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")
