Jeff Slotkin wrote:
>I've changed a lot of wheels from 126>130 and from 130>135, and there
>is still plenty of axle.
Right. No reason in the world to replace an axle for such a small difference.
>126>135 would test Sheldon's theory. While
>I'm sure what he says is true, it leaves out any fail-safe for a
>broken QR, and a bent/broken axle would probably move around also. But
>thank goodness we have him pushing the envelope for us!
If the QR breaks, you've got a problem anyway, but the wheel wouldn't completely fall out because the broken pieces of the QR would still be there, allowing you to roll to a stop. If it were going to break, it would most likely be on a stiff climb, so you wouldn't be going fast.
With a broken axle, once again, you've got trouble, but I don't think it would be any worse with the flush axle.
That said, I'd like to re-assure readers not familiar with this little experiement of mine that this is not something I'd recommend for general use on a multi-speed bike. I do this on a bike that I converted to fixed gear, even though it has vertical dropouts. Cutting off the axle flush, so only the skewer runs through the dropout, gives me a bit more room to move the wheel back and forth to adjust chain tension. It is a bit of a pain to do this and at the same time keep it in correct vertical alignment.
The real function of the protruding axle is to make wheel alignment easier. You only need a couple of mm protrusion on each side, rather than the common 5.5 mm.
Sheldon "Works So Far" Brown
Newtonville, Massachusetts
+--------------------------------------+
| A Nader vote is a Republican vote! |
+--------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772, 617-244-1040, FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com
Useful articles about bicycles and cycling
http://sheldonbrown.com