Originally Posted by co_rouleur

and also comes out pretty easily without the need to rotate the rear derailleur out of the way

Originally Posted by HTupolev

This has more to do with the particular derailleur and how the drivetrain was set up than the dropout type.

I'm surprised that it would be a bother in your case, though. The Campagnolo straight-parallelogram derailleur is a design with many faults, but it usually makes the rotate-backwards operation crisp and easy.


Versatility.

Since the wheel fore-aft is adjustable, they make it easy to run a fixed-gear setup, or a singe-speed without needing a tensioner.
They also make it easy to install a claw for derailleur mounting. This is useful for two reasons. One, derailleur hangers used to be an integral part of the dropout, so they weren't easy to replace when damaged. Two, derailleur hangers didn't used to be standardized like they are today, and a claw was an easy way to get around compatibility problems between frame and derailleur.

There's nothing sacrilegious about running raw cable on those things, they're intended get scuffed. Worrying about the paint there is like worrying that the texturing on a car's steering wheel will get smoothed out from your hands touching it.

Run the cable bare. If it makes funny noises, hit the spot with lube.

I don't have any experience with 3TTT stems, but that sounds totally bonkers. Loosening the expander bolt releases the tension between the wedge and the bottom of the stem, releasing the expansion connection between stem and steerer and allowing you to remove the stem. Normally this only takes a few seconds, and does not require unscrewing the bolt until the wedge falls off.

The only time a quill stem should be difficult to remove from a steerer is if considerable corrosion has occurred since the last time the stem was secured in place. If the stem has been properly greased and the inside of the steerer is in good shape, this usually takes a very long time to get problematic... like, if you're removing the stem once a year to clean and re-grease it, you should be plenty good.

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Yeah I think this is a poor design. When you loosen the bolt, it just comes out of the stem, the wedge is still sucked-up inside the stem. I'll try to upload a pic for you.

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Hi, thanks for your considered reply and interesting perspective. I'm hoping you can help with some of my questions below also. My thoughts as to your points;

1. Yes I only experienced horizontal drop-outs for the first time when building this bike. Not having your years of experience, I found the whole design fiddly and still don't really understand why the rear dropouts would be designed in this fashion. The modern design gives you (theoretically) perfect rear wheel alignment with no effort, the rear wheel pretty much drops in and also comes out pretty easily without the need to rotate the rear derailleur out of the way and the QR doesn't require as much clamping force as the chain is not able to pull the wheel out of alignment. Perhaps you can shed more light on why design a bike with these inward facing horizontal drop-outs? What are the benefits? I've read people say you can alter the handling of the bike by moving the wheel in and out a bit, but this would also have some effect on the chain wrap around the cogs and shifting I would suspect.

2. The Continental GP4000sII tyres are specified as a 330 tpi, the Veloflex Master 23's are specified as 320 tpi so not sure if the Veloflex are really more supple? During my research (for tan sidewall tyres) I read about the Veloflex and their open tubular concept, that was why I bought them and really like them. As for using lower air pressure in the Veloflex tyres, I must say I was opting on the side of caution as I haven't been using the tyres for very long. I have been using Continentals for years and know that they are still safe to use with much the lower pressures than 90psi. However for the purpose of a comparison, I tried to follow the manufacturer recommendations regarding tyre pressures. Also, I thought 100psi wasn't that all that high for 23mm tyres, I thought everyone used to ride with higher air pressures 'back in the day' to reduce rolling resistance? It's only in recent times that studies have revealed that lower pressure & wider tyres reduce rolling resistance.

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Not a great photo, but this is the design of the stem. The wedge nut is pulled up into the inside of the stem so as you would expect, when you loosen the bolt, the wedge remains in place?

Originally Posted by Milton Keynes

Sorry, but I like the looks of the modern R5 over the 1984 Master. Not that the vintage bike looks bad, (I must be getting old when something from my teen years is now called "vintage") but I just like the looks of the modern bike better.

Now if it were a choice between a 1955 Schwinn kid's bike compared to a modern Schwinn kid's bike, the vintage one would win every time. The modern one just wouldn't have the personality the old one has.

Originally Posted by Kovkov

Yes it remains in place after losening of the bolt. That's why You have to strike the bolt.

Your stem is expander style. There is also wedge style. Comparison:

Originally Posted by mstateglfr

Horizontal dropouts- in addition to the already mentioned ability to run single speed without tensioner and your stated theory of the ability to effectively adjust chainstay length which gives you different handling, a very real benefit to horizontal dropouts was to account for builder error. It wasnt some epidemic or anything, but horizontal dropouts gave the builder a wider tolerance with regards to how aligned the frame was. If the rear triangle was slightly off in one direction or the other, that could be accounted for when setting the tire in the dropouts.

Tires- Continental GP tires arent 330tpi. They are 3 layers of 110tpi. Conti chooses to advertise that as 330tpi to make it seem like a higher number(and it works, clearly).

Wheel slipping in dropout- this doesnt happen with an internal cam QR skewer, which is the only style of QR that should be used with horizontal dropouts. The internal cam QR has a significantly stronger grip on dropouts than an external cam, so it doesnt let the wheel move at all. You can smash cranks creating absurd amounts of torque and not make the wheel shift.
The only benefit of external cam QR skewers is weight. And using the stock external QR skewers on most bikes will save you maybe 40g compared to Shimano Ultegra internal cam QR skewers. There just isnt a realized benefit for external cam.

