Results 1 to 50 of 50
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    35

    Turner is missing the Integrated Headset Bus!?!

    Hey all,

    I'm considering buying a Turner because I hear they are awesome on the hills, but I have one main hangup about how Dave designs his frames. Almost all of the best brands spec integrated headsets, so why doesn't Turner?? IHs are stiffer, more reliable, and allow us to run lighter forks with less steer tube. I have heard that Turner really pays close attention to the opinions of its customers, so is there the possibility of Turner making their frames with IHs in the near future?

  2. #2
    Team Sanchez
    Reputation: El Chingon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,366
    Hey Holmes, define "best brands". I don't see Ventana, Nicolai(Jamis), Titus, Knolly, Transition or Santa Cruz running Integrated headsets. If you are talking about Giant, Trek, Speshy, ect...then your opinion of "the best" may be slightly different from the rest of us on this board.
    Team Sanchez; "Always hittin the upper lip"

  3. #3
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    ahmen. that bein said, i dont wanna scare the new guy off just yet. were a picky bunch and dont think of the big production brands as nessesarily makin the top of the heap, high end stuff.

    ive owned and ridden a '02 homegrown for 5 years. i like it fine, more than fine really. but its ihs is no winner. bearing issues, poor seals, rusted bits, tight spots, etc.... give me a high end h/set any day. my king from '95 is still goin strong on my turner burner, thank you very much. that should tell ya how good they are and how dependable a turner is at the same time. now go place yer order and join the elitest snobs of the turner homers.

    any questions, just ask. youll be hard pressed to find more real world experience in this joint than right here and we tend to be very helpful too.
    No, I'm NOT back!

  4. #4
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,132
    Good lord, you mean people actually WANT an integrated Headset???

    what a bastard creation. smaller bearings, weaker interface, just as much bearing exposure. what's the point? to make the MTB look like a road bike?

    Check-it if CK won't touch em. there has to be a half decent reason...and they list several.

    For me, I'm gonna spend money on a decent headset, I 'd like it to complement the bike and not be hidden, and I'd like it to last neigh forever.



    But then I'm a slave to the BLING... so my POV may be a bit skewed.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  5. #5
    Pivoteer
    Reputation: tiSS'er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,435
    Quote Originally Posted by bigleg82
    IHs are stiffer, more reliable, and allow us to run lighter forks with less steer tube.

    You are clearly not ready for any quality bike. Would you qualify the above statement please? Stiffer? Not a chance. More reliable? Laughable. Lighter forks? Wow, maybe 25 grams savings?

    Fo, is that you?
    Employed by Pivot Cycles - www.pivotcycles.com

  6. #6
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    hey guys. ease up on the newby. we all started not knowin what worked at some point before we became gawds of mtbr. at least in our own minds.
    No, I'm NOT back!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,827
    Jeez bigleg82, you really hit a nerve and made the homers sit up and take notice. Just waiting for Tscheezy to put in his $.02

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,827
    Quote Originally Posted by cactuscorn
    hey guys. ease up on the newby. we all started not knowin what worked at some point before we became gawds of mtbr. at least in our own minds.
    cc is calling all the head homers to decide the appropriate course of action. Flailing with a used tube anyone?

  9. #9
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,132
    cc, in my own mind I'm not even a demi-god... hell last I checked I wasn't even carrying demigod shorts. Not that I'd want to.

    Bigleg... let the IHS go... it's not a deciding point unless you really like the look, AND you're shopping for an XC bike.

    Headsets are a thing of beauty...not to be hidden... stuffing those bearings inside the headtube only requires smaller bearings, and weaker headtubes. No benifit. ditch em. Only Roadies care about the wind resistance...
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  10. #10
    Time flies...
    Reputation: xjbebop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,211
    Cactus must be tired.... I can't believe he stepped right in that troll poo......
    *phew!
    ...every day sends future to past...

