Thorn Cycles Forum
Community => Tandem Talk => Topic started by: john p on July 17, 2005, 02:29:30 pm
-
Hi all.
I have a Thorn voyager used for my daughter and myself and we have panniers on the rear rack. I wish to safely stand the cycle upright whilst we are on stop. Should I purchase a sidestand or centrestand? Has anyone got any advice on the stability of either of these? Thanks in advance for any replies.
John[:)]
-
When I asked about a stand when ordering my Thorn tandem, I was steered away from the idea. On the grounds that the windage area presented, especially by a tandem may mean a gust could blow the bike over. So we have gone standless and either find a bit of grass to lay the bike down on or find something to lean it against, using a saddle or pannier or even crank as the point of contact. Which seems to work for us.
Suppose it depends what you mean by 'safely'. I would be inclined to agree with Thorn and think that no stand would hold a tandem upright in all circumstances, but if you are careful and possibly don't mind the odd fall..
We did meet another couple with a tandem who had a brilliant centre stand, alloy castings I suspect, which stowed like a side stand but unfolded as lowered to make a centre stand. I don't know I'd put one on our tandem but for my solo it looked very good. I carry a heavy work bag on the solo which I just strap to the top of the rack, and with a sidestand the bike tends to topple because of the lean. If anyone knows what rack I've described and where to get one, I'd be grateful.
-
quote:
If anyone knows what rack I've described and where to get one, I'd be grateful.
Should have used preview. Meant to type Stand, of course.
-
Another tip for parking without a stand is to use a releasable cable tie or old toe strap to hold the front brake on, you can then just rest the handlebars against a wall, tree, lamp post etc. The bike can't roll and the bars can't turn so it's a very solid and lightweight solution.
-
quote:
If anyone knows what rack I've described and where to get one, I'd be grateful.
That sounds like the ESGE 2-legged stand (available in the US from http://www.sheldonbrown.com/accessories.html#kickstands); I'm not sure what UK suppliers might have it. Also, Hebie makes a 2-legged stand http://www.cyclex.co.uk/index.php/product/propstands/
-
A good way of proping a bike is to use the pedal low to the ground facing I think backwards so as not to freewheel. Or get BMX frame pads as this is far easier and stops the nasty scrapes causing tinworm-even a small section of pipe foam as this works well on the top straight/sloping bar against a post or solid object.
-
Go to click-stand.com
Tom in Washington state has a great product out and one that is tandem specific.
Mike
-
I use a Click-Stand on my fully loaded Nomad tourer and it does a good job. It doesn't like soft ground though. Tom is an absolute gent to buy from as well.
-
I use a centre-mount Pletscher kickstand. On the rear BB it is far enough back that the movement of the steering does not adversely effect it like would be the case on a single bike. We've used this happily on several fully loaded tours.
On the Thorn Nomad I busted the Pletscher Multi-zoom rear stand (with ~ 60kgs of food and water aboard). I had to resort to 'the stick!' (tm) - my bush version of the Clickstand. In use I did find one disadvantage of 'the stick'. It is easily susceptible to an inadvertent kick with the foot which trips the bike over. The Clickstand may suffer a similar hazard. I will be replacing the Multi-zoom with a new one, it's just so quick and easy to use.
-
On the Thorn Nomad I busted the Pletscher Multi-zoom rear stand...
Aw, no!
Pete, is there a story behind this? Maybe something instructive for others to do or avoid? Did it just fatigue somehow?
Hope your bike wasn't damaged in the falls from this or TheStickTM...sorry you had trouble with something so essential to everyday convenience while on-tour. I can't believe how much easier my solo touring life became once I got my Click-Stand; it is just so nice to have a mechanical "somebody" to hold the bike at every stop. It'd be the same for a kickstand, I'm sure.
Best,
Dan. ("Every Picture Tells a Story" is not just a Rod Stewart album...)
-
Aw, no!
Pete, is there a story behind this? Maybe something instructive for others to do or avoid? Did it just fatigue somehow?
No story really, just 3 weeks of sustained use with loads of up to 65kgs - 25 kgs of camping gear, 23 kgs of water, plus 6-7 days of food (say 15 kgs). It gave up the ghost as I finally packed the bike leaving Kulgera, NT heading for the Old Andado Track.
("Every Picture Tells a Story" is not just a Rod Stewart album...)
Yes, I'd love to post photos but apparently the IPad (lacking Flash capability) will not upload photos to either Facebook, my web gallery nor to Flickr!
Grrrrrr :( Damned Crapple >:(
-
Hi Pete!
<nods> Yes, I can see why the kickstand gave up; that it lasted as long as it did under those loads is mute testimony to its strength.
...apparently the IPad (lacking Flash capability) will not upload photos to either Facebook, my web gallery nor to Flickr!
I think we can fix that, Pete!
For Flickr...at least two ways...
1) You can upload photos from your iPad by email.
