[BurlyShirley]

...you know, instead of threading them in, and having backward threads and crossthreads and all the crap that comes along with pedals that just screw in...wouldnt it make simple sense to have an ISIS type spline on the pedal and just lock it on with a bolt from the backside?

 

[Westy]

Although a spline would work great it is more complicated and expensive to create a spline on both the pedal and the crank. It would take special machinery and another step in the manufacturing process. Since the pedal does not need to transfer power torque to the crank it would be just as easy to have a smooth interface and have a shoulder on the pedal and bolt secure things into place. Either the way threaded pedal interface is simple and causes few problems as long as the pedal is properly tightened.

 

[MTB_Rob_NC]

...you know, instead of threading them in, and having backward threads and crossthreads and all the crap that comes along with pedals that just screw in...wouldnt it make simple sense to have an ISIS type spline on the pedal and just lock it on with a bolt from the backside?

Are you serious? The pedal threading is a simple smart solution. So simple in fact that I vaguely remember reading some where that the Wright Bros came up with it but were denied a patent because it was too simple.

If its not broken don't fix it!

The crossthreading.... Well that just sounds like user error

 

[OGRipper]

Umm, do you really have trouble with the way pedals work? Not to be a dick but if you use a little grease and don't overtighten, pedals work pretty well as is, especially now that some crank manufacturers are adding steel inserts to aluminum cranks.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Umm, do you really have trouble with the way pedals work? Not to be a dick but if you use a little grease and don't overtighten, pedals work pretty well as is, especially now that some crank manufacturers are adding steel inserts to aluminum cranks.

Yeah, they work "pretty well" but it could be better, is all Im saying. I think they should at least be bolted on from the back, if not also splined.

Get ready for this:

I think steerer tubes should be splined too. Yeah! Thats right. ISIS it all out.

 

[Westy]

Yeah, they work "pretty well" but it could be better, is all Im saying. I think they should at least be bolted on from the back, if not also splined.

That could create more crank chain stay clearance problems. Your ideas suck.

 

[BurlyShirley]

That could create more crank chain stay clearance problems. Your ideas suck.

nah! you could get around that with some simple machining to recess the bolthead area, as you wouldnt need as thick and area to interface, because youd need less threads or rather no threads, just an isis area, right?

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Your ideas suck.

Uh...chill.


He's just throwing things out there.

 

[Westy]

nah! you could get around that with some simple machining to recess the bolthead area, as you wouldnt need as thick and area to interface, because youd need less threads or rather no threads, just an isis area, right?

Recessing the bolt head would reduce the effective thickness of the crank. Instead of stripping threads you would pull a chunk of crank out of the pedal interface.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Recessing the bolt head would reduce the effective thickness of the crank. Instead of stripping threads you would pull a chunk of crank out of the pedal interface.

Theres a ton of easy ways around this. You could use a very thin bolthead plus some recess on the inside of the pedal axle thingy. It aint that hard to think of.

 

[binary visions]

I think steerer tubes should be splined too. Yeah! Thats right. ISIS it all out.

While, in theory, splined everything sounds pretty great, it's a whole lot of new standards and new expenses for very little gain. Considering how well non-splined steerers, and threaded pedals work, you're talking about introducing two new standards with all the tooling and design expenses for all companies involved, just because a few people aren't competent enough to thread something properly.

Splining steerer tubes.. I've actually thought about that before but there's a whole lot of variables there. Headset design (should the bearings be splined to fit on the steerer? Or should the steerer be smooth where it interfaces with the bearings?), steerer tube length (if the steerer is smooth for the bearings, how do you deal with different height headtubes?)... Wouldn't you rather have your stem twist rather than break your steerer when you crash anyway?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Splining steerer tubes.. I've actually thought about that before but there's a whole lot of variables there. Headset design (should the bearings be splined to fit on the steerer? Or should the steerer be smooth where it interfaces with the bearings?), steerer tube length (if the steerer is smooth for the bearings, how do you deal with different height headtubes?)... Wouldn't you rather have your stem twist rather than break your steerer when you crash anyway?

Id just say make the headsets to fit the splined steerers. Sure, there's a ton of variables, but it totally defeats crooked stems and slippage. It'd take a helluva crash to torque a splined steerer into breaking, no? Or would not bars snap first?

 

[Westy]

Id just say make the headsets to fit the splined steerers. Sure, there's a ton of variables, but it totally defeats crooked stems and slippage. It'd take a helluva crash to torque a splined steerer into breaking, no? Or would not bars snap first?

