Integrated headsets
-
Simon Hill
Integrated headsets
Chris Juden gave integrated headsets a bit of a bit pasting in his review of the Koga Miyata bike in the current CTC mag. I don't know much about current headset designs, so what do other CTC members think - what is an integrated headset and should I avoid them like the plague as Chris seems to suggest?
-
CJ
Re:Integrated headsets
Just read this link. Here is the company that makes probably the best headsets money can buy, telling you why they refuse to make integrated headsets even though it would be a heck of a lot easier and more profitable for them simply to do that.
-
Simon Hill
Re:Integrated headsets
Thank you CJ - the link has convinced me that integrated headsets are a step backwards in bicycle design.
hidden headsets
I dont think Chris has any profound reason to object.
The design is good it uses preloaded bearings far better than any ball bearing types. The fit in the frame is far easier and more reliable than fitting the bearing seats into a frame as generally unless like me one has a lathe to achieve a suitable interferance if you buy the insert type from the dealers they will have about0.2to 0.3 interferance which is enough to split the frame and i speak from repairing some frames. The integrated version does away with this system and is a very good solution. Unlike Chris I like the Ribble it is perfect and better than most handmades. The carbon forks are perfect and the handling is brilliant. i have been cycling and racing and touring for years and get a bit fed up with the negative comments the Ribble in particular recieves I think it is excellent.
The design is good it uses preloaded bearings far better than any ball bearing types. The fit in the frame is far easier and more reliable than fitting the bearing seats into a frame as generally unless like me one has a lathe to achieve a suitable interferance if you buy the insert type from the dealers they will have about0.2to 0.3 interferance which is enough to split the frame and i speak from repairing some frames. The integrated version does away with this system and is a very good solution. Unlike Chris I like the Ribble it is perfect and better than most handmades. The carbon forks are perfect and the handling is brilliant. i have been cycling and racing and touring for years and get a bit fed up with the negative comments the Ribble in particular recieves I think it is excellent.
I don't agree with you, Raymondo.
Conventional headsets don't split frames, well not in my experience anyway. Maybe new frames aren't as good as old frames?
(Integrated) If the cup wears, replace it. Oh, but you can't! It's part of the frame!
I know, make the cups replaceable! What a good idea! The frame will last forever! Wow! (Conventional)
Regards,
Mick
Conventional headsets don't split frames, well not in my experience anyway. Maybe new frames aren't as good as old frames?
(Integrated) If the cup wears, replace it. Oh, but you can't! It's part of the frame!
I know, make the cups replaceable! What a good idea! The frame will last forever! Wow! (Conventional)
Regards,
Mick
Raymondo is correct that conventional headsets can result in split head tubes, particularly if they are incorrectly inserted during assembly - all to do with hoop stresses and resultant fatigue which can be saved for another day perhaps. Got some good photos of this. I would say that problem appears to affect aluminium frame and not steel frames.
However, when attempting to resolve such a problem on a bike with very low mileage bike purchased to order from Ribble, I was informed that frames are only guaranteed for 12 months so it’s tough luck really. Agree that Ribble are cheap, but not particularly impressed with anything else about them. I also recently ordered something from them via the internet: they thought the product was so good they sent it twice, and of course charged me twice!
Sorry, this could perhaps be in another area of Message Board.
However, when attempting to resolve such a problem on a bike with very low mileage bike purchased to order from Ribble, I was informed that frames are only guaranteed for 12 months so it’s tough luck really. Agree that Ribble are cheap, but not particularly impressed with anything else about them. I also recently ordered something from them via the internet: they thought the product was so good they sent it twice, and of course charged me twice!
Sorry, this could perhaps be in another area of Message Board.
-
reohn2
A thought that springs immediatly to my mind is profit followed closely by waste,waste in the sense that a frame is made from engineered tubing and the manufacturing process with all the energy expenditure that is needed for that process to be rendered useless in a reletively short period of time because of deliberately engineered flaws when engineers know better, just for profit,then going to waste or being recycled.
All this going on with a back drop of global warming due to too much human energy consumption.
They'll be telling me next how good the capitalism system is.
A fool and his money/energy... etc
All this going on with a back drop of global warming due to too much human energy consumption.