Go to: www.flickr.com/account/email/
. . . and locate your "upload by email" address and go from there. Keep it confidential so others can't hijack your Photostream (hint: create a separate email addy for photo uploads).
2) The iPad app store has a number of Flickr upload utilities available.
It is also possible to upload to Facebook and, I believe, your web gallery. Give a shout if you have trouble.
Best,
Dan. (who wants to see what Pete saw, y'see...)
-
We have an $8,000+ custom tandem there's no way am I going to lay it on the ground! We have ESGE/Pletscher Double-legged kickstands on both of our tandems and they're wonderful - You just stand the bike up where ever you are (within reason, of course.) On the stand, the bike is stable and it's very convenient to get into the bags. It even serves as a workstand of sorts - You can check and adjust the shifting and brakes, service the chains, remove and replace the wheels easily, remove/replace/adjust saddles and seatposts... Virtually any service that requires that the bike be upright and stationary. And it's always available, where ever you are! Removing and replacing the wheels for flat repairs is much easier. I wouldn't want to have to replace the Rohloff clickbox with the bike laying on its' side. Only once, in a really strong wind, have we had a tandem blow over. I know that some people like the Click Stand, but they look to me like a PITA. The only reason I can figure is that they just have something against kickstands and don't want to "defile" their bike by mounting one on it. I have seen tandems that were held up by a Click Stand fall over and the wind wasn't even blowing.
You can see the kickstand in this photo:
(http://www.rodbikes.com/catalog/makeshift/images/makeshift6-2.jpg)
-
I know that some people like the Click Stand, but they look to me like a PITA. The only reason I can figure is that they just have something against kickstands and don't want to "defile" their bike by mounting one on it.
Well, it is a bit like the Great Helmet Debate; some like 'em, others despise 'em, and it is a matter of individual choice.
We've heard how much you like your kickstand(s), and I think that's great, Steve. You have a wonderful purpose-built bracket attached securely to a boss on your tandem's stays. It is working well for you and for many others including other Forum members who regularly use them in extreme conditions and with enormous loads in the back-of-beyond (Il Padrone). I've used them in the past myself and recognize their many benefits and ready convenience for all the reasons you've stated. However, like others, I no longer choose to use a kickstand.
There are some good and practical reasons why people avoid kickstands, and they don't have a great deal to do with appearance, snobbery, or "defiling" their (sometimes very expensive) bicycles. Here are a few:
1) Many manufacturers (Thorn among them) will no longer honor their frame warranties if a kickstand is affixed to the bike and a failure occurs as a result. Sometimes, a manufacturer will disavow their frame warranty even if the failure is unrelated to the kickstand or in a different location. Thorn is very good and reasonable in this regard, but other manufacturers will void the warranty if, say, a head tube cracks and a kickstand is attached at the bottom bracket or rear triangle, the argument being the broken head tube might have been caused by a fall from a propped kickstand. I know of three instances among acquaintances where such denials have occurred. It is yet another way for a manufacturer to limit warranty claims, which are always costly to resolve. There are two ways to limit warranty claims -- either design and build a bike so well that failure rates are miniscule, or write enough disclaimers in the warranty so it is rarely honored. Most manufacturers do both, and for very good reasons. Not only are such warranty claims expensive, but some nefarious customers will deliberately damage a bike so it can be replaced or upgraded under warranty. It is called the "JRA" tactic -- as in, "I was Just Riding Around when..." and is fraud akin to faked slip-fall injury claims against grocery stores. What the JRA claimant may not say is "I was just riding around when I decided to try jumping my road bike off a three-meter high loading dock. The head tube broke on impact and that must somehow be your fault as a manufacturer for not designing the bike properly. After all, my buddy's trials bike took the same jump and did fine". This is why warranties are increasingly restrictive and why manufacturers often require positive and objective proof of a failure; it is entirely reasonable as a way to protect themselves from false or contrived claims.
2) Bottom bracket-mounted kickstands can and do cause damage if the bike is parked in a low gear and then wheeled backwards with the kickstand down if the left crankarm fouls the stand. The cranks then exert enormous leverage against the lowered kickstand, and the chainstays where it is clamped are damaged/crushed as a result. I had a bike damaged this way when parked at uni one day. My kickstand was down with the left crankarm against it and the bike was chained. There was just a bit of slack in the chain, parking was tight, and apparently someone thought if they moved my bike rearward -- and apparently forcibly -- there would be room for theirs. Unfortunately, I was left with a damaged bike, the stays crushed about 5mm in total by the force of the left crankarm hitting the kickstand while the bike was parked in low gear and mechanical advantage was greatest.
