chaadster

What’s going on with wheel QR skewers? I don’t get why big players, notably Shimano and Campagnolo, make sets that are 5x heavier than mid-pack lightweight ones. At this point, lightweight skewers have been in the market for nearly 30 years, and it seems pretty clear that they work fine (the good ones).

So what gives? The 70gm savings you can easily get replacing your Ultegra set seems worthwhile, and is more than you save on seatpost or handlebar upgrades, yet component manufacturers have those ranges finely parsed.

Are consumers afraid to ride lightweights? Maybe producers don’t see the ROI. Are skewers just overlooked? They are excluded from wheelset weights. Is it a convenience issue? Maybe big brands want they easiest to use variant, just to avoid liability issues.

Thoughts?

datlas 

My guess is supply/demand. Maybe it does not make sense for the big guys to focus on what really is a niche market. It's especially true since wheel weights don't include skewers, as you pointed out.

Zipp is a big name that makes lightweight Ti skewers that are also aero, FWIW.

redfooj

they dont get into the game of low-profile, infrequently-swapped items. just like bottom brackets and headsets.

also seems easy for someone to rip off their design, as manufacturing for skewer is much easier than a caliper or a brifter. not worth development costs. not much to be gained.

to shave weight its a pretty simple matter of replacing their steel skewers with titanium. skinnier nut, and just shave the lever to half its width.

chaadster

Good points.

I finally just got a pair of Tune AC 130s, which I’ve been lusting over for a few years since seeing them on Contador’s bike, but I’d have been real happy with a half-weight Dura Ace skewer, even being a bit heavier than the Tune.

datlas 

People sometimes argue about these QR skewers. I suppose if we all end up with through-axles the debate will go away.

In the meantime, some people think the internal cam of Campagnolo and Shimano is a perfect design, and it's foolish to go weight-weenie on an item that could cause a catastrophe if it fails.

Others argue that the QR really only holds the wheel on the dropout and it's the axle that really supports the weight, and since you can get weight-weenie QR's at a reasonable price it's the best (ahem) Bang for your Buck weight loss program for your road bike.

I think both sides have valid points, so I am not taking sides.

rosefarts

I've got a set of generic ti Chinese ones, about 40g for the set. They cost me $20.

I'm scared of them. Too many big fast descents on my rides. I put them on once, everything worked out, but it was literally the only thing I thought of the entire ride.

chaadster

Yeah, that was always the dominant paradigm, since way back, but I’d always put that down to poorly constructed skewers which used cheap nylon pivot bearing surfaces and simple threaded pivot ends which could be inadvertently unthreaded while trying to tighten down the skewer.

In any case, devastating skewer failures never seemed to be a thing. Being pissed off at crappy designs with painful to use levers, high friction, and short wearing bearings was definitely a thing, though!

jamesdak 

Well, I've got a lightweight Miche set that just doesn't hold with a darn. Nothing worse than taking off at an intersection, having the rear skewer slip again, and the rear tire lock against the frame. All while the drivers look at you like your an idiot who can't ride a bike, LOL!

Seriously though, I've just haven't seen a performance reason to upgrade. Not worth the money in my book.

Bandera

QR skewers from Shimano and other major mfgs are designed to be as fool-proof as possible for consumers while proving utterly reliable under the immense power of professional racers operating on brutal surfaces like the Pave'. Team mechanics must provide a safe, positive and quick wheel change each and every time. Fiddling about w/ finicky QRs is a waste of precious time & a wheel slip a disaster. UCI rules have current bikes adding weights, compromising the function of the well proven designs of internal cam QRs to save a few grams serves no functional purpose.

For the 41: Suit yourself.

-Bandera

Steve90068

I've used various versions of lightweight and mid weight skewers over the years and they were always creaky, would loosen over time, etc. I got a pair of Dura Ace 9000 skewers and never looked back

The extra 80g has not slowed me down lol

popeye

Because those don't creak on a really stiff wheel.

datlas 

Good point. A couple years ago I had a really annoying creak coming from what I thought was maybe my stem or even my bottom bracket, only happened when I stood up and pedaled hard...after much searching it was found to be my KCNC Ti QR skewer from the front wheel. I made some adjustments and it got better.

