St8kout

Regarding thru-axles for Treks, nobody at the Trek store or even Trek online, mentions that the included 'lever' on the rear thru axle is a removable 6mm tool. I just wasted $55 buying the Robert Axle Project rear axle to use on a trainer, and it actually even weighs more than the thru-axle from Trek. Apparently even Shane Miller didn't know this on his youtube review of the H3 trainer.

AnkleWork

How does the weight of a small part matter while it is used on a trainer? Please advise.

St8kout

Well, I'll advise you then. It turns out I DIDN'T need to buy this for a trainer, and that it weighs more than the stock part makes it even more useless. The company advertises this for everyday use, not just for a trainer. (I'm not blaming the company. There was a lack of info about needing this).

So for say, the H3 trainer, after I pull out the bike's thru-axle to remove the wheel, I'll then insert the same thru-axle into the H3 to mount the bike onto the trainer. In Shane's video, he pulls out his thru-axle with the lever that looks like mine, tosses it aside because he can't use it in the H3. If it's like mine the lever is only an addon to the axle and is removable. (Elsewhere, he says he had to hunt all over town for a suitable H3 thru-axle.)

Andrew R Stewart 

"and that it weighs more then the stock part makes it even more useless"

Sure, if weight is your prime value. Funny that if we were talking about people this view would be pretty petty. But this is about one's bike so I guess one can think whatever they wish Andy

Ironfish653

Funny how no one seems to know some trainers are wheel-on and some are direct drive.
Who knew?

Apparently you don't need a wheel-on thru-axle mount to put the bike on a direct-drive trainer.
That nobody on the internet or at the Trek store knew which trainer i have? What's up with that?


I know, right?

St8kout

It's not exactly earth-shattering news that bikers want the lightest weight parts for their bikes.

St8kout

Um, wrong. You DO need a thru-axle to mount a bike on a direct-drive trainer. The point was, that mine had a lever on it, and nobody seemed to know that it's removable from the thru-axle. For the H3, the lever gets in the way of screwing the axle in. Now that I found out it's removable, I can use my stock thru-axle.
Take a look at Shane's video on the H3 at the 4:00 mark. He ended up buying another thru-axle too because his has the lever. Funny how reading comprehension is always a problem on forums.

Andrew R Stewart 

I don't disagree with your comment. Yet after nearly 50 years of "serious" riding I find myself drifting further away from the current "trend of the year". I'll add that I do see the negatives of following the trends frequently at the shop. Bikes and there components are becoming more and more disposable. Whether from rapid wear, riding boo boos that affect the bike to a far greater degree then in past years or the industry needing to move on and the lack of economic value in supporting the old (often "old" is only a few years old).

The one exception might be the current trend for "Groveling bikes" (oops, I mean gravel bikes). Many of the sensible geometries and tire clearances of these frames worked very well in the 1970s as they do today. Too bad these modern versions typically have silly huge gear ratio gaps with their lack of chain rings. Andy