dummy-proof," accidents can be reduced. The existing QR system on bikes has many obvious flaws from an ergonomics standpoint:

1. Some hands aren't strong enough to close the QR lever sufficiently tightly
2. The QR lever can be tightened improperly by rotating the lever instead of closing the cam
3. Before "lawyer's lips," simply failing to close the QR could result in catastrophic accidents
4. QR levers can and have caught on passing objects and been flipped open accidentally
5. Disc brakes exhibit torque in the direction of the open fork slot
6. The QR lever can be tightened with the axle not fully seated in the fork slot

If a one-handed system can be designed that is equally light, fastens positively, and eliminates the above, then why not? What is there to lose?

1 Not that I've found, on anybody over the age of five.
2 True, but they do actually say 'Open' and 'Closed'. That obviously is meaningless to lawyers' clients.
3 Simply riding into big potholes could also cause catastrophic accidents.
4 Only if you point QRs in such a manner to allow this AND ride 'dangerously close' to objects.
5 Not if the front disc brake is mounted on the RH fork blade or in front of the fork blade. This is a fork manufacturer's problem regarding brake location, not a QR problem.
6 It is amazing how many things on a bike or virtually anything else can be tightened when not fully seated (seatpost, handlebar stem, etc).

I've read that a few times now. What is a lawyer tab? I have a specialized tricross and I can get the wheel on or off very easily.

For number one, a large number of people (my 23-year-old, slightly-built daughter included) find QR's hard to close.

For number two, I'm not trying to argue that folks who don't close their QR properly have grounds to sue. I'm merely saying that what I describe has happened (MANY times!).

For number three, ditto my comment for number two, and I agree that cycling is not without other hazards (although this is a spurious arguement in this context).

For number four, you are right, although (again) this has happened MANY times.

For number five, I don't argue that fork manufacture or disc-brake manufacture changes could solve this problem, but for the installed section of the existing market, the potential still exists.

For number six, you are right again, but the arguement is spurious in this context - we're talking about the safety engineering of QR mechanisms.

You ignore my final statement: If a one-hand, positive-lock mechanism can be designed at the same weight as existing QR levers WHY NOT?

After a lawsuit against a bicycle manufacturer for "unsafe design," all cycle manufacturers began installing small "swells" at the bottom of front fork axle slots. The intention of these swells was to prevent an untightened quick-release wheel from falling freely from the fork.

Although universally hated by experienced cyclists, the "lawyers lips" (as the swells have been called) are now standard on all bicycles at all price ranges. Experienced cyclists hate these swells (and often file them off) because they delay the removal of the front wheel. With the lips in place, a cyclist must not only release the quick-release cam on the axle, but also unscrew the axle nut by many turns before the front axle will spread enough to drop out of the front fork.

Hope this answered your question.

It did. I definitely have those because I have to screw/unscrew to get the wheel on/off. It does not bother me because I never have any reasons to change a wheel that quick.

Maybe they are similar to the Neuvation long travel Quick skewers: https://www.neuvationcycling.com/skewers/skewers.html

They don't bother me either. I went one step further with my commuter. I installed these:


Steve.

My fixie has nuts on the rear wheel and I carry a wrench in my seat bag. Removing the nuts and rear wheel of my fixed gear is faster than the QR wheel removal on my geared bikes, but that's because I don't have a derailer, tensioner and multiple cogs to deal with.

RFM

Except handbuilt bikes. You won't find lawyer tabs on Rivendell or Nobilette bikes, for example. They grind the tabs off of the dropouts.

RFM

Wal-Mart bikes are not generally sold to members of this Forum. They are sold to secretaries and nurses and school teachers who give them to kids age four, six and eight. When I take my nine year old nephew riding with his friends, I check over their bikes. Those Wal-Mart bikes are in unsafe condition. Badly put together (a fork on BACKWARDS!!!). Brakes not operating. Wheels not securely attached to the forks. Forks too flimsy to retain a wheel. And, when I talk with their parents, I find out their parents were told at Wal-Mart "the bike is assembled and ready to ride"...and the parents did not know enough about bikes to know what a huge lie that was.

Why would anyone assume that the average American mother knows how to safely assembly a bike and how to close and check a quick release for proper functioning when not ONE employee in the bike department of Wal-Mart knows how either?

With some time and effort, I can usually make those bikes reasonably safe for a slow ride around an empty school parking lot. But, I won't allow kids I'm supervising ride those bike in the streets...they just are not well made enough to be riding in traffic.

YOU want to blame lawyers for the lawsuits against Wal-Mart. That is a bit like blaming the fire department for a fire, or blaming the police department for bank robberies. Wal-Mart choses to sell crap that injures people. They invite lawsuits. In a recent trial, the executive at Wal-Mart who is responsible for their bicycle buying program demonstrated he has zero knowledge of bicycles. It is doubtful that he could take off a wheel, and properly remount it.

Many members of the Forums sneered and laughed at the notion that there might be anyone in America who does not know how to properly use a quick release. The fact is, the MAJORITY of bike riders do not know how to correctly use a quick release. After any of my bikes is serviced at an LBS, I check the quick releases before riding the bikes.

Even at the best shops, I have found staff members incorrectly closing a quick release. And, you can be assured, the quick releases on a $59 Wal-Mart bike are NOT the same quality of quick releases used on a $700 Trek. Last week, I showed a guy why his tire was rubbing against the chainstay of his $3,000 bike. He had closed the quick release incorrectly. And, he has been a regular rider for thirty years.

But, lawsuits may not be the answer. I would support a law that if Wal-Mart sells unsafe products to children, and a child is injured, the Wal-Mart executives go to prison. Money means nothing to Wal-Mart. Maybe a few years sharing a room with "Bubba" would cause them to be a bit more respectful of American children.

By the way, back in the 1970's, when Schwinn was a real bike company, Schwinn did NOT put quick releases on children's bikes. Schwinn had extensive in-house testing equipment, and had contracts with two university testing facilities to test bikes and bike components for safety. Schwinn sold safe bikes for children for a reason: customer safety was "job one". Wal-Mart thinks "job one" is to increase the billions of dollars in the pockets of the Walton family.

And that is Wal-mart's fault? Let's say I don't know how to pick up my feet when walking and I come up to your house and you've got 3 steps leading up to your front door. I stumble on the steps and bash my head on your door. Do I sue you because you had steps instead of a smooth ramp leading up to your door?


Whose responsibility is it to take care of your children? Personally I'm in favor of a law requiring training and licensing to become a parent...

I never did this or had this done to me but apparently that is one reason why you get homeowner's insurance. So if someone gets injured they can sur you and your insurance pays.

I could not agree more. Maybe not licensing because then it's a human's right thing. But at least a mandatory training. Maybe even an exam and a mandatory re-training if you fail.

Hi richardmasoner!

I didn't know that. I've no problem with them doing it if that's what their customers want, but it sure opens them up to liability... If I were the manufacturer, I'd just tell the customer to do it themselves if desired (but against my advice). I'd make that recommendation not because of any good reason - just for legal liability control.

In fact, my old Panasonic was made before the lawyer's lips decision, and I've never felt unsafe on it.

+1

Finally, someone that gets it!

Ever tried filing or sanding aluminum? It makes the most awefulest sound in the world. I may be getting a carbon fiber fork soon, but it will have aluminum dropouts!

A law which would, of course, result in no products for children. No rational person would accept such a risk. I suspect that few, if any, corporate executive has the necessary skills to personally evaluate any toy for safety and would have to rely on the expertise of others to stay out of prison. If walmart, as you contend, cares nothing about money (actually money is everything to walmart) then they would have no hesitation to forego the sales of products that could send their executives to jail.

I can confidently state that I have assembled more walmart bicycles than 99% of bikeforumm members. There is actually very little to assemble out of the box and with a bit of practice, it takes no more that 10 minutes to assemble any bike they sell. If adjusted correctly, the bikes are safe to ride. The problem is that the people hired to assemble the bikes do not do the job correctly. BTW, I didn't work for walmart, I just assembled large numbers of bikes for purchased for donation to Toys For Tots. I've assembled well over 100 bikes of all sizes and of the cheapest models and I test rode every bike.