|integrated headset TREK and COLNAGO||morency|
Nov 20, 2002 7:51 AM
|Why don't TREK and COLNAGO have integrated headsets on their frames?|
|because they don't buy into the hype? (nm)||ColnagoFE|
Nov 20, 2002 7:52 AM
|Well then that makes 3 of us. nm||Juanmoretime|
Nov 20, 2002 7:55 AM
|re: integrated headset TREK and COLNAGO||pmf1|
Nov 20, 2002 8:01 AM
|Colnago still uses ... gasp ... a 1" steerer tube. Ernesto doesn't believe in trends. Look at the new chainstays on the C-40 for proof.
Have fun finding parts for that integrated headset on your Cannondale CAAD 7 in a few years when the CAAD 10 is out.
|2003 Trek 5900 "IS" integrated <eom>||Fausto|
Nov 20, 2002 9:35 AM
|2003 Trek 5900 "IS" integrated |
|Same true for '02, right? (nm)||jtferraro|
Nov 20, 2002 10:30 AM
|Check definition of "integrated"||TrekFurthur|
Nov 20, 2002 10:41 AM
|While the lower cup on the 5900's headset is bonded to the headtube, it is not a structural part of the headtube; Trek's reasoning for this method is probably that a 5900 owner has to use the proprietary headset, due to the unique size (top is 1.1/8", bottom is 1.25"?--second number may be off a bit. However, this practice is different than using an actual "integrated" headset--though the difference may be nominal only.|
|Chris King makes a compelling argument (see link)||Elefantino|
Nov 20, 2002 11:13 AM
|Jesus, Here we go again.||Lazywriter|
Nov 20, 2002 4:41 PM
|First off, the Chris King "article" has no credibility because they are so fu(king biased that anything they say against the integrated or most likely the semi integrated design cannot be taken seriously. LISTEN TO ME, THEY FELL ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL AND ARE TRYING TO SCARE PEOPLE OUT OF BUYING FRAMES TO SAVE THEIR OWN ASSES. I think it is a shame because they make the best traditional headset.
They absolutely are pathetic with their attempt to talk integrated design down to save their own asses. The semi integrated design is no different in functionality than a traditional headset. The frame is protected by separate cups that are pressed into the frame and the bearing races rest inside them. No bearing to frame contact and King's original "article" before they became even more desparate stated that the semi integrated desingn was functionally sound and hence they created their own version the Perdido. They were way too late to the table and Cane Creek and Campy already had their own standard.
Second, to say that Colnago doesn't buy into "hype", what the fu(k do you call carbon seat stays with titanium/carbon frames and their new chain stays on the C40?
I don't have a problem with it but don't tell me that Ernesto is a purist old school designer who doesn't care about making $$$ on current trends.
The semi integrateddesing on my Litespeed is no different in basic functionality than a traditional headset although the latter is easier to install and service. As far as 10 years from now blah blah blah, there are many bikes out there and the 2003 also have them and so will 2004 and 2005 and so on. Replacement parts will no be a problem if your bike takes a Cane Creek or Campy headset. Plus you guys have it out like you need to replace an integrated headset after 5 rides. If adjusted and serviced, it will work like my traditional headsets with little to no maintenance. Talk about buying into hype, how about propoganda and hysteria. Sound like a bunch of bitches to me. LMFAO
|biased source w/o a doubt||pmf1|
Nov 21, 2002 9:17 AM
|Yes, you'd expect King to put down the new technology they don't make.
I'm curious though, what does an integrated headset get you over a standard one? Seems like the answer to a problem that didn't exist.
I'm glad my Litespeed doesn't have one. Or carbon stays for that matter.
|I guess it just saves a tad of weight and looks nicer...||jtferraro|
Nov 21, 2002 9:57 AM
|I don't have an integrated headset, either.