  11. #11
    i can't type the letter s
    Reputation: mouse jockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,094
    Integrated headsets, no good. Internal headset or "Zero Stack", better.





    Me want meat, arrgh.

  12. #12
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    just tryin to be respectful is all. and yeah, im pretty tired. long day.
    No, I'm NOT back!

  13. #13
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,343
    You'll get nothing and like it !

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Zrpx4NAtsFQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Zrpx4NAtsFQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
    “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.”

    ― Albert Einstein

  14. #14
    Rolling
    Reputation: lidarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,110
    I hear trolls have integrated headsets.


  15. #15
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    WTF

    Integrated POO

    Is this for real, 1st post must be Gonzo

    OK I hear ya CC, but hey for all you newbies show some respect and do some research, there's a tonme of info in here and one if not the best data bases around, if you are real and talk of quality you'll soon get the picture then you can ask some intelligent questions we can take the piss out of

    Integrated keep it on ya spechy,Trek Crack n fails and what ever

    I'm outta here I hate the word integrated, reminds me of STI on mtb! s integrated = biggest marketing crap of the mtb century

    Chir..

    ps you trying to do Chris Kng outta business
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    517

    Chris King response to IH

    http://chrisking.com/pdfs/Int%20Head...0Explained.pdf

    BigLeg 82,
    Why not 81 or 83, (three to the fourth power or a prime number)? But, I digress.

    I can't believe your really serious, but if you are go to King's website and read the thoughts of an expert. Likely, your a roady with a plastic bike. Check out Serotta's website. No integrated headsets. And none coming any time soon.

    Cheers,

    Kane
    Last edited by zkampyman; 07-02-2008 at 11:05 AM.

  17. #17
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Quote Originally Posted by bigleg82
    Hey all,

    I'm considering buying a Turner because I hear they are awesome on the hills, but I have one main hangup about how Dave designs his frames. Almost all of the best brands spec integrated headsets, so why doesn't Turner?? IHs are stiffer, more reliable, and allow us to run lighter forks with less steer tube. I have heard that Turner really pays close attention to the opinions of its customers, so is there the possibility of Turner making their frames with IHs in the near future?
    Turner does pay close attention to his customers and in this case, the customers have spoken against this awful invention.

  18. #18
    TLL
    TLL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,061
    Quote Originally Posted by bigleg82
    Hey all,

    I'm considering buying a Turner because I hear they are awesome on the hills, but I have one main hangup about how Dave designs his frames. Almost all of the best brands spec integrated headsets, so why doesn't Turner?? IHs are stiffer, more reliable, and allow us to run lighter forks with less steer tube. I have heard that Turner really pays close attention to the opinions of its customers, so is there the possibility of Turner making their frames with IHs in the near future?
    Best Brands? Not really.
    Stiffer? No.
    More reliable? No.
    Lighter forks? The fork actually has to be slightly bigger. Unimportant when you are running a 5-6 lb fork anyway.

    Def read the article that Chris King has on his website.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,576

    Hard work

    I work very hard, very very hard not to pigeon hole my customers into one kind of headset, or bottom bracket or front derailer. Other than a bulgy head tube as some might find that attractive I see no reason to go that route on a Turner Bike, none. Image buying a high end frame and rolling down to the local to pick up some critical parts so you can complete the swap of your old bikes parts to the shiny new frame. You will need a integrated headset and one off press in BB that is so cheap the frame ain't even threaded and an OE mostly E plate front derailer you have to toss the plate to use. No SRAM allowed, No King or Cane Creek 110, no choices. Kinda narrow minded don't ya think?

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts, as I do listen, but I listen to a lot of riders and have to distill the info into the next generation frames. As you can see, high end riders don't like integrated nothing. Integrated really means mass production ease.

    DT

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: prooperator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    514

    integrated

    If you are not riding a Turner, you are riding a integrated pos. I think that is all I have to say.

  21. #21
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    geez dt... why didnt you say that?
    No, I'm NOT back!

