In a message dated 3/28/02 6:43:05 AM Pacific Standard Time, tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com writes:
<< I have the impression that QR skewers, properly adjusted, exert more force
on the dropout face than track axle nuts, properly torqued. This may just be
some theoretical gibberish based on thread pitches and cam profiles that
totally breaks down because it doesn't account for various frictional forces,
the area of contact between fastener and frame and so on, but I have read (in
more than one place) that QRs grip better. >>
A fine point not mentioned so far is that, presuming you have no brake and a
fixed gear, if that little QR spindle within the axle were to break, you'd be
in trouble. I have never personally broken one of these, but in my parts pile
is an older Campy Record conical skewer end, that needs about 5/8" of skewer
removed before I can use it. This is probably because someone with the
"intellect of a potted plant*" over-tightened it, but nonetheless, there it
is. Having put many road miles on a true track bike, there is absolutely no
way you could convince me to use anything other than solid axles and nuts.
I don't know how much this matters, but in a solid, nutted axle the axle is
under tension, not compression. I think from a materials standpoint, this is
stronger than having the axle under compression as in a QR axle. The
practical example of this would be: if you had a solid nutted axle on a road
wheel set up for a 7 speed freewheel, you would be far less likely to bend
and break an axle, even if you weighed, uh, a lot.
Stevan Thomas
Alameda, CA