RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Components


Archive Home >> Components(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 )


WHY do I need an Integrated Headset???(7 posts)

WHY do I need an Integrated Headset???Cryoman
Jul 15, 2002 4:07 PM
Greetings, I've heard the news that these are not yet proven and the reasons for such are not obvious to me. One person told me it was weight savings but it seems the corresponding fork now requires a much broader (heavier) fork crown. At 100-ish grams for almost any lightweight no-thread, how much can possibly be saved?? Also seems like a natural channel for water toward the bearing (vice away from bearing with races on the outside.) Also seems to give an "effective" smaller diameter of the race (ie. outside radius of bearings) We just finally standardized from 1" to 1 1/8" now we are going back to smaller race diameters?? My King threaded on my MTB hasn't been touched in 5 years - no maintenance required. Seems my soon to have new bike might require more with its integrated headset?? Any help is greatly appreciated as I don't yet get it. Regards, Cryoman
re: WHY do I need an Integrated Headset???Roadfrog
Jul 15, 2002 6:04 PM
I don't get it either! HOP
I admit I'm biased, but I suspect ... marketing!cory
Jul 15, 2002 6:35 PM
I have a commuter/beater mountain bike that's at least 10 years old, and the one-inch threaded headset has never been touched. My Cannondale MB is six or seven years old, and its threadset got rebuilt for the first time this spring--it didn't need it, but I was doing some other stuff and just decided to repack it. I've never had a headset failure in 25+ years . . . I'm guessing there may be some theoretical advantages, but if a lardbutt like me hasn't seen anything go wrong with The Old Way in all this time, I think you'd have to look pretty hard to see them.
WHY Indeed?lnin0
Jul 15, 2002 8:19 PM
Try this link. Sure it is from Chris King (a Headset manufacturer who has a lot to loose if we get rid of headsets) but it explains a lot about them and makes a pretty good points.

http://www.chrisking.com/pdfs/Int%20Headsets%20Explained.pdf

For starters

-it is probably not lighter because headtube is beefed up
-it is currently not a 'standard' by any means
-a loose headset means you trash your frame, not just a $25 race/cup.
Nahgrzy
Jul 16, 2002 4:58 PM
King will just step in and make the best integrated headset. In fact they already make one.

The reason why "we" need them is so that the bike mfr.s can become more verticaly intgrated, cut manufacturing costs, and make us more captive to their planned obselecence. It's a bunch of low end shite that happened to make it onto some of the better frames (5900 & CAAD6)....with problems!

It's a solution looking for a problem.
zero stack is differentlnin0
Jul 17, 2002 5:27 AM
King makes a zero stack internal headset. A truely integrated headset means the race for the bearings is part of the headtube and cannot be replaced unless you replace the frame. With a zero stack you still have a removable race that can be cheaply replaced if worn.
you don't, but you may get one anywayDaveG
Jul 17, 2002 9:09 AM
Not to start any religious argumements on the goodness of integrated headsets, but the benefits seem very limited to me and the downside of compatibility and future repair/replacemnet are concerning. It may not matter though as more and more bikes are coming with them. There may be little you can do to stop them. I'd stick with a well established name though to avoid issues down the road.