They'll be telling me next how good the capitalism system is.
A fool and his money/energy... etc
Quote from raymondo
"The design is good it uses preloaded bearings far better than any ball bearing types"
All head set bearings are ball races or taper rollers. In some sealed types you don't see the balls, because they’re sealed
As the link from CJ makes clear the integrated type transfers the dynamic to and fro movement from the forks (not the turning movement) directly onto the frame head set tube causing un-repairable wear.
Normal head sets transfer this wear onto the bearing cup or insert depending on type so do not affect the frame.
If interference fits are causing tubes to split I suggest they've got the wrong tolerance in the frame bores.
"The design is good it uses preloaded bearings far better than any ball bearing types"
All head set bearings are ball races or taper rollers. In some sealed types you don't see the balls, because they’re sealed
As the link from CJ makes clear the integrated type transfers the dynamic to and fro movement from the forks (not the turning movement) directly onto the frame head set tube causing un-repairable wear.
Normal head sets transfer this wear onto the bearing cup or insert depending on type so do not affect the frame.
If interference fits are causing tubes to split I suggest they've got the wrong tolerance in the frame bores.
Cheers
J Bro
J Bro
Mick F
I put the question to you that if you were only allowed one material for a frame, what would you choose?
Aluminium alloy is not dead as there appears to be sufficient disposable income to maintain the demand for such frames (and I own some). But aluminium alloy is a ‘less forgiving’ material in terms of engineering than steel and that is why there are probably far more cracked or broken aluminium alloy frames than steel ones (clearly on a percentage made basis). But as long as people lust for them and are prepared to pay for them, the aluminium alloy frame will be available.
Reohn2
I think they’re already celebrating the merits of capitalism by having Adam Smith on the £20 note. Funny they didn’t choose John Maynard Keynes: perhaps they will put him on the £5 note.
Interesting point about the energy wasted in frames and flaws. I’m not sure ‘deliberately engineered flaws’ appropriately describes the known differences in material properties and I don’t believe flaws are deliberately ‘engineered’: if it is all put together correctly and used appropriately, then no problems should arise. However, if mistakes are made then disasters can occur, as in my cracked head tube which was not my fault and IMO resulted from shabby assembly.
Regards human energy consumption, I think quite a few of us might be guilty of owning more than one bike, which some would argue is particularly wasteful (and I’m not talking about solo and tandem, and I have more than one bike so ‘guilty as charged’) and we could do more to avoid waste. In fact I’m amazed how capitalism has enabled such expensive bikes to be owned/purchased and often discarded as they are no longer fashionable, by mere mortals.
So far as cycling is concerned, I think there are a fair few with views of the proletariat and the trapping of the bourgeoisie.
(Edited for spelling mistake)
I put the question to you that if you were only allowed one material for a frame, what would you choose?
Aluminium alloy is not dead as there appears to be sufficient disposable income to maintain the demand for such frames (and I own some). But aluminium alloy is a ‘less forgiving’ material in terms of engineering than steel and that is why there are probably far more cracked or broken aluminium alloy frames than steel ones (clearly on a percentage made basis). But as long as people lust for them and are prepared to pay for them, the aluminium alloy frame will be available.
Reohn2
I think they’re already celebrating the merits of capitalism by having Adam Smith on the £20 note. Funny they didn’t choose John Maynard Keynes: perhaps they will put him on the £5 note.
Interesting point about the energy wasted in frames and flaws. I’m not sure ‘deliberately engineered flaws’ appropriately describes the known differences in material properties and I don’t believe flaws are deliberately ‘engineered’: if it is all put together correctly and used appropriately, then no problems should arise. However, if mistakes are made then disasters can occur, as in my cracked head tube which was not my fault and IMO resulted from shabby assembly.
Regards human energy consumption, I think quite a few of us might be guilty of owning more than one bike, which some would argue is particularly wasteful (and I’m not talking about solo and tandem, and I have more than one bike so ‘guilty as charged’) and we could do more to avoid waste. In fact I’m amazed how capitalism has enabled such expensive bikes to be owned/purchased and often discarded as they are no longer fashionable, by mere mortals.
So far as cycling is concerned, I think there are a fair few with views of the proletariat and the trapping of the bourgeoisie.