3) If a bicycle is not designed for a kickstand (most aren't and lack any sort of boss or plate to fit one, which means the stand has to be clamped to the stays), then it can be problematic to affix one securely enough without tightening the mounting clamp and bolt too much. When most riders find a kickstand is loose (particularly when mounted with clamps on the forward end of the chainstays behind the bottom bracket), they simply tighten it. And when it gets loose, they tighten it more, and when the cycle occurs again, they really reef down on it. What has happened, generally, is the kickstand's fastener has not loosened primarily, but secondarily to the stand being overloaded and partially deforming the stays. Each time the stand is tightened, it makes matters worse. Some people pad the stays with rubber or handlebar tape, but this same process can still occur unless care is used to discover why the stand has loosened.
4) I've seen people sit on their bikes with the stands down. I was kinda horrified the first time I saw it. This is Not Good, but is done in innocence and ignorance, and seems to correlate with cell-phone conversations. I saw this occur earlier today. The stand was loose enough to partially foul the left crank arm on departure. It will probably get tightened pretty soon, and then....
5) Kickstands are mounted low. Fully loaded touring bikes carry a lot of weight up pretty high (panniers and rack-top loads, full water bottles). A lot of leverage is placed on a kickstand, which is at a geometric disadvantage, being located so low on the bike. If the kickstand is clamped to the stays, this leverage is transferred through the clamp. If the kickstand is attached to a plate that has been brazed across the stays or to a boss in that same location, there may be sufficient leverage to torque the brazed bracket off the frame. I have re-brazed no fewer than three stands back in place for people whose brackets were torqued off the frame. The fourth example could not be repaired because a small chunk of steel was torn from the stay when the bracket came off and the stay was distorted. This on a frame that was probably too light to take a stand to start with (Tange Prestige). The builder wanted a happy customer, so he installed the kickstand mounting plate and...the customer wasn't happy when problems occured After and the builder wouldn't fix it and I couldn't, so the customer was really unhappy.
6) Kickstands mounted to the left-rear triangle are less problematic 'cos they're far away from fouling by the left crankarm. They are also mounted a bit higher. Both those things help tremendously. Also, in the case of one-legged 'stands, they seem to be considerably more stable at the rear triangle than similar stands mounted to the stays near the bottom bracket. Double-legged stands like yours are far more convenient and stable when mounted to the chainstays, but they are (more) expensive and can still run afoul of the left crankarm if the rider is clueless or unaware or ignorant or has a lapse of attention and then there's problems.
The best and least problematic kickstand I've ever seen was on a tandem. As I recall, it was a pearlescent white tandem Angel Rodgriguez built for himself and his wife many years ago and was featured in Bicycling magazine in the early 1980s. The mount was located in the tandem keel tube and consisted of a lower plate (for location and to prevent rotation) and a tube that was brazed vertically through the keel tube (to pevent crushing from pressure exerted by the mounting bolt passing through it). Brilliant! (and typical of Angel's high build standards and practical innovation. He was also the first person I knew of who managed to successfully paint ESGE/SKS Chromopastic mudguards; his didn't peel or chip, unlike others').
7) Unless a bicycle is custom-built to accommodate a kickstand (and sometimes even then), the clamps can cause some paint loss, leading to localized rust if the bike is ridden on salted roads. Your mounting bracket is very nicely done -- appears to be investment cast or machined from billet -- but it is not common to see such things on production bikes, which most people own.
The Click-Stand is popular with its users (and endorsed by Thorn) because it is light, can be compacted/folded for storage, does not clamp or attach to the bike in any way (avoiding any possibility of crushing the tubes), and has a high bracing angle which is generally a geometric advantage for securely holding a loaded touring bike. The achilles heel of the Click-Stand is loose soil/soft ground. In those instances, the Click-Stand can sink and bend, break, or dump the bike. In such circumstances, it *must* be parked on a jar lid or something else to widen the contact point and disperse ground pressure. The optional Fat Foot helps a bit, but it often needs something more in wet soil. I've had one fail in that manner (cheerfully replaced by Tom Nostrant, the builder), and since then I pack a tennis ball with a hole in it for such conditions. The ball is self-centering on the Click-Stand and greatly increased the surface area where it contacts the ground, and the fuzzy surface helps a bit also. If the ground is too soupy for even that, I will block up the brakes and lean the bike against something solid, like a tree. The Click-Stand also requires the brakes be blocked else it is unstable, so an elastic failure can prevent it from working properly. About the only other failure that can occur is caused by high winds, but even that can be largely addressed through use of a greater lean angle.
As for laying a bicycle on the ground, I happily did so for 30-odd years until I purchased a Click-Stand. Why? Well, there's nowt so reliable as gravity and the ground has never fallen out from under my bike. Sticking the bike to the ground with gravity as the glue is a great way to hide the bike when stealth camping; it just isn't as visible to passersby who might otherwise stumble across my camp. Unless the loaded bike is lowered or raised with care, it can put a lot of lateral force into the wheels, and cows on open rangeland could step on it, but laying the bike down on the ground or leaning it at a strong angle against a fence or wall served me well for decades and I have no damage to show for it. I do prefer my Click-Stand to the ground, as it makes solo loading and unloading much faster and more convenient, and if the bike is parked upright, the bearings are exposed to less water when it rains,and my panniers stay much cleaner and last longer -- many of the same advantages you enjoy with your kickstand.