  22. #22
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,565
    If the '09 RFX comes with an integrated EBM, I'll be first in line to buy one.
    ****

  23. #23
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    At least the next ones are coming with 1.5, so one can use the internal headset for geo change, should they want. On longer travel bikes 1.5 should be standard to allow a wider range of components and geometries.

  24. #24
    Team Sanchez
    Reputation: El Chingon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,366
    I tried the internal 0 stack on my Highline. It was a Sunline V.1 reducer. The bearings only lasted 9 months. I'll stick to the fullsize bearings of the King from now on, especially for more abusive type riding.
    Team Sanchez; "Always hittin the upper lip"

  25. #25
    Just roll it......
    Reputation: ebxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,552

    Whoah, touched a nerve, eh???

    Hey ya'll.....since you're so quick to jump all over BigLegs here, I thought I'd echo what Mouse Jockey said and give him the benefit of the doubt......I think he means a "zero stack" and not an "integrated headset".

    If so, that's a very different animal and from what I've seen of buddies with 1.5 headtubes, they very much like the bennies associated with the ability to run a zero stack while running a 1 1/8 steerer tube fork (66, totem, etc.) on those bikes to keep the front end lower. So, in that regard, I do see a couple benefits to running a zero stack headset on an 1 1/8 headtube. I wouldn't necessarily choose a bike based on it, but it's not a detractor in my eyes.

    On that note, I'm running an FSA zero stack (Cane Creek design) on my 6" bike for the past year and it's seen at least 100 days of riding on it with no issues. I do enjoy the lower front end while still running my fork at 160. Of course, I ride a mass-produced POS, but it does ride damn nice (IMO) and has taken a TON of abuse since I've owned it.

    Cheers,
    EB

  26. #26
    Roy
    Roy is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,013
    Bigleg - don't let these *****es get you down. For your 2nd career post I would suggest you demand internal frame routing on all Turners. Everyone knows that's also done by all the high end brands.

  27. #27
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    Quote Originally Posted by ebxtreme
    I think he means a "zero stack" and not an "integrated headset".
    dammit! i meant chevy.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    No, I'm NOT back!

  28. #28
    Just roll it......
    Reputation: ebxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,552
    Quote Originally Posted by zkampyman
    http://chrisking.com/pdfs/Int%20Head...0Explained.pdf

    I can't believe your really serious, but if you are go to King's website and read the thoughts of an expert.
    That was published in March 2002. If you look at King's May 2002 "engineering paper", it discusses in laymen's terms why 1.5 headsets are a bad idea too.

  29. #29
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,132
    Headsets are such a crutch.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: juan_speeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,280
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes
    I work very hard, very very hard not to pigeon hole my customers into one kind of headset, or bottom bracket or front derailer. Other than a bulgy head tube as some might find that attractive I see no reason to go that route on a Turner Bike, none. Image buying a high end frame and rolling down to the local to pick up some critical parts so you can complete the swap of your old bikes parts to the shiny new frame. You will need a integrated headset and one off press in BB that is so cheap the frame ain't even threaded and an OE mostly E plate front derailer you have to toss the plate to use. No SRAM allowed, No King or Cane Creek 110, no choices. Kinda narrow minded don't ya think?

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts, as I do listen, but I listen to a lot of riders and have to distill the info into the next generation frames. As you can see, high end riders don't like integrated nothing. Integrated really means mass production ease.

    DT
    Not too hip on Pivot Cycles, I take it.

  31. #31
    i can't type the letter s
    Reputation: mouse jockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,094
    Quote Originally Posted by ebxtreme
    Hey ya'll.....since you're so quick to jump all over BigLegs here, I thought I'd echo what Mouse Jockey said and give him the benefit of the doubt......I think he means a "zero stack" and not an "integrated headset".