T'is better to slip than to break.

 

[BurlyShirley]

T'is better to slip than to break.

Well, maybe, but if you had a splined steerer, you could probably get around having to have a steerer pressed in at all, and new ones could be easy to get and just bolt in.

eh? eh?

 

[OGRipper]

Hmm, splined steerers...interesting idea I've thrown around over beers before. I agree with Binary, would create new issues with little gain, esecially what with integrated stems (on double crowns at least). I appreciate the creativity here, but like the splined pedal idea I think you're attacking a problem that doesn't really exist. If your stem is set up right and you crash hard enough to twist it, you've probably got bigger problems. The current way works pretty well and avoids a whole new standard and associated problems with tolerances, etc. And anyway you would still need a clamping mechanism of some kind, so you're just adding complexity (and probably weight) with minimal gain.

But I don't want to kill your brainstorm...do you have any ideas to revolutionize the real weak links, like drivetrain, etc.?

 

[Pip3r]

the one thing i do think would be nice is threaded headsets, no more banging, If BB's are i dont know why headtubes couldnt be.

 

[BurlyShirley]

The ends of handlebars and the insides of grips should be splined too! SPLINE IT ALL!

 

[buildyourown]

the one thing i do think would be nice is threaded headsets, no more banging, If BB's are i dont know why headtubes couldnt be.

BWWWaaaahhhhhaaaa,
I hope you are joking. Otherwise that is the funniest case of "full circle" ever.
"Just thread the headsets together, then they'll never come loose."
HHHHhhhaaaahhhaaaa

 

[Westy]

The ends of handlebars and the insides of grips should be splined too! SPLINE IT ALL!

Spline the hubs and axels too. The bike wouldn't roll but would be stiff as chit.

 

[buildyourown]

They spline everything on airplanes and they get expensive quick. I'm not sure what's wrong with having your stem slip when you crash. That's the reason I don't run an integrated stem. You crash, stem slips and your bars are crooked. You get up, put the wheel between your knees and crank. And your off and riding. By having something that is allowed to slip you avoid damage to alot of other things. Kinda like running your brake levers loose so they can slip.

 

[Slugman]

nah! you could get around that with some simple machining to recess the bolthead area, as you wouldnt need as thick and area to interface, because youd need less threads or rather no threads, just an isis area, right?

Which is easier - Cross threading a large thread or a small thread... The Small thread.

Therefore by threading a bolt into the back of the pedal axel you've just increased the chance that you'll cross thread it.

Nice thinking though... I know a couple ways to get around the problem, but it may mean more maintence later on... so it will not be widely accepted.

 

[zedro]

nah! you could get around that with some simple machining to recess the bolthead area, as you wouldnt need as thick and area to interface, because youd need less threads or rather no threads, just an isis area, right?

threads are like spines in the way they create increased contact area, just in the other axis. Not much point to splining in a direction where no torque is applied.

 

[Dreyzar]

"splining in a direction where no torque is applied."

Haha! You guys sure know how to geek it up! No one will ever make splined pedals, steerer tubes, and especially not threaded headsets ( ).
Sorry

 

[OGRipper]

Hey Dreyzar, why come on here except to geek it up?!? We're pretty much all bike geeks, that's why we spend so much time reading and posting inane crap here while ignoring the rest of our lives.

Zedro, as usual, made a good point in a few words.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Zedro, as usual, made a good point in a few words.

I see what he's saying, but I dont mean to have splines for the sake of fixing a torque problem, but rather, just to get rid of the whole threading the pedal directly into the crank thing. It seems lazy and outdated to me.

 

[Curb Hucker]

oh ya, well ya know that bolt that holds the derailleur on, i want that to be splined, with ourboard bearings, and a propritary self extracting bolt

 

[zedro]

I see what he's saying, but I dont mean to have splines for the sake of fixing a torque problem, but rather, just to get rid of the whole threading the pedal directly into the crank thing. It seems lazy and outdated to me.

but splines are used for torque purposes, otherwise there is no point because you arent really gaining any usable surface are; the splines would be a redundant feature. Like was said above, you'd be better off just having a cylindrical surface as an equivalent system, since the fasterner solution would be the same.