So, to sum up...it is a preference thing. One pays their money and takes their chances according to their preferences. No one approach is "better" except as it meets ones' own needs. Obviously, you're a happy kickstand user, but there are others who prefer somethig else, and the reasons do have merit -- for them.
Best,
Dan. ("Vive la différence")
-
The Hebie Bipod Classic (http://aushiker.com/hebie-bipod/) is an even better stand than the ESGE double-legged stand, in my opinion. To put it down you just push it down and pull the bike back, while to get it up you just roll the bike forwards. It works well even when the bike is heavily loaded, and it has a wider footprint to reduce the chances of the bike tipping.
(http://www.aushiker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/IMG_0802.jpg)
My friend has been using the ESGE and it requires a lift of the bike to properly flick the stand up - something that becomes tricky with a heavily loaded tourer.
The Hebie Bipod is not a lightweight stand however.
-
How easy would it be for frame designers to allow for stands when building bikes ?
-
How easy would it be for frame designers to allow for stands when building bikes ?
Very easy!
What is usually involved is simply brazing or TiG-welding a plate across the forward end of the chainstays, with or without a chainstay bridge being present (if the bridge is absent, the lower end of the rear mudguard attaches to the 'stand plate). The plate usually has cupped edges to prevent the kickstand from rotating. The beauty of it is, one can tighten the kickstand mounting bolt as securely as desired with no risk of crushing the 'stays -- because the kickstand mounts to the plate...which is brazed to the 'stays.
Alternatively, a CNC-milled or investment-cast mounting plate can be used, as on Steve's R&E tandem.
Adding a bracket at time of manufacture solves "most" of the potential problems of a BB-mount kickstand, but not all.
If the kickstand mounting bracket is in the usual place, it can still be fouled by the left crankarm if the stand is down when the bike is wheeled backward. Even this would not usually be a problem unless the bike has been left in low gear. It is astonishing how much force can be generated due to the mechanical advantage afforded by low gearing. On the examples I repaired, both the alu crankarm and the stand were deeply embossed by contact with each other, and the mounting plates has been torqued off the stays.
Also, if the plate has been essentially tack-brazed to the stays, it can tear off the stays when required to support a heavy touring load or a seated rider (Why?!? do people sit on bikes supported by kickstands? well, they just...do). I have seen it happen, and I know of at least one manufacturer who has advised their factory mounting plate not be used if required to support a touring load; they instead suggest mounting a kickstand to the rear stays, where it has a better bracing angle due to a slightly higher mount. People really shouldn't sit on bikes with 'stands near the dropout, and they almost never do, 'cos the stand is too far rearward to be actuated while on the bike. It is a human-factors issue.
Here's Rivendell's take on the matter: http://www.rivbike.com/category-s/335.htm
Here's a photo of what a good, plate-type kickstand mount with anti-rotation flanges looks like: (http://www.cyclofiend.com/Images/rbw/kplatewidth.jpg)
For reasonable use, the brazed-on kickstand plate solves a number of problems presented by clamp-on stands in the BB location. A kickstand mounted near the left dropout between the seat- and chainstays is far less problematic, as well.
Best,
Dan.
-
Thanks.
Now will all frame builders please take note !! :)
-
I know of at least one manufacturer who has advised their factory mounting plate not be used if required to support a touring load; they instead suggest mounting a kickstand to the rear stays, where it has a better bracing angle due to a slightly higher mount.
ESGE give their rear stay-mounted Multi-zoom stand a load rating of 18 kgs (including the bike)!
My bike on its own weighs more than that..... then there's the 30kgs of camping gear and food that is a standard touring load. In the NT at times I had 55-60 kgs plus the bike :-*.
I guess the stand did well to survive so long, but I will order another one.
-
On the Erie Canal ride I saw one of these:
http://www.breezerbikes.com/bikes/details/greenway_elite (http://www.breezerbikes.com/bikes/details/greenway_elite)
It looked like a brazed- or welded-on plate for the kickstand back at the rear dropout.
The Breezer Greenway sure looks like a nice bike!
-
Some of the best quality European touring bike manufacturers (Santos?, Tout Terrain) also have brazed-on rear kickstand mounts.
-
There are several detail photographs in this document http://coolmainpress.com/AndreJute'sUtopiaKranich.pdf of the way upmarket European bike makers insist on fitting the stand. Stop a moment on the front page and check out the apparent chain stay brace. It isn't a brace but a tube cut longitudinally in half to act as a router for the brake and light cables. The chainstays are special custom butted types from Columbus and only about 0.7mm thick there; you can't attach anything without risk of crushing the stays, and you'd lose your valuable ten-year guarantee.
Notice on the pictures of the stand and its tag that they are just far enough forward not to interfere with the gearbox and possible disc brakes (I use rim hydraulics) but well inside the strengthening brace for disc brakes. On my bike, a crossframe mixte braced by umpteen triangles in all directions, there is not a snowball's chance of the thing twisting the frame, but it's still an engineering atrocity, and I bet it twists many less stiff frames than mine. And, clearly, it's balance will never be anything but deplorable.
If you take my bike touring (it's rated at 170kg all up, and has many circumnavigations to its credit), you have to fit a second stand from Tubus, which attaches to the lowrider racks for which there are fittings on the fork. I bet the two stands together weigh more than the famous Hebie two-leg stand, which is known to be heavy but to last forever.
The Esge single leg rear stand works, but marginally even before you load up for touring or with shopping, and I refuse to fit a second stand because an entire industry has a bee in its bonnet about centre stands. I'd rather have a two-foot stander under the bottom bracket like Il Padrone's Hebie. It makes more engineering sense, too.
***
As a side note, I'd not mind in the least if cranks were to be made with a wider tread to clear two-leg central standers. I like a good wide Q factor. There is in any event no reason that a central stand should be wider than the chain stays, under which it can nestle, for much longer than any conceivable crank length.
Andre Jute
-
There are several detail photographs...of the way upmarket European bike makers insist on fitting the stand.
Well yes, Andre, and Utopia Velo have done an admirably fine job of it on your wonderful Kranich. Tout Terrain and several others have too, typically by placing a plate in or near the stay end or -- as in your case -- via a threaded extension of the original left-hand dropout. Unfortunately, these well-engineered approaches are the exception to the rule, and so not many riders can enjoy such benefits. Their otherwise fine bicycles lack them, either deliberately or through oversight.
If you take my bike touring...you have to fit a second stand from Tubus, which attaches to the lowrider racks...and I refuse to fit a second stand
Chances are, that second stand wouldn't do what you wish anyway, Andre. The Dutch friend I spent 5 weeks touring The Netherlands and Belgium with had this setup on his Avaghon; the front stand was specially fitted to his Tubus Tara front pannier rack (see attached photo). Though he had a kickstand plate brazed on behind the BB, the builder advised against its use, instead fitting a Hebie clamp-on 'stand to the rear stays near the left-rear dropout. My friend's bike toppled a half-dozen times while parked during our tour, causing damage on a couple occasions; the foam handlebar grips were torn in one, and in the other, the Brooks saddle was scarred across its top as the bike fell against a WWII memorial to downed fliers we had stopped to see. A real shame.
The front stand really did nothing except prevent the front wheel from turning to the left side on level pavement, and really added very little if any to stability. The bike seemed to stand -- or occasionally fall -- equally well with it deployed as with it stowed. He simply doesn't use this front stand anymore, and leaves it on so the bolts and clamps will fill the mounting holes in the rack. Really, a toe strap (or velcro strap) around the front wheel and downtube (as JimK occasionally uses) would have been preferable 'cos it would also have stopped the bike from rolling. His rear stand alone was a success when parked on pavement. However, on wet grass or on The Netherlands' many sand roads, the whole lot was pretty unstable. I do believe a double-legged center stand such as Hebie offer would have been far preferable, but then we run up against the matter of forces exceeding recommended loads on the brazed kickstand plate (he carried big loads at the rear, including a 3+kg tent).
D'you think you might someday fit a Hebie double-legged center stand, Andre? Can you find one narrow enough to clear both your cranks with their existing Q-factor? I am given to understand there is some lifting (or perhaps "jacking") involved in using the Hebie double-legged center-stands. Would this be a limiting factor compared to your existing deploy-with-a-toe-then-tilt, single-legged rear stand?
All the best,
Dan.
-
The Esge single leg rear stand works, but marginally even before you load up for touring or with shopping, and I refuse to fit a second stand because an entire industry has a bee in its bonnet about centre stands.
There is a correct technique to standing up a loaded bike with a rear side stand, and I have never really found any need for a second stand on the front low-rider. Just drop the stand, then turn the handlebars to the right a little bit (judgement called for) to balance the bike nicely. I almost never find my loaded bike toppling over, even on rough track surfaces.
(http://smile.webshots.com/images/187d5b50ef5b012f33e512313f029898/jpg/800x600)
-
Thanks for the tip, Il Padrone. I'll remember it if I ever load my bike as much as yours. I bet you aren't too pleased when your beautiful bike falls over, though.
Dan: The designers have solved the wrong problem, "How can we attach a stand to the frame ends?" rather than, "How can we strengthen the frame so the best stand solution, a central, two-leg stand can be attached?" Several solutions to support a standplate between the chain stays appear after ten seconds of thought by the clock on my screen: longer butts in the chainstays at the bottom bracket end, sleeving either internally or externally before assembly of the bicycle, and longer lugs on the bottom bracket which on my bike is anyway custom made and can therefore the more easily be altered.
All the same, I won't be fitting the Hebie twin leg. There's nowhere to fit it where it won't damage the frame, and even if it doesn't, I don't hate the Esge stand enough to give up a valuable 10-year warranty for a HEBIE stand.
Andre Jute
-
Nothing beats the versatility and load capacity of 'The Stick' (tm). But it is still possible to trip it up, and the bike crash down (to much hilarity) :-X
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/398516_10151149750771107_1833912541_n.jpg)
-
Well, it is a bit like the Great Helmet Debate; some like 'em, others despise 'em, and it is a matter of individual choice
...it is a preference thing.
It appears that your argument against kickstands can be summed up as: (1) they can damage your bike, (2) even if they don't damage your bike they can void the manufacturer's warrantee and (3) your bike can fall and end up on the ground anyway (as well as damaging it.)
To me, rolling the bike backwards and sitting on the bike while the kickstand is down are non-issues. I mean, I’m not going to say to myself: “I’m not putting a kickstand on my bike because I might get stupid and sit on it.”
I can agree on the damage point; I wouldn't put a kickstand on any of my bikes if I had to clamp it onto the chainstays. They can damage the paint, crush the tubes and - if they get loose (which they inevitably will) - rotate out and interfere with the crankarm. I’ve seen a tandem that was propped up with a Click Stick fall on the pavement as the owner was walking away. I wanted the utility of a kickstand and that's why I ordered my bikes equipped with kickstand mounts. (To be fair: The kickstand mount on my Rohloff tandem DID break off. In order to route the cable past the kickstand mount, R+E had to stand the mount off of the chainstays, increasing the leverage on the mount. I took the bike back to R+E and they stripped the components from the frame, welded and reinforced the kickstand mount, repainted the frame and re-installed the components all in less than a week-and-a-half at no cost to me. The kickstand is much stiffer than it was before.)
I kind of disagree on the "debate" and "preference" issue. The only debate is whether a kickstand is worth the trouble. As far as preference is concerned, I believe that most people in most instances would rather park their bikes upright rather than lay them on the ground. Cyclists without kickstands almost without fail will look for something – a wall, fence, tree, whatever – to lean it against rather than lay in on the ground.
What if you could attach an anti-gravity device to your bike that would hold your bike vertically anywhere and under any load without any risk of damaging your bike? Would you not install one?
Edit: Since this is the tandems forum, it seems to me that discussions of standard one-legged kickstands is not vaild.
-
What if you could attach an anti-gravity device to your bike that would hold your bike vertically anywhere and under any load without any risk of damaging your bike? Would you not install one?
Speaking for myself, the answer would be, "Oh, of course! In a heartbeat!"
I think you've summed-up the whole issue very nicely, Steve. If the "perfect" uh, means of propping a bike came standard on *every* bike and lacked the drawbacks that attach in some degree to all current methods...I think everyone would be much happier.
...I believe that most people in most instances would rather park their bikes upright rather than lay them on the ground. Cyclists without kickstands almost without fail will look for something – a wall, fence, tree, whatever – to lean it against rather than lay in on the ground.
Absolutely agreed! Plus there is the matter of foul weather and bearing shielding. Nearly every bearing in a bicycle (including cartridge bearings with shields) are designed to do their job with the bike standing upright. Laying the bike down often creates a direct pathway for water contamination/infiltration of the bearings, shortening their livespan.
Nicely written summation!
Best,
Dan.
-
Since this is the tandems forum, it seems to me that discussions of standard one-legged kickstands is not vaild.
Not sure why you would say that. A BB-mounted one-legged stand is what we use on our tandem. It woks very well. Being relatively closer to the rear wheel than when used on a single bike it gets much less instability from the lean and turn of the front wheel. The tandem stands much like a single with a rear-mounted stand.
-
Not sure why you would say that. A BB-mounted one-legged stand is what we use on our tandem. It woks very well.
I concur with Pete. Here in Eugene, OR -- former home of Burley Design Co-Op and current home of Co-Motion, if I see a tandem with a kickstand (rare), it generally has one leg. Tandems with double-legged kickstands are scarce as hen's teeth; I think I've only ever seen one here and a couple in Corvallis (both the latter were recumbent tandems).
Most tandems here (including my own) have no kickstand or means of support and are leaned against fixed objects or laid on the ground when left alone. I always set my bar-con actuated Arai drag brake when parked so the bike won't shift position when leaned against a wall, post, tree, fence, building, etc., and it works nicely to keep the bike from rolling. A lovely Co-Motion was leaning against the side of the Rolf Prima building here the other day, apparently getting a new set of wheels: http://www.rolfprima.com/products-TandemDisc.php Decent wheels, priced nicely at USD$1099 base; options and accessories extra. More here for those who are interested: http://www.rolfprima.com/techinfo.php
Eugene is also home to Bike Friday, and their tandems are the most eclectic of the bunch, though tend to split evenly between rear and center 'stands if they have 'em at all.
There's a *lot* of tandems in Eugene, former home to the annual Burley Tandem Races.
Best,
Dan. (Tandems + kickstands = a rarity here'bouts, but single-leggers outnumber their double-legged brethren)
-
All Hase Pino tandem are factory equipped with a double-legged kickstand, the frame has a special plate to mount it:
(http://www.roulcouche.com/image/pino/Tandem_Pino_Hasebikes_Allround.jpg)
It is a twin bike stand from Humpert:
(http://www.hasebikes.ro/foto/accesorii/1291939799.jpg)
-
Not sure why you would say that. A BB-mounted one-legged stand is what we use on our tandem. It woks very well. Being relatively closer to the rear wheel than when used on a single bike it gets much less instability from the lean and turn of the front wheel. The tandem stands much like a single with a rear-mounted stand.
I concur with Pete. Here in Eugene, OR -- former home of Burley Design Co-Op and current home of Co-Motion, if I see a tandem with a kickstand (rare), it generally has one leg. Tandems with double-legged kickstands are scarce as hen's teeth; I think I've only ever seen one here and a couple in Corvallis (both the latter were recumbent tandems).
Best,
Dan. (Tandems + kickstands = a rarity here'bouts, but single-leggers outnumber their double-legged brethren)
Geez, no matter what I post here I get shot down immediately… :-\
Mine is the only one around here that I see with a kickstand, and it’s the two-legged kind. R+E has posted photos on their website of other tandems they have built with the same kickstand. I don’t recall ever seeing a tandem with a one-legged stand (maybe a Bike Friday or recumbent or something like that.)
The way mine is mounted it does not interfere with the crankarms and it holds the rear wheel off the ground. This way I can do all sorts of maintenance that would normally require a workstand, although for changing chains and adjusting derailleurs I have to sit on the floor. Adjusting brakes, re-taping bars, replacing saddles, etc. is a breeze. The bike will stay upright with either wheel off, making it easier to deal with flat repairs. The bike doesn’t lean on the stand so when parking on soft ground I can usually just jam the kickstand legs into the ground and it will stand up.
-
I completely agree with you, on the Pino (even if it is not a "normal" tandem), the rear wheel is also off the ground, we can do the same type of maintenance you mention very easily and we can park the tandem on soft gropund as well.
As said, the double-legged kickstand is a factory mounted equipment on a frame factory foreseen to mount such type of kickstand, it won't damage the bike.
Any frame manufacturer could easily do the same: just foresee the needed plate at the right place.
-
As said, the double-legged kickstand is a factory mounted equipment on a frame factory foreseen to mount such type of kickstand, it won't damage the bike.
Any frame manufacturer could easily do the same: just foresee the needed plate at the right place.
Oh, yes, Fleur and Steve; if only all bicycles were all made this way! It would be bliss! Sadly, not very many frames provide for such a kickstand or mount, so we must do our best with alternatives that are not as convenient, versatile, or good.
Best,
Dan.
-
I'm not at all certain that adding a central kickstand plate is as easy as has been claimed in this thread. The modern tendency is to build even touring steel bikes with very thinwalled tubes, and the butts have been getting shorter and shorter. It may well be that the many designers, whose instant reaction to mention of a central stand ranges between severe distaste to hands in the air horror, cannot order a plate brazed or welded in there because the tubes are just too thin, and the butts too short -- exactly the same reason they don't like clamps on the tubes in that region. It's also the reason that oddly shaped bikes (like the recumbent a few posts earlier) have the best stands, right bang in the middle of the bike, because they are not made with "racing" tubes and thus have no attachment taboos.
The reason they want instead to braze or weld or bolt on a tab for a single leg stand at the frame end is that there the tube is solid, or can be made solid, or is intended to be and can be locally strengthened to support gears, brakes, luggage etc.
I'm not pretending it's not a bodge, I'm just saying that if they work with off-the-shelf tubes shaped by now-obsolete racing practice, warranty replacement frames for broken centre stand mounts will drive them bankrupt.
-
FYI, the half recumbent Hasebike Pino tandem with a double-legged kickstand has an aluminum frame, not steel.
Also, the travel bikes loaded with huge travel bags I see in the previous page is probably not made with "racing" tubes.
-
Geez, no matter what I post here I get shot down immediately… :-\
Umm, if you re-read my post you'll see that I'm not trying to flame your choice at all, just saying that I use the single-leg stand with my tandem and find it works quite OK. Not perfect, but it is an option.
YMMV, as you say.
-
Also, the travel bikes loaded with huge travel bags I see in the previous page is probably not made with "racing" tubes.
You're taking this too literally, Fleur. There are no real racing bikes made from steel any more, but the influence of the UCI lingers in an attitude that abhors weight, and promotes thinwall tubes and short butts that are hostile to touring and utility bike design. I'm talking about an attitude that does not say, "Let's start with a blank sheet and ask what is best for a touring or utility or town bike?" but instead asks, "How can we make the available tubes do for a purpose for which they were never designed?"
If steel bikes were not built from pseudo-racing tubes, every touring bike would long since have had a central stand, in the same way Dutch aluminium bikes naturally have a central stand, because either there would be long butts on the majority of chain stays to support a stand mounting plate, or long ears on the bottom bracket shell for the same purpose.
Andre Jute
-
I think Fleur may have been referring to the photo of my Thorn Nomad. In no way could it be described as a 'lightweight frame' or 'racing tubing' :D
-
I’ve seen a tandem that was propped up with a Click Stick fall on the pavement as the owner was walking away. ...
Happens to single bikes as well. Those ClikStands are a menace. Had one myself with the fat foot option and the bike blew over several times due to wind, so I eventually junked it. I've read all sorts of reports of the ClikStand collapsing under a full touring load, with or without fat foot, with or without a jar lid or tennis ball or whatever. It's a bad idea. As are stands in general.
I kind of disagree on the "debate" and "preference" issue. The only debate is whether a kickstand is worth the trouble. As far as preference is concerned, I believe that most people in most instances would rather park their bikes upright rather than lay them on the ground. Cyclists without kickstands almost without fail will look for something – a wall, fence, tree, whatever – to lean it against rather than lay in on the ground.
The only time I look for something to lean against is when I'm in civilization, because a bike lying on the ground attracts unwanted attention. Away from civilization, lying the bike down is PREFERABLE to me because it plus my rack bag makes a very nice back rest. For example:
(http://frankrevelo.com/hiking/images/2012_08_06_champs_flat_road_camp_640.jpg)
Lying the bike down guarantees no damage from being blown over by the wind and also makes it inconspicuous. The only time I look for something to keep my bike upright when I'm away from civilization is when it might rain at night and I want to keep the saddle dry (using the Brooks saddle cover).
What if you could attach an anti-gravity device to your bike that would hold your bike vertically anywhere and under any load without any risk of damaging your bike? Would you not install one?
If it weighed nothing, sure. But not if it weighed any significant amount. I am not going to pedal or push even a single ounce uphill if there isn't a good reason for it, and the reasons for wanting to hold the bike vertical just aren't that good. If I want to do repairs, like truing the wheel, adjusting the eccentric, shortening the chain, etc, I'd rather have the bike upside down resting on the saddle and handlebars than held vertical in the upright position.
Lying the bike down is like sitting cross-legged on the ground, squatting over a hole in the ground to relieve yourself, sleeping outdoors. At first it feels very unnatural, but soon enough you get used to it. In other words, your discomfort with lying the bike down is due to social conditioning, not any good technical reason. Yes, it is possible to damage the bike if you drop it to the ground. So you lay it down gently. Yes, you can squash stuff in the panniers. So you take care to put squashable things on one side of the bike (tent, clothes, instant rice and other foods repacked into sturdy bags, water bladders) and delicate things in the other side, and then also take care to lay the bike down on the squashable side only.
Reinstalling the ex-box is EASIER if the bike is lying down on the right side (the sprocket side). In any case, the only time reinstalling the ex-box should be necessary is if you remove the rear wheel. After much experimentation in the field, I came to the conclusion that doing things the old-fashioned way is simplest. That is, when you need to remove the rear wheel, turn the bicycle upside down and rest on the saddle and handlebars, after being careful to remove the bike computer and gps. With the bike upside down when removing the rear wheel, ex-box removal becomes a non-issue as far as stands and lying the bike down is concerned.
-
I am liking this idea more and more.
Out of interest, when the bike is on it's side on the ground what kind of weight / pressure is put onto what parts of the bike?
I guess a pannier soaks up a fair part of the weight but if none then doesn't one of the pedals take the weight? That's what concerns me at the moment but await comments so my eyes can be opened on this point.
-
I am liking this idea more and more.
Out of interest, when the bike is on it's side on the ground what kind of weight / pressure is put onto what parts of the bike?
I guess a pannier soaks up a fair part of the weight but if none then doesn't one of the pedals take the weight? That's what concerns me at the moment but await comments so my eyes can be opened on this point.
The pedal take the weight with or without panniers. I had the same concern about the bottom bracket, crank and pedals being damaged from lying the bike on the ground, soI asked Thorn sales about this and they assured me it wouldn't damage any of these. Which makes sense, as the bottom bracket has some pretty hefty bearings and the aluminum crank is certainly hefty and the pedal has a steel spindle. Aluminum isn't damaged by static pressure so much as by shock. For example, handlebars can crack when the bike falls over and slams into the ground or even from long-term vibrations from riding on rough roads.
-
If it weighed nothing, sure. But not if it weighed any significant amount. I am not going to pedal or push even a single ounce uphill if there isn't a good reason for it
Pletscher ESGE Multi Zoom Rear Adjustable Kickstand
(http://www.cyclocamping.com/prodimages/large/52900-1-1.jpg)
..........Weight: 11.9 oz. (340 g)
I find the weight insignificant, and the reasons very beneficial.