    If so, that's a very different animal and from what I've seen of buddies with 1.5 headtubes, they very much like the bennies associated with the ability to run a zero stack while running a 1 1/8 steerer tube fork (66, totem, etc.) on those bikes to keep the front end lower. So, in that regard, I do see a couple benefits to running a zero stack headset on an 1 1/8 headtube. I wouldn't necessarily choose a bike based on it, but it's not a detractor in my eyes.

    Cheers,
    EB
    Ya, ya this is wot i wuz get'n at but i wuz hungry and no want to type all tha hullaballo...

    mj

  32. #32
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes
    I work very hard, very very hard not to pigeon hole my customers into one kind of headset, or bottom bracket or front derailer. Other than a bulgy head tube as some might find that attractive I see no reason to go that route on a Turner Bike, none. Image buying a high end frame and rolling down to the local to pick up some critical parts so you can complete the swap of your old bikes parts to the shiny new frame. You will need a integrated headset and one off press in BB that is so cheap the frame ain't even threaded and an OE mostly E plate front derailer you have to toss the plate to use. No SRAM allowed, No King or Cane Creek 110, no choices. Kinda narrow minded don't ya think?

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts, as I do listen, but I listen to a lot of riders and have to distill the info into the next generation frames. As you can see, high end riders don't like integrated nothing. Integrated really means mass production ease.

    DT
    DT,

    That's all fine and good, but the real question is:

    When are you going to start building the Turner that everyone wants? You know, the one with a Klein AirHeadset and an integrated seatpost like the Yeti ASR?

    Build it and I'll take two. It also needs a sunburst fade paintjob.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueMountain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    891
    I'd really like to see some integrated wheels so we don't have to go through the I9-CK debate ever again.

    Next- an integrated fork so Jerk can never post another fork thread again.

  34. #34
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueMountain
    I'd really like to see some integrated wheels so we don't have to go through the I9-CK debate ever again.

    Next- an integrated fork so Jerk can never post another fork thread again.
    My next ongoing saga of parts I pay to test for the manufacturer.

  35. #35
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueMountain
    I'd really like to see some integrated wheels so we don't have to go through the I9-CK debate ever again.

    Next- an integrated fork so Jerk can never post another fork thread again.
    Im riding a integrated bike its a POS too, I don't get very far, its dosen't climb to well, decend and I get lots of pedal feedback, its heavy and it doesen't even have a low stack height and Im only good for about 10-15min
    pd oh its does have a big COMPUTER!

    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  36. #36
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    Quote Originally Posted by ebxtreme
    Hey ya'll.....since you're so quick to jump all over BigLegs here, I thought I'd echo what Mouse Jockey said and give him the benefit of the doubt......I think he means a "zero stack" and not an "integrated headset".

    If so, that's a very different animal and from what I've seen of buddies with 1.5 headtubes, they very much like the bennies associated with the ability to run a zero stack while running a 1 1/8 steerer tube fork (66, totem, etc.) on those bikes to keep the front end lower. So, in that regard, I do see a couple benefits to running a zero stack headset on an 1 1/8 headtube. I wouldn't necessarily choose a bike based on it, but it's not a detractor in my eyes.

    On that note, I'm running an FSA zero stack (Cane Creek design) on my 6" bike for the past year and it's seen at least 100 days of riding on it with no issues. I do enjoy the lower front end while still running my fork at 160. Of course, I ride a mass-produced POS, but it does ride damn nice (IMO) and has taken a TON of abuse since I've owned it.

    Cheers,
    EB
    Don't sell ya bike short dude,its a sweet machine but I think DT hit the nail on the head about the real benefits for intergration its more about mass produced benefits not whats best for the consumer, not to say it does not work well on those bikes, and you explain the zero stack very well but then that also comes down to design, not nesseccarily if its better, I compare the DHR front to the IH Sunday both get the job done well from too different design persectives!

    One of the nice things about high end frames, and thats why I mentioned doing ya research, cause normally when youre outlaying lots of $$ on anything!