(Edited for spelling mistake)
-
reohn2
.Interesting point about the energy wasted in frames and flaws. I’m not sure ‘deliberately engineered flaws’ appropriately describes the known differences in material properties and I don’t believe flaws are deliberately ‘engineered’: if it is all put together correctly and used appropriately, then no problems should arise. However, if mistakes are made then disasters can occur, as in my cracked head tube which was not my fault and IMO resulted from shabby assembly
I'll have to disagree with you Oracle I think the integrated headset is a deliberately engineered flaw designed to promote accelerated consumerism.Though the proles that made it could perhaps have done a better job, perhaps the bourgeois factory owner could have given them realistic job targets and two bowls of rice a day instead of one then things may have been different and your bike frame may have lasted a little longer.
Could I point you in the direction of Rover cars perhaps with regards to rampant capitalism?
-
hubgearfreak
- Posts: 8212
- Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm
Reohn2
Cunning plan that, having an integrated headset specifically designed to be flawed to fuel the fires of consumerism - wish I‘d have thought of that, I might be rich after conning all those consumers. We should have seen this cunning plan earlier with aluminium alloy frames and then all that carbon fibre stuff: and replacing all that heavy waxed cotton with that lightweight Goretex. No, can’t believe that deliberately designed flaw theory, too close to conspiracy theory to be believable IMO.
If it is true, I’m surprised the Luddites allowed this to happen, as for it to happen there must have been a desire for improvement and a market for such improved products. But that’s the problem with market forces, you either take part or get left behind. As for Rover workers, they were a victim of market forces and poor design/engineering that resulted in very few people buying their cars: we have always been so patriotic when it comes to supporting our Country haven’t we? Or is it because most people do not live in that altruistic bubble and just go for what they see as the best value for money an of benefit to them - such a short sighted view really. Or perhaps Rover engineers deliberately introduced flaws in their cars to fuel consumerism and ensure the buyers went back and purchased more fundamentally flawed Rover cars. Well, I suppose they did produce some flawed cars, perhaps not deliberately, and people did purchase more frequently as a result and fuel the flames of consumerism, but they did not buy Rover and that’s why the view on flawed integrated headsets is probably fundamentally flawed as few companies would knowingly commit the commercial version of suicide.
With regards to my frame, I put that down to shoddy workmanship, because as Raymondo has noted, he has been totally happy with his frames from the same source. I must have had the ‘Friday shift’ and some unhappy proles getting their revenge on the bourgeois who can afford such luxury items (aluminium alloy with carbon forks, rampart capitalism).
Cunning plan that, having an integrated headset specifically designed to be flawed to fuel the fires of consumerism - wish I‘d have thought of that, I might be rich after conning all those consumers. We should have seen this cunning plan earlier with aluminium alloy frames and then all that carbon fibre stuff: and replacing all that heavy waxed cotton with that lightweight Goretex. No, can’t believe that deliberately designed flaw theory, too close to conspiracy theory to be believable IMO.
If it is true, I’m surprised the Luddites allowed this to happen, as for it to happen there must have been a desire for improvement and a market for such improved products. But that’s the problem with market forces, you either take part or get left behind. As for Rover workers, they were a victim of market forces and poor design/engineering that resulted in very few people buying their cars: we have always been so patriotic when it comes to supporting our Country haven’t we? Or is it because most people do not live in that altruistic bubble and just go for what they see as the best value for money an of benefit to them - such a short sighted view really. Or perhaps Rover engineers deliberately introduced flaws in their cars to fuel consumerism and ensure the buyers went back and purchased more fundamentally flawed Rover cars. Well, I suppose they did produce some flawed cars, perhaps not deliberately, and people did purchase more frequently as a result and fuel the flames of consumerism, but they did not buy Rover and that’s why the view on flawed integrated headsets is probably fundamentally flawed as few companies would knowingly commit the commercial version of suicide.
With regards to my frame, I put that down to shoddy workmanship, because as Raymondo has noted, he has been totally happy with his frames from the same source. I must have had the ‘Friday shift’ and some unhappy proles getting their revenge on the bourgeois who can afford such luxury items (aluminium alloy with carbon forks, rampart capitalism).