Work stand and through-axle frames

[rafletcher]

I have two work stands, a conventional clamp type, which is used on the steel bike, and a Tacx one that secures the front or rear drop outs and supports under the bb for the carbon bike. The latter relies on qr’s to secure the dropouts. What does the committee recommend for through axle frames (such as the Trek Domane I’ll be building up soon!)?

Hmmm, a bit of googling shows that the latest version (it’s a “spider team”) comes with adapters for thru axles, but the beam part is now triangular in section, and my older model is rectangular. 

Edit: Looks like a new stand will be required unless I want to use the clamp type on the seatmast  which I’ve never liked to do.

[robgul]

Unless you are attacking the carbon frame with a hammer using the clamp on the carbon machine will be fine (I often use a piece of pipe lagging around the bit of tube that's in the clamp - and am gentle with the clamp lock.)

Rob

[DuncanM]

If you have an alloy seatpost, use the clamp on that. I wouldn't use the clamp on the top tube of a carbon bike - they are not designed for squishing type loads.

[rafletcher]

It would be on a carbon seatmast in the case of a Domane, no seatpost option to change for an alloy one.  And top tubes on soot bikes are rarely cylindrical and can’t be clamped with sufficient force to avoid damage IMO. Rationally, if the seatpost / mast supports my 85kg without breaking then supporting 8kg of Bike wont hurt it, I just don’t like doing it, plus the bike swings about - though some stands have extra tethers. I do like the look of the Park Tools PRS22.2, but will have to check the piggy bank.

[Brucey]

if you always maintain your bike in the same location you don't need a workstand, you just need to be able to suspend the bike using straps (eg around the saddle and if necessary the handlebars).  No danger of wrecking anything.


Carbon frame tubes are increasingly becoming larger diameter and even thinner walled; they are so much more easily damaged (by clamps, knocks, etc) it isn't even  funny. If the bike has a 'mast' then you can't easily clamp on that either....

cheers

[rafletcher]

if you always maintain your bike in the same location you don't need a workstand, you just need to be able to suspend the bike using straps (eg around the saddle and if necessary the handlebars).  No danger of wrecking anything.

That rather assumes a) sufficient headroom and b) sufficient space for 360 degree access. Neither of which my shed can provide.

[Brucey]

presumably you will struggle with a workstand in the same space then? IME a workstand takes up more space than a hanging bike and there isn't a shed made that can have a workstand in it and can't be made to hang a bike within.

  Or are you planning to work outside?  If the latter there are any number of ways of temporarily supporting a bike to work on it, you don't need to buy a workstand or risk using an inappropriate clamp on a delicate frame if you don't want to. 


I know of plenty of busy bike shops where they have wrecked CF frames using workstands and others where they don't bother with them because they are more trouble than they are worth. They can be handy for some jobs but very often you would be as well off (or better even) without one.

cheers

[Chris N]

Have a look at one of these, it might fit your Tacx stand: https://www.parktool.com/product/sliding-thru-axle-adaptor-1729-ta

[rafletcher]

@Brucey;  Not sufficient headroom. Stand gets shuffled to and fro to free up room at desired end.

@Chrisn; Thanks but the rectangular sections are non-matching sizes.

Interestingly I went to a LBS this morning for a saddle fit. There they were working on two bikes, both CF. I need to look more closely when I go back (I’ve got a demo saddle from them to try) but what they had were conventional clam stands, and clamped into them were weak padded handlebars such that the drops provided hooks into whic the top tubes of the bikes were positioned. I didn’t see how they stabilised the bikes to prevent them swinging, but will look more closely next time. A good universal solution it seems to me.

[Brucey]

... and clamped into them were weak padded handlebars such that the drops provided hooks into whic the top tubes of the bikes were positioned. I didn’t see how they stabilised the bikes to prevent them swinging, but will look more closely next time. A good universal solution it seems to me.

that isn't a bad scheme. I'd suggest pipe lagging as good padding. BTW if you are short on space there is no reason why you can't have more than one set of mounting points in the roof; you just move the bike instead of the workstand. The straps/hooks can also be short/variable in length. IME such an arrangement invariably takes up less space than a workstand. 

Not saying this is necessarily going to be the best way for you, but there is always more than one was of skinning a cat.

cheers

[mattc]

Ever since I saw tht short film about the lovely Hamsterjam bikeshop, I've been moving toward a hanging system.

But I have *never* seen an LBS that didnt use some sort of stands. Odd.

[rafletcher]

For me at least, a hanging bike swings about too much. YMMV.

[Brucey]

I guess that the bike will also swing about a bit if you use the 'handlebars' trick too. Oddly enough the shorter the straps (i.e. the lower the ceiling) the less the swinging about is. Just hanging the whole bike from a suitable beam (by hooking the saddle over it) works OK (sometimes only until you take the front wheel out.... ).

Near me for years there was an LBS with the main workshop round the corner from the main shop. In the main shop they had a tiny space to work on bikes and they used a hanging system in there (for about forty years at least).  It worked well for them, even though the space was so small that to get to the back of it (to access tools etc) you had to swing the bike out of the way. They had a high ceiling and the swinging was made less (by accident or design I am not sure) by using somewhat heavy chains to hang the bike from.

cheers

[Samuel D]

Another idea: skip the stand altogether.

I do most work on my bicycle up to and including pressing in or removing headset bearing cups. I’ve never used a stand at home and think the cost and hassle of buying one, storing it, and setting the bicycle up on it for each job is worse than the minor extra difficulty of working without one. I’ve never found a case where a spare knee, head, or hip didn’t hold the bicycle adequately while working on it. For some jobs (e.g. bottom brackets) the bicycle resting on its wheels resists torque better and more safely than any stand.

I think this urge to use a tool where none is often better (e.g. Park third-hand and fourth-hand tools) is fuelled by magazine articles that say things like “you’ll never know how you lived without it”.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Maybe, but I note that you're fairly young and probably don't have a creaky back!

[Brucey]

Maybe, but I note that you're fairly young and probably don't have a creaky back!

yes, I used to be quite rubbery and didn't really see the need for a workstand. These days a lot less so and the other thing is that gears are becoming  increasingly finicky to set up, so it often takes longer to do.

cheers

[Samuel D]

Point conceded, old boys.

(I’m starting to develop the odd weird ailment in my mid-thirties so I shouldn’t be crowing.)

My post above was truncated, though: it was supposed to have another sentence saying that “you’ll never know how you lived without it” is usually used precisely when the need for the tool and its benefit are not obvious.

[rafletcher]

I guess that the bike will also swing about a bit if you use the 'handlebars' trick too.

That’s why I’ll look more closely when I go back, they weren’t. One bike was having the rear mech adjusted, so cranks were being turned, and the other was having a bent rear mech hanger straightened forcibly. Neither frame moved much, if at all, so there was something I missed.

As for not using a work stand, even 20 years ago I preferred to stand to work rather than kneel or crouch. Just my preference.