Holdsworth are back

It looks very nice but I wish they could have put a 17 degree stem on it to make it parallel with the top tube. Better yet use a quill stem.

I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that they went with the carbon forks mainly because they couldn't find anyone good enough in Taiwan to make them in steel.

Mark.
 
daccordimark":3316ic8o said:
It looks very nice but I wish they could have put a 17 degree stem on it to make it parallel with the top tube. Better yet use a quill stem.

I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that they went with the carbon forks mainly because they couldn't find anyone good enough in Taiwan to make them in steel.

Mark.

Actually Cinelli are re-making the 1A stem and should be available in August/September no idea on costs.
 
Spokesmann":3becombt said:
Very nice for a 'modern' bike.

I do like the horazontal top tube.

Looks great to me too, I don't get non-horizontal top tubes, I don't get modern stems either, why did they move from quills?
(A half serious question, that). A lot of people say they're superior, but how so?
 
There's one in the window of Action Bikes at Embankment that I pass regularly - nice frame spoilt by the details like the stem and seatpost - polished alloy would look 10x better.
In terms of quill vs headset, the modern design is far simpler, lighter and stiffer plus you don't get the joy of having a stuck stem. Putting an stem expander inside a carbon fork steerer isn't a good idea either.
 
monty dog":1powxpr1 said:
Putting an stem expander inside a carbon fork steerer isn't a good idea either.

Even with metal steerer tubes, the thinner threaded portion can end up being a "stress riser" with the quill expander in place and I have had a cromoly one fracture in this way.
Most of my bikes are on threadless now; once you've done one, the set-up and adjustment of the headset isn't so fiddly after all (and no risk of it unscrewing either). Only down side to them is that you've more limitation on altering the height of your bars.

David
 
monty dog":187jv60k said:
There's one in the window of Action Bikes at Embankment that I pass regularly - nice frame spoilt by the details like the stem and seatpost - polished alloy would look 10x better.
In terms of quill vs headset, the modern design is far simpler, lighter and stiffer plus you don't get the joy of having a stuck stem. Putting an stem expander inside a carbon fork steerer isn't a good idea either.

Have to dissagree with a modern stem is easier, what is easier than moving the stem up and down to set the handlebar height.

How many people buy a second-hand frame and find thet they need new forks as the stem has been cut down and is now too low for them ???
 
David B":k6hshpnh said:
Only down side to them is that you've more limitation on altering the height of your bars.

David

For me that is a major down side. Changing stem height is very useful sometimes and flippin' difficult with threadless stems.

I have never had a stuck quill stem or seatpin for that matter so that point is moot as far as I'm concerned. The initial installation is only easier on integrated headsets and ongoing maintenance isn't really an issue with either in my experience. I'll admit modern stems are stiffer but that is not necessarily the headset coming in to play but rather the oversized hollow construction of the stems. It should be entirely possible to produce a stiff quill stem using the same technology. Modern bikes are slaves to the latest marketing maxim of "stiffer is better" - just look at Deda's 35mm oversized 'bars and stems - how much stiffer do we need to go?

Having said all that my main bike has a threadless system because it was a new aluminium frame and I didn't care either way about the headset technology - it was the frame design that was important to me. However, if I was looking for a new steel frame in traditional small diameter tubing like the Holdsworth I would go for a quill stem every time.

Mark.
 
Back
Top