Also its more likely you would need a wider crank and pedal axle interface with a splined system because you are loosing the appropriate surface area (ie. those that can transfer force from the bending moment) compared to that of threading.

not sure why you're clutching to splines just because they're used on the BB; its a totally different application that serves a specific pupose. Even Shimano BBs (Octalink and the new 2 piece stuff) dont use a full spline interface because its simply not needed; half the interface is simply a cylindrical press-fit.

ahhh....geeking-out afterglow...

 

[Jeremy R]

I was surprised that nobody ever came out with a splined 20mm fork axle.
Like Manitou has their hexagon axle, it seems that a splined setup would be even stiffer. You would not even have to change the hubs or anything, just the axle ends. I guess it is either A) not needed or B) maybe you need some rotation in your axle to keep stuff from breaking.

 

[zedro]

i pick A).....unless people are too lazy to tighten the dropout pinch bolts, in which case they should not be allowed to own forks...

 

[Curb Hucker]

i pick A).....unless people are too lazy to tighten the dropout pinch bolts, in which case they should not be allowed to own forks...

ok,you arnt alowed to own a fork, give yours to me

 

[Westy]

I was surprised that nobody ever came out with a splined 20mm fork axle.
Like Manitou has their hexagon axle, it seems that a splined setup would be even stiffer. You would not even have to change the hubs or anything, just the axle ends. I guess it is either A) not needed or B) maybe you need some rotation in your axle to keep stuff from breaking.

1. Splines are expensive to manufacture and are probably heavier.

2. A splined axel would only increase stiffness compared to a smooth axel when slippage occurs. Slippage only occurs in extreme circumstances and sometimes it is better to allow slippage to absorb energy and prevent other parts from breaking. Making something too stiff can often contribute to it becoming brittle, flex or slippage absorbes energy, exactly why airplane wings are designed to flex.

 

[Shmoe]

I for one think the threaded headset is a good idea.
Not the old style. Just make the cups th read into the frame instead of press in. Forks would not have to change at all, the fork would still be threadless.

 

[Curb Hucker]

I for one think the threaded headset is a good idea.
Not the old style. Just make the cups th read into the frame instead of press in. Forks would not have to change at all, the fork would still be threadless.

F that, theres nothing like taking a beat up old hammer and pounding the living hell out of your brand new King headset until it finally is crammed into your new frame.

 

[D_D]

F that, theres nothing like taking a beat up old hammer and pounding the living hell out of your brand new King headset until it finally is crammed into your new frame.

But would that beat hanging off a massive spanner before every ride in a vain attempt to get the cup so tight in the frame it doesn't loosen 10min into your ride?

 

[Shmoe]

But would that beat hanging off a massive spanner before every ride in a vain attempt to get the cup so tight in the frame it doesn't loosen 10min into your ride?

Does your BB loosen 10mins into your ride?

I'm probally missing somthing, but it actually seems like a decent idea to me. I remember someone posting it here a long time ago but dont remember the negitives.

 

[D_D]

Does your BB loosen 10mins into your ride?

No but threaded headsets had a tendancy to. I can't help but think that using a thread to secure a bearing race where there is rotation in both directions is a bad idea, especially when the race is at the end of a long lever.

 

[thaflyinfatman]

I was surprised that nobody ever came out with a splined 20mm fork axle.
Like Manitou has their hexagon axle, it seems that a splined setup would be even stiffer. You would not even have to change the hubs or anything, just the axle ends. I guess it is either A) not needed or B) maybe you need some rotation in your axle to keep stuff from breaking.

Any non-circular-ended axle is covered in the same patent Manitou holds for the hex-lock axle. The hexagon was chosen because it appeared to Manitou, to be the best.

 

[thaflyinfatman]

i pick A).....unless people are too lazy to tighten the dropout pinch bolts, in which case they should not be allowed to own forks...

I did that, and lost the end cap off my Boxxer axle. I got halfway down a run, stopped and noticed my axle sticking out one side about an inch.

= dumb.

 

[binary visions]

I for one think the threaded headset is a good idea.
Not the old style. Just make the cups th read into the frame instead of press in. Forks would not have to change at all, the fork would still be threadless.

Why? I just don't see it. Threaded headsets can come loose like anything else. Is it really that hard to tighten your threadless headset? Loosen stem. Tighten top cap. Tighten stem. Done.

With threaded headsets, you just have the extra step of tightening the headset itself. To what gain? So you can have another set of threads on your bike to cross-thread and/or sieze if improperly installed/taken care of?

 

[Brian HCM#1]

Why spline when you can duct tape, it would be way stronger.