Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by JohnW »

NetworkMan wrote:...............The old bars are 3T ergo but I found them extremely un-ergo!


Do you mean the drop-bars with so-called ergo flats at the so-called correct position for the hands? If you found them "un-ergo" - so did I. they were all the range a few years ago, but in my experience were dreadful. They've gone now though, haven't they? - people actually converted to them, but all that I know have converted back. I built up one bike with them, but they were a waste of money
NetworkMan
Posts: 727
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:13am
Location: South Devon

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by NetworkMan »

Actually this bike came with that rare bird - a front loading quill stem so you can get the bars out easily. Even so the fact that the stem was so short made it impossible to alter things much in the direction I wanted. Having relatively long legs and short body make things difficult. Too large a frame makes the reach too great while too small a frame makes the saddle very high and thus the bars are too low so it's always a compromise. These bars and the other ones on the Spa tourer both have a reach of about 70 cm and I like both of them. My oldest bike has 'randonneur' bars from about 1992 and for some reason I I like those too - perhaps because the brake levers are smallish.

Tell you one thing though, getting all this right makes a huge difference and I bet there are loads of people riding around with bikes that don't fit as well as they could. Ironically many of those are probably one with threadless steerers cut off too short so that the bars are just too low and can't easily be raised without an extension.
NetworkMan
Posts: 727
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:13am
Location: South Devon

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by NetworkMan »

JohnW wrote:
NetworkMan wrote:...............The old bars are 3T ergo but I found them extremely un-ergo!


Do you mean the drop-bars with so-called ergo flats at the so-called correct position for the hands? If you found them "un-ergo" - so did I. they were all the range a few years ago, but in my experience were dreadful. They've gone now though, haven't they? - people actually converted to them, but all that I know have converted back. I built up one bike with them, but they were a waste of money

Yes they are the ones. Perhaps you'd like to buy them so that you can convert back again :wink:
Just posted a couple of pictures on this thread at the end.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=123464
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by JohnW »

NetworkMan wrote:..............getting all this right makes a huge difference and I bet there are loads of people riding around with bikes that don't fit as well as they could. Ironically many of those are probably one with threadless steerers cut off too short so that the bars are just too low and can't easily be raised without an extension.

I'm sure you're right about that - in fact the experience of several of my cycling colleagues confirms that you are. The problem is that, once the steering tube has been cut off, having established the ideal height, there's no going back and we do change with the years. Several of my friends (of similar age to myself) are now riding their bars higher than they did when their bikes were newly built up. With quill stems you can do it. The threadless headset is, in my opinion, a retrograde step. I may be wrong about this, but I don't know of a generally available ready-built bike which has the traditional headset.

Having your frame built, and then building your own bike around it avoids a lot of problems.
Brucey
Posts: 44672
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by Brucey »

it is all part of an evil conspiracy to make bikes cheaper to make, and less good for the end user. My advice; when planning a new bike, give yourself some 'wriggle room' by buying a few angled stems, to give positions higher and shorter than you might want to actually use right now; that is the most likely direction it is going in. Zoom make some.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by JohnW »

Brucey wrote:it is all part of an evil conspiracy to make bikes cheaper to make, and less good for the end user. My advice; when planning a new bike, give yourself some 'wriggle room' by buying a few angled stems, to give positions higher and shorter than you might want to actually use right now; that is the most likely direction it is going in. Zoom make some.

cheers

I think that those of us who have built up around our own frames as a normal part of cycling life will possibly have a few different stems of varying ages. One problem with that is that there handlebar diameters keep changing. Even since the A-head was introduced we've had a change of diameter. I do agree with that philosophy though. I must have half a dozen in a bucket somewhere.
alexnharvey
Posts: 1924
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:39am

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by alexnharvey »

Well I rode the bike tonight and I think I've been a bit hasty. Very comfy in the current hand position and don't think I'll be happy reaching out much more. Effective top tube is about 585, approx 30mm longer than the medium day one and 45 mm longer than my road bike, a litespeed Tuscany.
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14659
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by gaz »

alexnharvey wrote:To those of you who have done a straight to drop conversion, what did you find was required in terms of stem length adjustment, or moving saddle position or other adjustments?

I was trying to set them up as close as practicable to my tourer. Saddle height and distance behind BB were matched, then further measurements taken to determine the appropriate length of stem. The frame on the first was a little too big, it is also the only one I rode for any significant time before converting. I never found it comfortable on straights.

Image

Image
The second was bought because the frame size was better.
Image

Image
User avatar
horizon
Posts: 11275
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by horizon »

NetworkMan wrote:
Tell you one thing though, getting all this right makes a huge difference and I bet there are loads of people riding around with bikes that don't fit as well as they could. Ironically many of those are probably one with threadless steerers cut off too short so that the bars are just too low and can't easily be raised without an extension.


So the deal is, Cycling UK print this out in really big letters, distribute it to all bike shops and it gets put up on the shop wall where everyone can see it. Actually are not headtubes are getting longer so that people can have their carbon steerer (with no extension) but their bars at the right height?
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
NetworkMan
Posts: 727
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:13am
Location: South Devon

Re: Quill Vs aheadset converter for IGH drop bar conversion

Post by NetworkMan »

Good idea and I'll wave all royalty payments. :wink:
Does it work like that though? I'd imagined that your Giant/Canondale/Trek etc. carbon wonder bike arrived complete with steerer cut off short (along with the compact double chainset and racing cassette so that we get the riders on here asking how they can get lower gears).
Post Reply