# A Couple Of Complaints...



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

From my signature, you can see that I've been a steel BreakAway owner for a long time. It's been to a couple of countries outside of the US and 4-5 states. However, it was stolen a few months ago.

I replaced it with a new carbon BreakAway and finished out very similarly with a Chorus drive train. Tom at GVH Bikes, who built the first one, also built this one. Very Nice Riding and Handling Bike! However...

It has a Ritchey WCS stem with the 220deg wraparound. My previous bike had a WCS stem, but it was the older 180deg design. In trying hard not to cross thread the bottom angled screws, I found that it was difficult to get the right angle to thread them correctly. This situation is not helped by the thread locker patch running down close to the end of the screw. After working with it for some time, I ran the screws in from the back side and was able to thread them in far enough to clear the threads at the other end. Seems to be a lot more hassle than it's worth. I'm a retired mechanical engineer, so I understand the logic behind the design, but the screws should not be that hard to thread.

I like some of the changes on the case. The opening zipper on the edge is much better than the previous design, which also allows for a one piece pull handle. However, even though the nylon webbing on the outside is wider than on my original case, the new buckles have a cheap feeling to them and are more difficult to operate with arthritic fingers.

I'll get my signature updated soon to reflect the new machine. Must Represent!


----------



## tka (Jun 11, 2014)

flatlander_48 said:


> It has a Ritchey WCS stem with the 220deg wraparound. My previous bike had a WCS stem, but it was the older 180deg design. In trying hard not to cross thread the bottom angled screws, I found that it was difficult to get the right angle to thread them correctly. This situation is not helped by the thread locker patch running down close to the end of the screw. After working with it for some time, I ran the screws in from the back side and was able to thread them in far enough to clear the threads at the other end. Seems to be a lot more hassle than it's worth. I'm a retired mechanical engineer, so I understand the logic behind the design, but the screws should not be that hard to thread.


I have a been playing with a few different length WCS 4-Axis and C220 stems trying to get my position right. I've had some difficultly getting the screws in C220 and resorted to doing the same thing you did. I know one of the assemblers at the shop managed to cross-thread all 6 screws on a C220, which explains why he is still is an assembler rather than a mechanic. I think (and I know I've done it) if you push the clamp to one side it seems to be easier to cross-thread the screws. The geometry in that condition seems to force them in straight rather than at an angle. If you put the clamp on with relatively equal spacing top & bottom the screws seem to go in with no issues. 

I didn't expect to notice any difference between the 4-Axis and the C220 but the bars do seem slightly stiffer in the C220. So maybe there is some good from the alternate design.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

tka said:


> I have a been playing with a few different length WCS 4-Axis and C220 stems trying to get my position right. I've had some difficultly getting the screws in C220 and resorted to doing the same thing you did. I know one of the assemblers at the shop managed to cross-thread all 6 screws on a C220, which explains why he is still is an assembler rather than a mechanic.


Ouch! Sounds like my brother.



tka said:


> I think (and I know I've done it) if you push the clamp to one side it seems to be easier to cross-thread the screws. The geometry in that condition seems to force them in straight rather than at an angle. If you put the clamp on with relatively equal spacing top & bottom the screws seem to go in with no issues.


It was loose when I did it. The top screws were in place, but basically just to keep the clamp plate from falling off. However, I do think the thread locker patch on the screws was too long. A least a couple of clear threads are needed to get the screw started before you get to the patch. When the patch is too long, it's hard to tell if the screw is dragging on the patch or cross threaded. In retrospect, running the screw in from the back deformed the patch enough in addition to reforming the threads at the front. Next time I take it apart, I might trim the length of the patch a bit.



tka said:


> I didn't expect to notice any difference between the 4-Axis and the C220 but the bars do seem slightly stiffer in the C220. So maybe there is some good from the alternate design.


Unfortunately I can't make a comparison, but I do remember that I did feel a little flex on hard acceleration but I don't usually ride like that. That improvement might be lost on me...


----------