79pmooney

There is the fact that steel has the highest modulus of elasticity of the metal used in the bike industry by a factor of two. This means that you can build skewer with twice the clamping force without compromise. Shimano and Campagnolo apparently think that clamping force might be an important characteristic of an item whose only function is to keep your wheels on the bike.

I will only ride internally cammed steel skewered quick releases or nutted axles (or bolted in the case of Phil Wood). Campagnolo and Shimano both make very good ones.

Ben

1nterceptor

Some observations. Among the OEM's; DT RWS is lighter than Dura Ace.
Have used this before on my Scott's DT Swiss wheels, very nice. Also, some
skewer companies make their models lighter by giving up the QR lever:
High End Skewer Review - Fairwheel Bikes Blog

exmechanic89

I use DT Swiss Ti skewers on my road bike for the weight savings and have never had an issue with them. I think any of the high quality branded versions are safe, it's the Chinese no-name (eBay) stuff that's iffy to me. I'd never use those, personally.

stockae92

I ride a pair of KCNC titanium skewers are so far so good. no problem with locking the wheels down.

There are internal cams (Dura Ace), and external cams (KCNC). People would say internal cams are more reliable. And I think the weight more and cost more (depends). And the Dura Ace lever seems to be more aero?

chaadster

Is modulus of elasticity even relevant? Surely the skewer is not seeing so much clamping force that is stretching, and of course it’s not necessary to have steel levels of modulus because that would mean Ti skewers wouldn’t work (they’d be permanently stretched or broken), but yet they do work.

I also find it interesting that it’s not as though Shimano and Campagnolo are in a clamping force arms race. They don’t advertise clamping force at all, or even assert that their skewers are better than anything else. It’s not apparent to me those guys think about their skewers at all, much less what they think of them.

SethAZ 

Nah. If someone hasn't done it already, someone will skeletonize their thru axle and shave a few grams, and the race will begin anew.

chaadster

Of course, pros use lightweights too. As I said earlier, I learned of Tune AC skewers from seeing them on Contadors bike.

Speaking of fiddling, I’ve wondered why supposedly good skewers (Ultegra and some kind of Campagnolo I’ve had) don’t have captive springs. That’s a small detail that seems like it would save a lot of fiddling to have, Maybe pro level Dura Ace and Super Record have that feature for the mechanics’ sake?

Bandera

That "fidding" isn't done on the roadside during a wheel change if one has/is a competent mechanic. QR tension adjustments on spare wheels , even in the day of front "lawyer lips", is done before an event. Some mechanics still use loose pairs of front & rear dropouts to set QR tension properly on spare wheels w/o having to use a team bike just like we did decades ago for neutral service.

Having wheels properly/reliably/securely attached to the machine is relatively important. I'll trust Shimano internal cam QRs for that task rather than to save a few grams in the aftermarket. Plenty of places to save those grams if that's a huge concern in less critical components or around one's waist-line.

As always, suit yourself.

-Bandera

chaadster

Ah, yes I understand your point regarding wheel changes not needing to pull the skewer, but I just mean any time you remove a skewer, as for service, it has also seemed captive springs would be nice. I’ve never had DA or SR; do those have the feature? I bet most of us have dropped a spring at some point and would agree it’s fiddly and silly!

I don’t know why Contador used a lightweight set, but for me, it simply to customize the bike, and to do so without sacrificing security and reliability. I will, however, trade off a bit of ease-of-use! I would not trade off performance for customization, though.

Anyway, it’s not about me, and I was just curious to “take the temp” on the current state of opinions, and so I appreciate your input. The idea that Shimano make the only reliable skewer is particularly interesting.

Thanks.

Bandera

You are jumping to an ill-founded conclusion, Shimano hubs & QR are what I ride, except on my FG.

-Bandera

Sy Reene

fwiw I split the difference on weight. Stayed with steel skewers for piece of mind, but got a pair of 85g Zipps.

chaadster

Oh, sorry, I did misunderstand. There may be other reliable brands, and you trust Shimano.

chaadster

I looked at those, but was uncertain, with different iterations on the handle design, whether I was going to be assured of getting the latest model, and couldn't figure out what was going on with the design that led to last year's recall for "fail to engage when in closed position." They have a Ti model, too, and both that and the steel version are right in the middle weight-wise and very attractive.

Do you have the [I think] older, rounded handle design, or the newer flatter style? I wondered if the round style limited closing positions, especially with hooded dropouts.