cross frames & integrated headsets?



On 17 Dec 2005 10:27:09 -0800, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>Are you saying that intregrated headsets don't
>>actually function? If so, what is wrong with them?

>
>No, I have no experience with them.


!!!!!!

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
On 17 Dec 2005 10:27:09 -0800, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I was simply expecting cross
>equipment to emphasize proven reliability/
> durability and therefore use
>"traditional" solutions.


Cross races are 1 hour long or less and top riders almost always
havespare bikes, and sometimes change bikes every lap. Cross bikes
are among the most innovative in the racing world.

Sure, the equipment has to work and be reliable, but it's often
cutting edge stuff.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
Derk wrote:
> M-gineering wrote:
>
>
>>6% + VAT

>
> Are you sure? What about the VAT? Can one get the VAT back that has been
> added to the price that one pay's abroad or is it: price of article + 6% +
> Dutch VAT e.g. ? That's what I understand and in that case you can add more
> than 20% to the original amount.
>
> Greetings, Derk


I ordered some parts from the USA recently and had to pay about 20% VAT
(omzetbelasting) and about 5% customservice (invoerrechten), and the
parts were still cheaper than when ordered in the EU, and delivered
within a week. Amazing..


Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu
 
Lou Holtman wrote:

> I ordered some parts from the USA recently and had to pay about 20% VAT
> (omzetbelasting) and about 5% customservice (invoerrechten), and the
> parts were still cheaper than when ordered in the EU, and delivered
> within a week. Amazing..

I think a 25% "price increase" is significant. Something that sounds like a
bargain is suddenly less interesting from a financial point of view. On top
of that, there's the problem of transport costs. Whenever you buy a part
that fails and isn't guaranteed by a Dutch importer, you'll be forced to
send it back and forth overseas at sigificant cost. When you take that into
account, it's not that interesting any more. It'a a pity: I'm a big fan of
Titanium frames.

When do you plan a vacation in the US, Lou? ;-)

Greetings, Derk
 
Antti Salonen wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Chris King has led a charge against the integrated design, asserting
>>that it opens up the possibility of wrecking a frame because the bearing
>>could move against the head tube: in an integrated design, the races are
>>in press-fit contact with the head tube.

>
>
> I'm wondering though how real this problem is in practice. After all,
> we've been hearing these warnings for years, but integrated headsets
> have been on the market for five years already. If there is a real
> problem, no doubt the shops would've already seen the results. There
> are several people running or working at bike shops in this newsgroups,
> but I don't remember reading a single report.
>
> I'm not saying it's necessarily a smart design, but telling everybody to
> stay away from otherwise nice and competetively priced frames because of
> integrated headsets might be excessive.
>
> -as





Have a look at:

http://photobucket.com/albums/a158/kwalters1532

for a Trek/Lemond ti road frame with integrated headset after 7000
miles. Ken.
 
kwalters wrote:
>
>
> Antti Salonen wrote:
>
>> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Chris King has led a charge against the integrated design, asserting
>>> that it opens up the possibility of wrecking a frame because the
>>> bearing could move against the head tube: in an integrated design,
>>> the races are in press-fit contact with the head tube.

>>
>>
>>
>> I'm wondering though how real this problem is in practice. After all,
>> we've been hearing these warnings for years, but integrated headsets
>> have been on the market for five years already. If there is a real
>> problem, no doubt the shops would've already seen the results. There
>> are several people running or working at bike shops in this newsgroups,
>> but I don't remember reading a single report.
>> I'm not saying it's necessarily a smart design, but telling everybody to
>> stay away from otherwise nice and competetively priced frames because of
>> integrated headsets might be excessive.
>> -as

>
>
>
>
>
> Have a look at:
>
> http://photobucket.com/albums/a158/kwalters1532
>
> for a Trek/Lemond ti road frame with integrated headset after 7000
> miles. Ken.
>


That isn't proof of excess wear, but of off-centered milling. I'd bet
my eye-teeth that that 1/2mm difference existed before the 7K miles started.

That said, wear will occur in these headsets, fore and aft on the
bevelled (angular contact) surfaces.


Robin Hubert
 
Robin Hubert wrote:
> kwalters wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>
>>> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Chris King has led a charge against the integrated design, asserting
>>>> that it opens up the possibility of wrecking a frame because the
>>>> bearing could move against the head tube: in an integrated design,
>>>> the races are in press-fit contact with the head tube.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm wondering though how real this problem is in practice. After all,
>>> we've been hearing these warnings for years, but integrated headsets
>>> have been on the market for five years already. If there is a real
>>> problem, no doubt the shops would've already seen the results. There
>>> are several people running or working at bike shops in this newsgroups,
>>> but I don't remember reading a single report.
>>> I'm not saying it's necessarily a smart design, but telling everybody to
>>> stay away from otherwise nice and competetively priced frames because of
>>> integrated headsets might be excessive.
>>> -as

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Have a look at:
>>
>> http://photobucket.com/albums/a158/kwalters1532
>>
>> for a Trek/Lemond ti road frame with integrated headset after 7000
>> miles. Ken.
>>

>
> That isn't proof of excess wear, but of off-centered milling. I'd bet
> my eye-teeth that that 1/2mm difference existed before the 7K miles
> started.
>
> That said, wear will occur in these headsets, fore and aft on the
> bevelled (angular contact) surfaces.
>
>
> Robin Hubert



I agree completely, so does Cane Creek (maker of the headset), and
several local shops. Unfortunately, Trek doesn't.

I have another picture of a similar frame but with concentric milling;
it shows noticeable wear, but I don't know the mileage on the frame.

Ken




Ken
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
>
>I've recently been trying to find and build my first cross bike, and I
>am surprised that so many cross frames use integrated headsets. This
>seems counter-intuitive to me: cross = function takes precedence over
>fashion, while IS = fashion over function. Is there a good technical
>reason for using integrated headsets in cross frames?


So that you replace the entire frame when the HS goes bad???
---------------
Alex