    1: you tend to know something about that market?
    2: if you don't you research it

    Usually its common knowledge that in small frame makers you get a frame and shock the rest you choose which is something normally the person in that market enjoys doing for many reasons, e.g choosing your own components, doing your own build, the quality of combined components usually adds to the sum of the quality of the frame and its intended use!

    You enjoy both sides! Which is cool..

    I had SI Integration long before it became cool or popular, it cracks me up how now Specchy Trek and others all market this including Manitou and 1.5, Cannodale was doing this for years way back in the early 90s, long before anyone, e.g all their serious mtbs were 1.5 even there XC Headshocks were 1.5, if you wanted to run a Judy for example you needed a reducer, SI Interation, they had Coda as there sub brand most of it was crap but some worked well,it was throughout there road range too I know I had a Caad 5 road bike, I liked there high end cranks, but I learnt a very hard lesson through that experience, expensive, hard to support and repair, special tools, no good for anything else, never again even though things have moved on lots since then, its still imo marketing at is worse, the idea is appealing cause Humans are lazy and want to believe eveything easy is best, we are marketers dreams, tech sorta does that though to be fair!

    Ateast with Giant you get that reflected in the price/performance and the value is unquestionable yet others up the price when they are reducing costs while making out its the lastest big bang theory that will revolutionise the sport yet its been and failed long ago, not that old ideas are bad sometimes its timing but be honest about it, hence why I have no trust in those companies
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kevin G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,239
    Having to purchase one of these ugly devices is SO painful...


  38. #38
    Amphibious Technologies
    Reputation: SCUBAPRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,472
    Quote Originally Posted by trailadvent
    Im riding a integrated bike its a POS too, ...
    I like the handlebars on your new bike.
    "The best you've ridden is the best you know" - Paul Thede, Race Tech

  39. #39
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    Quote Originally Posted by SCUBAPRO
    I like the handlebars on your new bike.
    they are WIDE and stem is integrated
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  40. #40
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,648
    Quote Originally Posted by bigleg82
    Hey all,

    I'm considering buying a Turner because I hear they are awesome on the hills, but I have one main hangup about how Dave designs his frames. Almost all of the best brands spec integrated headsets, so why doesn't Turner?? IHs are stiffer, more reliable, and allow us to run lighter forks with less steer tube. I have heard that Turner really pays close attention to the opinions of its customers, so is there the possibility of Turner making their frames with IHs in the near future?
    IH is crap and has been for a long time. I had a IH bike recently, and so did a friend. Both had serious design flaws (chainstays and shock-mounting). Go look at the threads on the IH board about the play they get in the pivots, and hell they even tell people that it's NORMAL to have play in the pivots, lol! The first generation sundays were made with flawed rockers that allowed the use of a super-long bolt that was prone to bending, then they finally made a link more like turners (3-d shaped so a smaller bolt can be used). IH may have had the DW link, but they've never really had anything else (decent pivots, quality, etc).

    My Turner is still kicking. Can't really say that for my iron horse....snap!
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  41. #41
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    What about the BB30 (pressed in BB bearings) standard? Is someone missing the boat there?

  42. #42
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    What about the BB30 (pressed in BB bearings) standard? Is someone missing the boat there?
    Picky hardly integrated atleast you can choose what BB you want with most cranksets, and now with Hope, Phil Wood new RF you can service and replace bearings etc yerself already moving away from pressed cheap ass technology which if anything proves the merits of non integration even more to me!
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  43. #43
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,648
    I forgot the part where we had to send my buddies IH back for being out of alignment.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  44. #44
    TLL
    TLL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,061
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    What about the BB30 (pressed in BB bearings) standard? Is someone missing the boat there?
    I actually see the point in that--it yields a narrower Q factor for all the paperclip thin, narrow hip, goater racers out there.

    Stick figure man would approve.

  45. #45
    TLL
    TLL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,061
    Quote Originally Posted by trailadvent
    Im riding a integrated bike its a POS too, I don't get very far, its dosen't climb to well, decend and I get lots of pedal feedback, its heavy and it doesen't even have a low stack height and Im only good for about 10-15min
    pd oh its does have a big COMPUTER!

