|What are the benefits of Integrated Headsets?||DT|
Mar 25, 2002 6:07 AM
|Are there any mechanical, or is it purely aesthetic, with a gram or two shaved off? I had the chance to get a Klein QP with the integrated headset, but opted for the QR without. Since I'm in the Air Force, the LBS owner recommended to me to get it without since I could potentially be stationed somewhere out of a normal drive range for a Klein LBS (which I am now in Mississippi) and therefore have problems getting it worked on if I needed it, whereas any LBS could work on a non-integrated one. Thanks!|
|re: What are the benefits of Integrated Headsets?||Allister Fiend|
Mar 25, 2002 6:22 AM
|They seem like a fad that really hasn't decided whether or not they are going to stick around. It seems to me it is purely aesthetic. The concept makes sense, but you aren't really saving that much weight. They do look cool though.|
|re: What are the benefits of Integrated Headsets?||grandemamou|
Mar 25, 2002 6:28 AM
|There are no "real" advantages that I can think of from the consumers perspective. Consumers aren't being given much choice. If you want the frame, you buy the headset.
As for working on them it's pretty simple the only real difference is that the races are pressed in instead of being a seperate unit. It's pretty simple to work on yourself. All you need is a set of allen wrenches and a little time.
|here's a link||RideLots|
Mar 25, 2002 6:30 AM
Mar 25, 2002 6:31 AM
|According to Chris King, they weigh MORE.
This PDF newsletter (you'll need Acrobat) is a pretty damning report from King about integrated headsets.
I understand the potential bias in that King has a lot invested in regular cup headsets, but it does make an integrated model. (the Perdido, a zero-stack model) And yet this newsletter is powerful and convincing.
Read it and you'll see that you made the right choice.
|re: there was a post a few days back||cyclopathic|
Mar 25, 2002 6:34 AM
|with ref to CK paper pooping it (and also objective assessment of this article) scroll down.
Given proper tighten up headset I doubt you'd need to tuch it more then once every 500 years.
Mar 25, 2002 6:49 AM
|Integrated headsets seem like another fine example of a solution seeking a problem. There's nothing wrong with conventional headsets, and the integrated versions seem primarily a marketing tool to convince cyclists they need to buy a new bike, frame, etc. I can think of several disadvantages, some serious, with the integrated sets: |
-- Lack of consistent standards among brands.
-- Potential lack of availability of spare parts in the future.
-- Shorter head tubes/ stack heights.
The final point I mentioned could cause real fit problems for some cyclists. With threadless headsets, it is already difficult setting up most of the new bikes with handlebars at higher positions, such as 1" below the saddle height. The integrated headsets compound the problem by lowering the bars yet another cm or so. This may not be a problem for professional racers and others who ride in aggressive positions with their bars far lower than their saddles. Myself, I wouldn't even consider a frame with an integrated set.
|Good answer nm||greg n|
Mar 25, 2002 6:58 AM
Mar 25, 2002 7:28 AM
|One small advantage is that the integrated headset head tube on the frame is larger. It is easier to weld a large diameter down tube onto the larger headtube without having to resort to ovalizing. This is particularly true for aluminum frames that use super large diameter tubing.|
Mar 25, 2002 7:26 PM
|You score 100% on that one. And I too wouldn't consider an integrated headset frame. You can almost hear the continual buzz words "lighter, stiffer, yadda yadda.." in order to promote these things.|
|re: What are the benefits of Integrated Headsets?||mackgoo|
Mar 25, 2002 10:12 PM
|They look great. Nice and clean. When using Campy's Hiddenset there's no draw back. Why do we get alot of the things for our bikes?|| |