Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

X-tra long QR 5mm skewer ~ 11-inch in length

Notices
Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

X-tra long QR 5mm skewer ~ 11-inch in length

Old 09-09-21, 05:19 PM
  #1  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
X-tra long QR 5mm skewer ~ 11-inch in length

My Blackburn Outpost Fat Rack is coming tomorrow and I am looking for a New Old Stock Blackburn quick release. No problem finding the front Outpost QR Skewer, however the longer rear wheel is skewer is difficult to find.


Blackburn Front Outpost World Touring rack with Trek Trek ABP Rear Skewer Mountain Bike// 210mm Length

I suppose that I can always grab a 12-inch nickel plated SST 5mm rod and cut the threads to the appropriate length, and hacksaw to achieve a non-quick release mount for the axle thru hub dimensions.

Blackburn used to sell an 11-inch length that you cut to size, I suppose I need to start calling around 50-year old bike shops to see if there is any New Old Stock around.

Don't suppose any of the readers happens to have on lying about, eh!
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-09-21, 06:53 PM
  #2  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
cant help you out with the qr, but a couple of observations--not many spokes there, and that carbon fork seems to fit the bill of forks that shouldn't have p-clamps clamping.......

don't know anything about you and what you expect to put on that rack, but the spoke count is just a courting potential issues (depending on how much you put on there, the super sturdy rack seems to indicate that you might put a lot, plus of course it dpends on how the roads are, how you ride loaded into bumps etc)
and the whole carbon fork thing and clamping, well, suffice to say that you should get some proper professional advice on this, not from some internet stranger.
I have a bike with a carbon fork, but it has rack bolt holes in it, and even then, I was very wary of not overloading my front bags and being careful of what and how I rode over and whacking into potholes with it loaded.
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-09-21, 07:54 PM
  #3  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
djb I agree with the cautions, and to ease the concerns the rack weighs 12-oz, and each pannier carries less than 5-lbs including the pannier weight. I do not wack into potholes, as my touring speed is between 5-10mph. No hurries here, just a bit faster than a quick stride. If I cannot avoid a pothole, I stop and walk the bike around it.

We probably have differing concepts of FASTER-LEANER-STRONGER! (aka Bicycling Magazine for the past 30-years).

Although I have been eyeing a Univega Gran Primieo 520 Steel lately. So, I generally pull into a National Forest and set up a base camp with the 1983 Cherokee Laredo. Next day or two, take the bike out with a tarp, hammock and straps. Toaks Siphon for the 2lb SST espresso 10-cup. And some Opa's Jalapeno Cheddar Smoked Sausage links to stave off the hunger. A fly 6-piece fly rod might catch supper.

18-lbs fully loaded weight of front and rear racks, four-panniers for the bike load. So no heavy duty touring, ultralight if you will. My backpack with a weeks provisions is 18-lbs.

I got a private message on another board and it looks as if the Blackburn Part# 8023428 just might work.

By the way, the Quick Release Skewers are the weight bearing surface, not the carbon forks. The clamps on the carbon forks simply keep the rack from pivoting fore and aft on the skewer axis

. I appreciate the concern and absolutely agree with not drilling and tapping threaded inserts for rack mounting, nor have the fork clamps be the load bearing components. That would be...interesting.
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-09-21, 08:04 PM
  #4  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
Good, I'm glad you are aware of being careful, and your load is rather light.
over all the decades I've toured, my average speed is still about 10mph, but sometimes going down a hill we can get going fast and get surprised by a potholes.
djb is offline  
Old 09-10-21, 10:00 PM
  #5  
veganbikes
Clark W. Griswold
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 10,214

Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26

Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2974 Post(s)
Liked 2,208 Times in 1,459 Posts
10 out of 10 would not mount a rack to that fork.There are a good number of forks designed for racks and also made from Crabon fibers that is not one. I get what you are saying and you are at least semi-careful-ish but still why take the risk. Get bike packing bags and go ultralight.
veganbikes is offline  
Old 09-11-21, 04:21 AM
  #6  
staehpj1 
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 10,897
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 867 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 260 Posts
Originally Posted by JAG1 View Post
18-lbs fully loaded weight of front and rear racks, four-panniers for the bike load. So no heavy duty touring, ultralight if you will.
That just doesn't make sense to me. Most panniers are going to weigh at least 5 pounds empty for a set of 4 putting, but even if you have some exceptionally light panniers at say 3 pounds that would mean your gear was only 15 pounds. I found that once down to anywhere near that weight I had long since stopped using 4 panniers.