    Dude, is that your new Nicolai?

  46. #46
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    Quote Originally Posted by TLL
    Dude, is that your new Nicolai?
    Nah nuttin that fancy, just a Jamis
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,576

    standards

    BB30. is probably going to gain a lot of momentum. When it is proven to be superior, and easily available then I will consider it. Right now, there are so many great choices in old school BB's it will take a couple years to see how this jells.

  48. #48
    TLL
    TLL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,061
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes
    BB30. is probably going to gain a lot of momentum. When it is proven to be superior, and easily available then I will consider it. Right now, there are so many great choices in old school BB's it will take a couple years to see how this jells.
    I really think it makes sense for the riders/racers that have difficulties with OB bearing cups and wider Q factors. Think your average racer like Adam Craig, or your average female rider, who might actually benefit from a narrower Q, Especially since they are running clipless anyway. Big guys like me, well the wider the butter.

    Sadly, square taper seems to be less of an option for crank makers and ISIS never (well almost) delivered. Perhaps BB30 will deliver.

    I could see BB30 on the Flux, when demand is there. BB30 will prolly never be for DH/AM rigs, regardless of all the stronger/stiffer arguments.

    Now, If I could just convince you to shorten the TT of Sultan 2.0 by an inch . . . .
    Hadley rear hub service here and here.

  49. #49
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,554
    Here we go again BB30!

    I can't beleve this industry sometimes!

    We talk about costs hiking up, we talk about common standards, we all want new tech but how about just proper well designed products! You moaned about production issues in 07, moan about rising costs at the mo, and you want new introduction of more standards when exisiting ones are fine and the ones that aren't are just poor products nothing more!

    ISIS had flaws thats why it fell short, but that concept lead to the EXBB.

    Sheesh I used to go through 3-4 BB's a year at one time at a cost of over $200- $300 bucks each, even if I did that many with EXBB I'd still be well ahead, at $60-70 for exBBs it dosen't come close and servicing or replacing them is a cinch, dam I have 3 bikes and I don't do that many BBs a year, those 3-4 were for one bike, I don't remeber the Q bing any better or the quality certinley wasn't, weight frinken heck most were heavy POS, square taper what who 60kg asking for square taper, well take them outside and flogg em right now

    OK for your SS HT Steel 26/29er! thats where retro belongs

    Ive done some reading on the BB30 still to do some more but I'm not knocking it yet but all Im pointing out is this! I am knocking yet another flipping standard, potentailly..

    This needs a totally new housing to support this design, so ya stuffed for your exisiting bike, doh another croc anint no adaptor gonna help there

    Question why do we buy a Turner for example?

    We want quality, great design, consistency, CS, implementation of design flexibilites, we like how they look, [ e.g frankensess which actually works not many other brands have that flexibility] evolution of a well thought out theory/design ,e.g implementation is more important than the marketing feature TNT vs say other faux bar pivot locations etc!
    HL for example dosen't mena its good if badly implemented same with DW!

    Turners seatposts accross the range are all 27.2mm, BBs all consistent except for obvious models, as are many other features, Turners just don't make great bikes they make it as simple as possible for its customers to work within its range of frame models!

    So back to BB30 and other potential standards, once you say for example have BB30 for Flux, EX BB for RFX DHR or some other standard, does this make it better for us, imo NO, if you have 2 different models its just raised ya costs again, there's no consistency, what it means is again we are being lazy ass consumers, who will end up paying higher costs, due to more manafacturing costs to produce different frame standards, its a no brainer!