Originally Posted by Kovkov

You shouldn’t losen the bolt until it detaches. You losen it a turn or two and then strike it hard with a rubber mallet. If it’s an allen bolt you leave the key in and strike the key. This releases the tension on the wedge or the expander and the stem can be pulled out in one piece.

It‘s a way superior design to the ahead system since it gives you the possibility to do all kind of stem related work without touching the headset adjustment.

Originally Posted by bruce19

Thank you. That was well written and informative. On the subject of tubulars, I've never wanted the hassles of them. And, now that I'm riding the lighter, smoother and faster Mavic USTs, there's no need for them. I recently bought a CAAD 12 w/105 mid-compact gearing. My cassette is 11-30 and at age 73 my weight/power is not what it used to be. So, the idea of climbing in a 36X25 is impressive to me.

Originally Posted by canklecat

Good write up. I enjoyed it.

Pretty much mirrors my experiences with older and newer bikes. Like 'em both. Both have quirks and advantages. If I had to choose only one I'd probably stick with the steel bike and downtube shifters, but that's only because it's what I started with umpteen years ago and it's familiar.

And I do get comments on my steel bike, although it's just a Centurion Ironman, the Everyman of affordable road bikes. In most group rides at least one person will chatter about the Ironman they started with years ago. Maybe the distribution network was more extensive here in the 1980s.

The '93 Trek 5900, meh. Nobody comments on it. Great, functional early-ish carbon bike, lightweight and fun to ride, feels pretty much like riding a lighter weight version of a diamond frame steel bike. But cosmetically it's in that nether region era before carbon bikes were designed without slavish adherence to old school standards. Those 1990s carbon bikes just looked like diamond frame steel bikes with odd looking fat tubes. I'm not even sure it's a monocoque, I think it may just be cosmetically designed to resemble one over conventionally joined tubes.

Some newer carbon bikes are works of art in their own right. None that I can afford.

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Thanks for your comments. At 73 it is great to hear you are out and active. Mind you 36x25 used to be 39x23 a few years ago and probably 36x28 with the next bike. Is gravity changing with global warming?

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Hi, thanks for all your comments.
1. I suspected that frame alignment may have been part of the reason for the adjustability in the rear drop-outs.
2. Certainly didnt know the Conti tyres 3 layers of 110tpi, where did you find that information?
Regardless they are still a fantastic tyre. Just got a set of the GP 5000 which are no doubt 1000 times better than the GP4000's?
3. I have tried to keep the Colnago reasonably period correct, so I'm using the original 70's-80's Campagnolo skewers and just tighten the hell out of them which seems to work.
All the old pro's from that era would generate a lot more watts that I can and I assume the equipment worked fine for them?

Originally Posted by canklecat

Funny that some folks don't comment on Cervelo. It's one of those contemporary carbon bikes that does get my attention. They nailed the minimalist lines and graphics, subdued elegance.

The only new-ish carbon bike I've ridden was a Tarmac. Felt incredible, like and extension of my body. But most Specialized and Trek carbon bikes look like generic race rockets to me. Maybe it's the cosmetics, not the lines.

I suspect most fellow cyclists don't comment on new-ish bikes out of respect or a preference to not seem confrontational. Even roadies are aware of that annoying roadie cliche personality type, which thankfully isn't the majority. But there's always that one guy who has to make everyone else grit his teeth, nod and smile and try to ignore.

But almost everyone has a bit of C&V in them, so it's safe to chatter about older bikes we see on group rides. Or anything a little out of the ordinary. During Thursday evening's ride I noticed a fellow on a titanium bike so I bent his ear for awhile about that since a ti bike is on my someday list.

But I rarely ask about someone else's carbon bike. Too expensive for one thing, which I think some folks are actually embarrassed about, like they have to justify to us why they have a $3-$5k bike for their 18 mph average speed. That never occurs to me and folks should enjoy their hobby any way they like. I didn't even plan to buy a carbon bike but snagged the old '93 Trek 5900 for a very good price from a friend, and it's been fun to ride. Feels a lot like my Ironman, but 5-7 lbs lighter. Not quite as comfy (mostly due to the deeper bar drop -- I'm more of a French fit kinda guy, maybe an Eddy fit on the Trek 5900), but nice on hilly rides since I'm not a strong climber.

Originally Posted by mstateglfr

Conti claims 3 layers on their site and it's all over the internet, just need to know how to interpret.
https://www.continental-tires.com/bi...-prix-4-season
The 3/330 is what 3 layers equaling 330 means.

Old Campy QRs are great for your need.

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Modern stem: Loosen 3 bolts and simply slide off vs Retro stem: loosen 1 bolt and strike the bolt with a mallet one or more times until you are sure the wedge is properly released.

Originally Posted by co_rouleur

Hi Guys,

I have just written up a big article discussing the differences between riding a 21st century modern road bike and riding a retro (1980s) road bike. I've tried to cover as many points as I could think of. I hope you find it interesting and hope that anyone who only rides a modern bike is inspired to go out and add a retro ride to the fleet!

Modern vs Retro Bicycle Comparison