Many other options exist, but if sticking with panniers, why not use only rear panniers if you want to use that fork? If you really need more capacity or want to move some weight to the front how about a bar roll?

Btw, veganbikes does have a point in that if you deduct the weight of the 4 panniers from you stated 18 pound load to get 13 pounds (15 if you have some crazy light panniers) and that should put you in the range to easily fit in frame mounted bike packing style bags.
__________________
Pete in Tallahassee
Check out my profile, articles, and trip journals at:
https:/www.crazyguyonabike.com/staehpj1



Last edited by staehpj1; 09-11-21 at 05:27 AM.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 09-11-21, 04:30 AM
  #7  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
Ive followed Formula 1 for eons, and c.f. is used extensively. It's always been commented on how one example of suspension struts, can take incredible loads and forces in one direction, but if someone leans on them in the wrong direction, they will break.

it's simple, a c.f. bicycle fork is not designed to take a clamping force in this direction, so you really should educate yourself about this. There's a reason that cf handlebars, seatposts etc have very very clear "no clamping" rules.

but in the end, it's your face and your call.
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-11-21, 05:21 AM
  #8  
staehpj1 
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 10,897
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 867 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 260 Posts
Oh, btw, if you really must use that fork and a front rack, why not figure out a way to use the brake mount point as a top anchor point and skip the mid fork mount points.
__________________
Pete in Tallahassee
Check out my profile, articles, and trip journals at:
https:/www.crazyguyonabike.com/staehpj1



Last edited by staehpj1; 09-11-21 at 05:25 AM.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 09-11-21, 02:46 PM
  #9  
Patty Up North
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Sealand, Denmark
Posts: 32

Bikes: Ghost HTX 7500 2005 & Fuji Touring 2016

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
https://www.thule.com/da-dk/bike-tra...wer-_-20100796

I have a few of these. So we can tour with the lizards in our Thule twin trailer. They are longer than standard QR skewers If its of any intrest I can measure the lenght for you.
Patty Up North is offline  
Old 09-11-21, 06:58 PM
  #10  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by staehpj1 View Post
That just doesn't make sense to me. Most panniers are going to weigh at least 5 pounds empty for a set of 4 putting, but even if you have some exceptionally light panniers at say 3 pounds that would mean your gear was only 15 pounds.
Ortlieb Front Roller Classic 1 lb 9.9 oz
Blackburn Outpost Front rack 12 oz
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-11-21, 07:22 PM
  #11  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by JAG1 View Post
Ortlieb Front Roller Classic 1 lb 9.9 oz
Blackburn Outpost Front rack 12 oz
rack is 645g or 22.7 ounces. Not sure where you get 340g or 12oz. See their website

pair of roller classic is 1590g or 3.5 pounds. See their website
djb is offline  
Old 09-11-21, 07:36 PM
  #12  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
I agree the fork is thin and 20-years old. The new Univega Steel Gran Premio have a sturdy front carbon fork with the three eyelets per leg, my steering tube is 1 1/8 Threadless and no idea of the rake. The length from center of axle to crown is right at 375mm. Could use some help with getting a replacement.


Each bag holds four of the Plastic Food Grade containers.
These could be converted to ultra-light with J-hooks pop-riveted to the lids and a support "L"-bracket to sit on.

Here is a view of the 1lb 9.90z Ortlieb bags.

Finishing up on the group set swap. 22T-30T-40T Chainwheel and 11-40 9-speed cassette. Microshift Advent Long Cage Derailleur and Miscrshift R9 drop bar shifters. Fitting brake cables at this particular time.

Anyone recommend a light-weight front fork of steel or carbon? Right now the weight of the Bike and Racks is 26.5 lbs. Dan chainwheel is H-E-A-V-Y (Shimano Altus).
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 05:40 AM
  #13  
staehpj1 
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 10,897
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 867 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 260 Posts
Originally Posted by JAG1 View Post
Ortlieb Front Roller Classic 1 lb 9.9 oz
Blackburn Outpost Front rack 12 oz
All four panniers the same? So if I am reading that right, and the ortleib specs are close enough to that, your 4 panniers weigh in at a combined weight of about six and a half pounds. You said your loaded panniers weighed 18 pounds so that puts the contents at 11.5 pounds. That is quite light. Something isn't adding up here. No one carrying that little of a gear load is likely to be carrying it in 4 panniers and it seems really unlikely that anyone would be carrying 11.5 pounds of gear with about 9 pounds of racks and panniers (the combined weight of the racks is almost 3 pounds according to Blackburn). That works out to less than 3 pounds of contents per pannier. It seems like gross overkill in the rack/pannier department for so little gear.

Am I missing something? Is 18 pounds not the full load? I can't help but think I am misreading you description of your rig or load somehow. The fact that your panniers are filled with little food grade containers puzzles me even further. They don't seem suited to the size of shape of most of the kinds of items I'd expect folks to pack in panniers. Also the 16 of them combined would add over a pound themselves if they weigh the same as a similar container to the one I have here that looks like them.

Maybe you just have a very different approach than I do, but I have yet to be able to make any sense of it. I can relate to the heavy touring approach and the need for 4 panniers. I can relate to going ultralight with 11.5 pounds of gear. I have done both. The two just are not compatible approaches though and combining them makes no sense. It is like buying a ten wheel dump truck to haul home a .75cf bag of topsoil.

This all would make a lot more sense if you are mistaken about the 18 pound total weight of the loaded panniers , or maybe it doesn't include some heavy stuff to be added? Or it was a typo or something, maybe 28 pounds?That would make sense with the choice of racks and panniers. The little plastic food grade containers in all four panniers would still puzzle me though, but I haven't tried packing my gear in them so maybe they aren't as bad as I imagine.
__________________
Pete in Tallahassee
Check out my profile, articles, and trip journals at:
https:/www.crazyguyonabike.com/staehpj1


staehpj1 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 12:49 PM
  #14  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by staehpj1 View Post

Am I missing something?
Maybe you just have a very different approach than I do, but I have yet to be able to make any sense of it.
The little plastic food grade containers in all four panniers would still puzzle me though, but I haven't tried packing my gear in them so maybe they aren't as bad as I imagine.
Stay puzzled my friend, and as shocking as it might seem, perhaps I do have a different approach.

Yet, in the pursuit of a coherent community of like minded enthusiasts:
SteriPen (2.7 0z.)
Evernew ECA-403 800ml teapot(4.6-oz.)
Toaks Titanium knife, fork, and long spoon (1.8-oz.)
Wardrobe including container (1-lb 10.6 oz.)
(Castelli Velocissimo Bib shorts, 2-Adidas polyester T-shirts, and 2-pair of Adidas polyester socks).
Tarp 10-foot wide, 12-feet long Xenon 1.6 Sil-Poly tarp with pole mods (2-lbs 9.6 oz.)
Polycro ground sheet and Costco down throw (1-ib).

The above is less than 6-lbs (water filter, 800 ml pot, fork, knife, and spoon, riding gear with spares, tunnel shelter and down throw.

This is Texas and average temps here are from 70-deg F to 90-deg F from May through September.

Naked and Afraid episodes are proof-positive that folks can withstand a wide variety of three-week excursion with a whole lot less than 10-lbs of gear (not that I know anyone who would want to).

So, then we move to philosophy as this is a puzzlement for you. The containers were chosen because I like peanuts, and so saved them for rice, legumes, and spice containers. Then I started to shop for lightweight gear, and they are waterproof and clear. No digging around for something in the bottom of a pack, nor having to pull open a bag that is strapped to a bike to access gear. Bags are separated according to function. Food, shelter, bedroom, and accessories. There is where the 4-bags come into play.

I know that 20-years from now the bags and containers will still be viable. Your puzzlement is not in my gear choices, look elsewhere in your life to "make sense of it".

Maybe I just have a very different approach than you do.

Last edited by Cyclist0105; 09-15-21 at 05:04 PM.
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 02:53 PM
  #15  
robow
Senior Member
 
robow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,714
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked 201 Times in 136 Posts
Yea, with so little gear, I would and often do, just use two rear panniers and throw the tarp up on top of the rack. Though nothing wrong going about it the way that works for you.
As to the skewer, yea, I would just cut appropriate length rod and thread ends my self for non-quick release.
robow is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 02:56 PM
  #16  
staehpj1 
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 10,897
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 867 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 260 Posts
Originally Posted by JAG1 View Post
Naked and Afraid episodes are proof-positive that folks can withstand a wide variety of three-week excursion with a whole lot less than 10-lbs of gear (not that I know anyone who would want to).
Your desire to pack light doesn't surprise me in the least. I often have packed quite light myself. I went coast to coast witth 14 pounds including the bags and trimmed gear weight since then. I think my lowest base gear weight was 9 pounds. So I get that. I used to pack heavy and used 4 panniers and progressively shed weight until I was down into the ultralight minimalist level for both touring and backpacking. Some of my methods are unconventional so I am not always doing things using the most conventional methods either.

It is your call and you can certainly do as you please. I was just trying to understand the apparent inconsistancy of shedding every possible ounce in your camping gear and clothing and then carrying it in a heavy set of four panniers on a pair of heavy racks designed to cary many times that much weight. I don't need to understand, I just thought perhaps I was missing part of the story. I still feel that I am missing something since the gear you list would fit in one 25 liter pannier. Are you carrying a weeks worth of bulky food or very large amounts of water or something?
__________________
Pete in Tallahassee
Check out my profile, articles, and trip journals at:
https:/www.crazyguyonabike.com/staehpj1


staehpj1 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 03:28 PM
  #17  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
... and the whole carbon fork thing and clamping, well, suffice to say that you should get some proper professional advice on this, not from some internet stranger.
I have a bike with a carbon fork, but it has rack bolt holes in it, and even then, I was very wary of not overloading my front bags and being careful of what and how I rode over and whacking into potholes with it loaded.
I researched carbon fork failures and got some interesting results, suffice it to say that my 20-year carbon fork was designed in a different era.

Therefore I am looking at a Soma Fork Pescadero Replacement:

Replacement CrMo fork for the Soma Pescadero frame set in Gloss Black. Compatible with center mount brakes with 59 to 73mm of reach.

Tange Infinity CrMo. (Carbon Fiber)

Axle to crown: 383mm (375mm)

Rake: 48mm (43 mm)

Steerer: 1-1/8" (1-1/8" Thread-less)

With mini-rack mounts and double eyelets at the dropouts

My factory issued carbon fork geometry and specs are in RED.

My gain would be steel over carbon, advances in design from 2-decades ago, mini-rack and double eyelets at the dropout for fenders and a greater tire width over the current fork. I have worked for 42-years as an subject matter expert in electronics design/development, maintenance, calibration, and trouble-hooting and repair in my early career. So, not so much he said/she said but data driven results. ASTM standards cost money, as corporations are held to the specifications.

Sometimes you hit the end of the rainbow by following dissertation papers at peer-reviewed universities.

Soma Pescadero Replacement Fork


I think that this is a win-win.
Fatigue Analysis of Steel Forks

ASTM F2274-11(2016)
October 1, 2016
Standard Specification for Condition 3 (non-suspension) Bicycle Forks

Last edited by Cyclist0105; 09-12-21 at 03:34 PM.
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 04:09 PM
  #18  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by staehpj1 View Post
Your desire to pack light doesn't surprise me in the least. I often have packed quite light myself. I went coast to coast witth 14 pounds including the bags and trimmed gear weight since then. I think my lowest base gear weight was 9 pounds. So I get that. I used to pack heavy and used 4 panniers and progressively shed weight until I was down into the ultralight minimalist level for both touring and backpacking. Some of my methods are unconventional so I am not always doing things using the most conventional methods either.

It is your call and you can certainly do as you please. I was just trying to understand the apparent inconsistency of shedding every possible ounce in your camping gear and clothing and then carrying it in a heavy set of four panniers on a pair of heavy racks designed to carry many times that much weight. I don't need to understand, I just thought perhaps I was missing part of the story. I still feel that I am missing something since the gear you list would fit in one 25 liter pannier. Are you carrying a weeks worth of bulky food or very large amounts of water or something?
I honestly do not think in those terms. My goal is to have a single bike that is YELLOW.

Let it go brother, some folks tour on unicycles. I know, it is inconsistent when there are two and three wheels designs.

In my case, I have a bike, I have the panniers, I have the Peanut Plastic cartons, I have the racks. Why not use them? And if I could get the Peanut Plastics cartons in yellow, then I would have them too.

I live by what if, and then by if then what? This is the 100% answer to the why. My other vehicle is a 6,000 lb. 1983 Jeep Cherokee Laredo which gets 10-mpg. Why? Because it is Yellow, and I can carry anything I want. So, it is the freedom of having one single item (1983 Cherokee and 2001 GT ZR 3.0) each of which can carry as much as needed. Are the better options? Of course. Will those options give me a return on investments? Only if they are Yellow.

The ultimate answer is... because (fill in the blank_______).

I am getting a CrMo fork to replace the carbon fork. Just in case I need to go lighter It is black!
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 07:40 PM
  #19  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
Am I mistaken, or have you positioned an adjustable stem so as to place your drop bars behind the steerer.
it looks like this in your photos.


Last edited by djb; 09-12-21 at 07:43 PM.
djb is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 08:02 PM
  #20  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
Am I mistaken, or have you positioned an adjustable stem so as to place your drop bars behind the steerer.
it looks like this in your photos.

Today the centerline of the handlebars is 2.5-inches behind the steering tube centerline. Tomorrow it might be only only 1-inch. The triple heart bypass, the titanium plate and 9-rods in the right knee, the titanium rod in the left leg, the three fractures in my right leg, the fracture in my right shoulder, and the fractures in my left shin bones and the carpal tunnel issues in both hands also dictate my adjustment to the "cockpit".

Other than that, I am ALL ABOUT STRONGER-LEANER-FASTER!

Yep, the bike is a 54cm and what I actually need according to the bike fitting gurus is a 49-51 cm bike, so I reconfigured the "cockpit" to accommodate my comfort zone. I just love the bike, the ride quality and the air pressure in the tires (100 psi rear and 95-psi in the front (without the racks) for very slow meanderings out and about. We are talking 5-10mph, and downhill the brakes are applied to keep speed down to 8-mph. So, I am not about speed, I am about how the bike springs and rebounds on each pave gravel road I encounter.

Sometimes my 4th lower lumbar discectomy scar tissue pinches a nerve, and so I raise the handlebars and pivot them for a "sit-up-and-beg" position, and go to the lowest of gears to work out the pinched nerve by slow pedaling. This bike is a health preservation machine, not a go fast to get there machine, not a I can carry a ginormous load machine, nor an ultralight bike packer's dream machine.

It is the machine which I have become comfortable using for the past 2-decades machine, much like a marriage. No interest in changing partners at this late stage of the game.

The handle bar height changes from week to week to accommodate this ole bodies proclivities.

Last edited by Cyclist0105; 09-12-21 at 08:12 PM.
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 09:53 PM
  #21  
KC8QVO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,091

Bikes: Surly Disk Trucker, 2014 w/Brooks Flyer Special saddle, Tubus racks - Duo front/Logo Evo rear, 2019 Dahon Mariner D8, Both bikes share Ortlieb Packer Plus series panniers, Garmin Edge 1000

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked 104 Times in 89 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
Ive followed Formula 1 for eons, and c.f. is used extensively. It's always been commented on how one example of suspension struts, can take incredible loads and forces in one direction, but if someone leans on them in the wrong direction, they will break.

it's simple, a c.f. bicycle fork is not designed to take a clamping force in this direction, so you really should educate yourself about this. There's a reason that cf handlebars, seatposts etc have very very clear "no clamping" rules.

but in the end, it's your face and your call.
I knew a guy that had a carbon fiber bike. I forget what the make was, but it was extremely light and about 6-7 years ago it was a $7,000 bike. Before he got that one the previous frame cracked. His bike dealer couldn't get the frame repaired, but they managed a new warranty replacement. The guy also rode about 12-17,000 miles a year - fitness riding (not commuting or touring, but did do some larger group rides).

Long story short, when I was getting in to cycling some years back and thinking through options and looking at options that was an interesting and enlightening opportunity to learn of something a bit, uh, "different". However, not just from the cost perspective, but the damage perspective - the risks to carbon fiber, I feel, are way too high compared to the benefits.

I second, third, fourth, ... ten millionth the motion of not upsetting the apple cart with the carbon fork. Even if a carbon fiber component was "designed for" adding accessories, especially racks (whether it be a fork or frame, or both) being load bearing accessories, I, too, would be skeptical. Carbon fiber is a neat "high tech" material but it scares me in load-bearing applications that carry my arse.
KC8QVO is offline  
Old 09-12-21, 11:57 PM
  #22  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Even though there is ample data to suggest that carbon forks produce stress cracks which are visible to eye inspection, I am going to go with a Soma Pescadero Steel replacement fork. Of course the recurring thought as I go to sleep is why do they have a replacement fork as part of the marketing platform name?

In any case, the Soma Pescadero is very near the geometry of my existing fork, and it has mid-fork mounting and eyelets at the drop-outs on the bottom. So 2-sets of mounting options.

Some research circa 2011 via Velo News and Leonard Zinn:From True Temper:
We are confident on the long-term durability of our forks because we test far beyond the ASTM test standards for fatigue life on forks.

We have two types of fatigue tests:

1) ASTM

2) Ramped load testing

ASTM standards call for a load of 170 lbs. applied perpendicular to the steering axis, both pushing and pulling for 50,000 cycles without failure.

At True Temper, every Alpha Q model is tested to 250,000 without failure before a design is considered acceptable. Also production models are tested periodically for quality control.

True Temper’s own test is also used on every new model and in routine quality checks. Our test is a ramped load, meaning the load is increased periodically until failure occurs. Starting at 180lbs, the load is increased 45 lbs. every 5000 cycles. Every fork will eventually break. Strong forks will last more than 10,000 cycles with a load of 270 lb. But our minimum standard begins at over 15,000 at 315 lbs. for road forks and 18,000 for cross forks and tandem. But our production forks are stronger than that, often going into the 20-25K range and beyond at loads 0f 360-405 lbs.

Obviously, crashes are uncontrolled events and it is not easy to guess what loading was applied to a component by the speed or violence of the crash. After any crash it is important to thoroughly inspect the frame and components for visible cracks, dents, and bends. An Alpha Q fork that has been damaged (usually evident as a crack) should be replaced.
–Bert Hull
True Temper Sports

From Deda:
Carbon lasts longer than metal. Only love is stronger than carbon. Bonding is a different story. I believe that a good glue (epoxy) can last for 2000 hours of work, or about 800 days, not in continuous daylight, and below 35 Celsius. Whenever a carbon “part” has crashed, even if you cannot see a failure, if there is any reasonable doubt about having surpassed the elongation limit, the part must be replaced.
–Fulvio Acquati
Deda Elementi

From Kestrel:
On the lifespan issue, of course the person should contact the manufacturer regarding specifics on the product in question. For carbon forks in general, there should not be any limited life span, as carbon composites themselves are not subject to fatigue failures as metals are. So the fatigue life of a properly made carbon composite is “infinite”. Example, in Kestrel’s case, our forks (as with all our carbon products) have a lifetime warranty and are designed and tested to last a “lifetime” of use for the given product.

What should be more of a concern, again as it would be with a metal structure, is the kind of abuse and/or damage the fork has seen. It’s the old “inspect in case of crash, impact or other suspected damage” deal. If any fork is known to have been crashed or impacted I’d look it over real close and, if any damage is present or suspected, I would play it safe and assume the worst. Get it checked out immediately by the manufacturer.

If a carbon part – in this case a fork – is properly designed, properly manufactured and has not been damaged due to crash/impact/abuse, there is no reason it should not last just as long (or longer) than a metal component.
–Preston Sandusky
Sand Point Design (Kestrel Bicycles)

From Columbus:
Carbon forks can be long lasting but one has to take care of other aspects than metal ones.

A fiber composite material has higher mechanical characteristics than metals (higher tensile strength, higher fatigue life, higher stiffness) but it has even different behavior due to its “non-homogeneous nature”. This means that the fork project is really a “critical point” for life span, moreover the final user has to check the composite fork with attention to different aspects compared to metal one. In fact, for composite material the areas of coupling with other parts are critical (headset bearings, stem clamp, gap cap),composite has different impact behavior so for each shock is important to check fork, finally composite is sensitive to ambient agents (solvents, temperature over 90C etc).
–Riccardo Carpinacci
R&D department, Columbus, Cinelli and 3T

From Look:
There is no limitation because carbon has a natural flexibility. It can be used a hundred years while maintaining the same stiffness.
–Ming Tan
Look Bicycles

From Reynolds:
After considerable testing and thought on the matter we find the question of “fork life” in terms of time to be a tough question to answer. Our fatigue testing would indicate that well built composite forks are far superior to metal forks with cycle counts running hundreds of thousands of cycles rather than tens of thousands. These tests are also run at much higher loads than metal forks can withstand further demonstrating the durability of composite materials. Based simply on fatigue life a well made and properly installed composite fork should last virtually indefinitely if the bike is not crashed or otherwise abused.
Mike Lopez
Reynolds Composites

From Easton:
There are two failure modes that could cause a fork to fail, fatigue or impact. Questions about life span are really questions about fatigue life. How many cycles can a fork survive before it is tired and worn-out? The good news is the fatigue life of carbon fiber is immensely more than that of metals. While the writer expresses concern about his carbon fork lasting as long as a metal component, there is nothing to worry about in terms of fatigue life on a composite fork.

The most likely cause of failure for a composite fork would be impact damage sustained from crashing. Most of the time any damage to a fork from a crash will be visible. Cracks can be seen. We would recommend that the fork be periodically inspected visually at the drop out area and along the fork legs to look for cracks or depressions in the material. Any fork that shows signs of cracking should not be ridden and replaced immediately.

In general terms, a component made from carbon fiber will far out-last a component made from metal.
John Harrington
Easton Sports

Question:
There were two things I wanted to ask.

Is there any kind of recommended /not recommended weight limits on the different carbon forks available, in particular the Reynolds, Time, and Easton forks? Is it possible that a new fork, carbon or not, with a different fork rake may help me with some “shimmy” problems I’ve experienced with my big Schwinn Paramount 62cm frame, or is this mostly a function of my frame’s tubeset?

I’m 6’4″ 183lbs and ride this great Schwinn made of Reynolds 853 tubing, and have ridden bikes consistently for 30 years.

As you stated in your experiences with ‘shimmy’ most big frames are made with the same tubing as their smaller counterparts, and this isn’t so ideal for bigger riders. Sometimes this can probably cause these lower speed wobbles. I am looking to give my bike a little more resiliency and a smoother ride up front than I currently experience with the OEM Schwinn Paramount straight-blade fork, and at the same time lighten the bike a bit and maybe alleviate some shimmy problems if possible. Regardless of slight no hands speed wobbles at low speed, I’d still like to know if carbon would be recommended for riders my size. And if so, with carbon, aluminum, or steel steerers?

What fork rake would be ideal (40/43/45mm) for a frame that’s approximately 74/72 degree angles, or does this just depend on how I want the bike to handle?There are many Carbon forks to choose from and I get a different opinion from everyone, but I need an opinion from someone who’s a bigger rider with good experience.
–Todd

Answer:
The answer to your first question is below in the manufacturers’ responses. In general, fork manufacturers do not specify weight limits.

To your second question, you would need to try it. Sometimes, I have cured mild shimmy in a frame by changing out the fork, but many times, it has not worked. As for rake, the steeper the head angle, the less rake you want, and vice versa. Consider 74 degrees or more to be a steep head angle and 72 or less to be a shallow head angle.

As for material of the steering tube, as long as you cut it properly and do not crush it tightening down your stem, I recommend a carbon steering tube. Again, for our big bikes we use forks made by True Temper with an extra thick (and extra long) carbon steering tube meant for a tandem. See manufacturer answers below.
–Lennard

From True Temper (Alpha Q forks):
No, we don’t have a published weight limit on the pro fork or the big guy fork.The SUB 3 has a printed weight limit of 200 lbs (rider) but in testing it is stronger than many forks without limits.

Part of that is for marketing. People want the lightest equipment they can get away with.

Our Pro does not have a limit set for it.

The failure mode is not catastrophic. A broken fork will crack near the crown and allow more movement. It will feel “soft” because it will flex more under braking. The rider will see cracks on the outsides of the crown. The rider can ride home and remove the fork without danger. This failure mode is preferred to forks that can break and cause a wreck.
–Bert Hull
True Temper Sports

From Deda:
We do not have a limit for the rider weight.
–Fulvio Acquati
Deda Elementi

From Look:
No weight limit on any Look forks, frames or pedals (including the new Ti spindled pedals).
–Ming Tan
Product Manager – Look – CicloSport

From Reynolds:
At this point, Reynolds does not have any size or weight limits associated with our products.
–Mike Lopez
Reynolds Composites

From Easton:
Lennard, I assume you want me to answer the fork question. If you want my opinion on the frame shimmy, I would say that the shimmy is not a function of frame angles or fork offset. The stiffness of the frame and the rider’s position on the frame would be the areas I would look to improve. Bigger diameter tubes would increase the stiffness and a stiffer fork would help.

Now on to the fork. The rider’s weight is not an issue. 185 lbs. is no big deal. 200 lbs. plus is no big deal. The strength properties of the carbon fiber materials are equal to the task of any of the steel or aluminum forks on the market. However, given the size of the frame and the riders concern with shimmy, I would recommend the stiffest of these forks, which is the Reynolds.
John Harrington
Easton Sports

From Time:
Time does not have any rider weight limit restrictions. I am 200 lbs and have never had problems with steel or aluminum steerers or a full carbon steerer.
–Kurt Stockton
Time Sport International

From Columbus:
We haven’t any rider weight limit in our manuals, but we suggest a “reasonable limit” only for Muscle and Super Muscle fork: 80 kg (176 pounds).
–Riccardo Carpinacci
Columbus R&D department
VeloNews technical writer Lennard Zinn is a frame builder, a former U.S. national team rider and author of several books including the pair of successful maintenance guides “Zinn& the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance” and “Zinn & the Art of Road Bike Maintenance.”
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-13-21, 05:43 AM
  #23  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
I wish you the best with your riding comfort in the future.
djb is offline  
Old 09-15-21, 05:02 PM
  #24  
Cyclist0105
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
rack is 645g or 22.7 ounces. Not sure where you get 340g or 12oz. See their website

pair of roller classic is 1590g or 3.5 pounds. See their website
Well, the weight comes from my Ortlieb Front Roller Classic bags weighed on my OXO 5-lb scale.

With regards to websites and weights on the Blackburn rack, you must be aware that this is the weight of the rack, the various hardware, the skewer and the long and short rack braces. So, I put the rack on the scale and the scale reads 12-oz., and therefore can comfortably report the actual weight of an item bought 9-years ago vs. some other he said/she said weight, from an unidentified website.

If you ask me a question, be assured that I will answer that question. So here goes...

I put a single Ortlieb Front Roller Classic on the scale and the scale reads 1-lb 9.9 oz.

So then I get a calculator and convert the 1 lb to 16-0z. I multiply that by two to get 32 0z. (two Ortlieb Front Roller Classic panniers) then I add 0.9-oz and 0.9-oz and get 1.8-oz. Then I add 9-oz and 9-oz and get 18-0z, to which I add 1.8-oz for a weight of (32-oz, plus 18-oz, plus 1.8-oz for the Ortliebs = 51.8-oz and then divide by 16 to get lbs. = 3.2375-lbs for total rack and two panniers for the front.

Do you really think that the rack that I have is the exact same rack (model and year number) that you looked at.

I hope that you understand that when you question my integrity and honesty that you might reflect back on the passive aggressive manner in which you handle your conversations with me.

Here is to a more gentle communication experience..
Cyclist0105 is offline  
Old 09-15-21, 05:27 PM
  #25  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 12,420
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 614 Posts
I'm not questioning your honesty, like others, I just don't get how you say your four panniers loaded with everything weigh 18lbs, and I second just using a large set of rear panniers on a rear rack, especially if you want to stay light.
You don't mention the other set of panniers, so we are not sure what you are using or packing.
I personally have used Ortliebs for about 30 years, so am familiar with their weights and with such a light load that you are using, it really seems overkill to use four panniers and two racks, especially given that your front fork isn't designed for this.

re a diff front fork, I just don't have the fork and frame geometry knowledge to make any suggestions, but if your bike is already too big for you, I question putting time and money into this, as well as a frame that can take limited tire widths, being a road bike.
Wider tires really make a difference to rider comfort, and I have ridden and toured on 28mm slicks a lot in the past, but have grown to appreciate wider tires for my comfort as I get close to 60---but the key thing here is that you are riding a bike that is too big for you, a real detriment to physical issues, especially if you aren't 20 anymore.

ps, I knew I had this ortlieb chart somewhere, shows the weights for various models.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf
Ortlieb_bag_comparisons.pdf (98.3 KB, 4 views)

Last edited by djb; 09-15-21 at 05:31 PM.
djb is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.