    We can decide and influence the market, look what the MTB community did to Shimano, with all its marketing all its investment in the new STI MTB groupset which was supposed to revoultionise MTB it crashed, sure many bought into it, sucked into it, many OEM bikes came standard with it, and MANY said stuff you shimano I want a choice, they lost lots of loyal customers to a company ready to listen, designed a good group, sure it may not have looked as good but it performs. Look at th big S now! they have changed fully, sure they still offer theyre STI theyre not going to back down, but atleast they have allowed the groupo's to mix and if not copied have followed allot of SRAMs innovations winning back some customers!

    Where is this being driven by, look closely at the industry, its not the small manafactures! these guys brings new standards because it is something they found benefits the rider and carve out a niche because people can see and identify with it, without all the hype!

    These other guys are only after global domination, sure profit is what business is all about but like any good relationship its about honesty integrety and putting your customers first that wins you business in the long term, just look at where Cdale have fallen since there share float, greed cost them, same with GT Schwin all sucked up by non cyclists after one thing $$

    This is what they want and all it will do is raise costs even more, look at the new TREK DH/FR bikes, very nice I grant you, but are you seriously are you going to pay for that over a handmade frame you can specc yourself for a lower price or equal or even a little more! Are we nutz!

    Trek frame for $2900 something, DHR @ 2600 something

    Then look at your kit bag, at the moment I can pretty much use anything I have for any bike, yeah sometimes things don't always fit!! but usually thats a bad choice, or nothing a dremel can't modify, something we homers are proud or were of doing!

    WE buy a frame only !

    Cause we like to make choices, we know through experience that the sum in OEM is usually a cost cutting measure somewhere!

    We like to make our bikes unique a bit part of us, not buying the whole bike and then say well I don't like the stem, bars, seat pedals and can you swap it out or worst having to dump it in the bike room while we spend another $500 on our show room bike to get it to fit the way we like!

    We are our own worst enemies in this industry, we need technology and advancement but for the right reasons, the big players do this only for one reason and its not your benefit, thats why they pay so much for marketing, they do it so they have a selling point and can brag about there latest desgin to sell more product,market share, instead of producing better product and trickling it down, sure this happens and there's some good product out there, no doubt, but lots of its dosent include proprietry this that or some other new standard, which just proves what model is sustainable!

    But stil they persist, cause unfortunately many will buy into it, Ive been caught myself its dam hard at times!

    But Im totally dubious on this new standard just like 15mm hubs, etc, instead of building or desgining a lighter 20mm and or axle like Sram's maxle light they go and make a new standard! Ask yourself was this truly required..

    Suckers, whats wrong with ex BB the players are just starting to now get there s h i t together and provide better life bearings, replaceable, I thoughts that's what boutique riders want, not plug and play PS3s or what ever, bearing's back in the frame housing, have we forgotten the crap that usued to hapen in there, typical this comes from roadie begining's and XC again which is lets be honest is dead where's XC racing @
    If you want Q factor get shorter spindels between axle to crank, Look been doing them for CBs for ages

    Will it really make that much differece to most of us NO, we not good enough to get that much out of it, clean yer chain keep ya rings and clusters in good shape, go ceramic jockeys or BBs if you must, proper chain length, test some tires that or check pressures, most people are so off on these basics, let alone a new BB standard

    Im really cooked on this, maybe its my meds today, been to see the insurance nutters and head doctor today and got to get reffered to some head specialist for syc evalution memory issues

    But even so I feel like at times Im reading the OEM forums lately, people moan we having fun thats what the Homer forum has always been about mixed with serious questions speccifications showing ya Turner steeds, pictures lol, sheep and some place called Alaska and speedos debate, and opinions all entitled too, but this at a time when everything is skyrocketing, what happened to intelligent aware Homers where have they gone, at one time we wanted standards consistency, quality, thats why we franken turnedered things, Im lost, danger danger Will Robinson! Im wondering if upon crash I reawoke in a parrallel dimension

    rant out

    My sonic srewdriver is armed and ready!
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  50. #50
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Anyhow, I don't like BB30, but it might be the standard I have to follow in the future. I remember the idea way back for a new BB shell size standard. Nothing seems to have come of that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •