Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 101
  1. #1
    I like rigid MTB.
    Reputation: edle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    159

    New question here. Chris King or Industry 9 hubs ?????

    I have $$$ for one wheelset only.
    What should I use ? Chris King or I9 hubs ? Why ?

    Thanks.....

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Whisperer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,214
    Though it doesn't show the I9, this video does show the key differences between Pawl and Ratchet hubs like the I9 and The Chris King design which IMO is the best made.

    How Things Work: The Freehub Body – Dirt

  3. #3
    I'm in...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    311
    I have both. King ALL The way!

  4. #4
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,474
    Neither, DT.

  5. #5
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    I got a garage full of high end performance wheels. Easton Haven carbon, Enve King, i9 Enduro, and various DT wheels, and various other mid-range stuff from WTB, Stan's, Bontrager, etc. With all my experience on 'em, I'd say Enve XC/AM + DT 190/240s + Sapim CX Ray (or DT Aerolite) spokes would make one of the finest all around wheelsets. 1500-1600g, rolls fast and low drag when coasting, strong and reliable, very low maintenance and easy to "fix", with comfortable ride feel and precise tracking.

    Here's my take on the rear hubs:

    King puts their bearings on the very outside edge of the hub shell, and their drive mech on the inside. Wider spaced bearings carry heavy loads better. The freehub shell has a long extension with special helical spine on it, which meshes with one of the drive rings, which then connects with the drive ring. Since the drive rings are inside, they're bigger in diameter and allow for larger teeth design with a more solid engagement--being inside the hollow part of the hubshell gives it its unique hollow buzz sound. It can fail though, since the freehub shell is soft alloy and the drive rings are steel--the helical spines can notch and possibly strip. Mine notched and slipped and sort of caused a miss-meshing or something, that turned my King hub into a fixie. King uses their in-house bearings, which I believe have a focus on high load bearing and sealing, rather than fast spinning. It has some sort of metal circlip holding a shield on it, which can be removed and allow access to the bearings to be serviced. King hubs tend to be heavy and slow rolling, compared to others, but precision made parts, user serviceability and long life due to regular maintenance are its main appeal. Axle conversion kits, spare parts and special tools are relatively expensive. Lots of different anodized colors available. Their company is run very responsibly.

    i9s drive rings and pawls are made with super hard tool grade steel, some of the hardest steel and also hardest to work. They use some sort of special method to cut their micro sized teeth, using a very expensive machine. It allowed them to get 120 points of engagement, only beat by Kappius hubs. They use traditional design, with the main load -bearing driveside bearing just inside the freewheel mechanism. Their bearings are standard cartride bearings require no maintenance. Just knock 'em out and press in new bearings from Enduro or SKF or whatever and roll on. The stock bearings roll faster than King hubs and I haven't touched mine for the couple years I've been rolling on 'em. The freewheel mech is a little draggy, but of course that only matters if you're coasting and not pedaling. Lots of costly advanced high tech machinery making nice things happen here.

    I love DT hubs. They are reasonably light and roll very fast, especially compared to King hubs. Speed is fun. Super simple and easy to work with. I miss the engagement from i9 and CK, but if I wanted one set to race on and also train on, DT would be choice over i9 and CK, though I believe there are better hubs for race purposes out there. Reliable. Lace 'em up, throw 'em on your bike, and ride 'em to the ground. The higher engagement upgrade doesn't get as close to CK or I9, and definitely isn't as durable as i9, in fact their durability is what makes it an option rather than standard, but it's not very expensive compared to the others here. Simple methods that worked for ages, forging that has been refined over time, with precision for tight tolerances to make parts that press together with perfect fits. DT seems to know wheels really well and their high end offerings seem to offer a great balance of features that seems to be perfect for the type that wants it all, but is able to appreciate more things than just weight, engagement, or other fancy marketable stuff. As sensible people know, forging tends to make better parts than parts that are fully CNCed from raw material and anodized a multitude of colors.

    Front hubs from CK/i9? Nothing special about them. There are differences between all sorts of front hubs: bearings, flange width, height, weight, convertibility, part of a proprietary wheel system, lacing pattern, straight pull, etc. Might as well go Lefty, just so you avoid paying premiums just for matching hubs.

    I play with a lot of top end wheels, besides the one I currently own. Some generalizations I can make: I highly recommend carbon rims. Enve rims > Easton Haven > Reynolds/SRAM > Roval > Chinese/Alloy. I don't totally dismiss alloy wheels though. I kind of prefer pre-built wheels, but I don't break many spoke due to being a lightweight. I find DT Tricons to be nicer than my i9 Enduros for perceived stiffness and durability, with added speed--one of the nicest pre-builts I've been on, with weight being the only downside. The Syntace pre-built wheels look really nice if you wanna hop onto the wide rim bandwagon, hopefully not pairing them up with narrower tires. Would love to check out Extralite Hyper hubs and more exotic hubs, but not much return for extra cash paid there.

  6. #6
    I like rigid MTB.
    Reputation: edle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    159
    Thanks for the valuable inputs.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    23
    It took my buddy with I9's like 5 weeks to get a few replacement spokes from them when he busted a couple. I had an axle issue with my CK's and had the part by the next weekend. Customer service makes all the difference for me.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    580
    The only issue I can come up with for CK hubs is the (current) lack of XX1 support. If you don't plan on using that group, I don't think you can do better.

    With that said, the new I9 "Torch" hubs look like they solve most of the small issues present with the previous design so that is definitely a strong contender.

    Good luck with whatever you choose!

  9. #9
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    When I "busted" my CK hub, I called them intending to warranty. Told them what was up and how it happened and they weren't sure and acted like it was the first time it happened. They directed me to their detailed online manuals and had me look inside the hub. It was super simple. My bad for not really cracking open the hub to do maintenance. Put it back together after following basic service routine and no more problems, though I did notice the notching on the spline (both the drive ring side and cassette side)... well, that's my experience with CK CS. They did say that I could replace it with new freehub shell, but at $120 or so, I decided to ride until the freehub shell gave me problems again and avoid that stupidly steep climb. I've tried that climb on other hubs without probs.

    When I was looking for a 142x12 axle for my rear CK hub, it took me over 2 weeks to get one. I called up CK one week and they said the would have them in stock on Friday. I then checked all the online sites (ex. Aspire, Universal Cycles, etc.) and even LBS, and couldn't find one. I put an order with CK and called next week and they said, not yet in stock, but will be on Friday. Called up again, and they found my story odd and that they'd get it expedited. Early in the week after, it arrived here in SoCal. Came with minimal packaging as expected, a thin little plastic zip baggy with a label stuck on it, inside a bubble mailer I think.

    They're probably in so much demand that they're unable to keep up with supply. I recall i9 saying their demand outstrips supply too, with spoke production being their bottleneck.

    Someone almost got a hot deal on a new and "historic" i9 carbon 29er XC wheelset on eBay, if not for a reserve option. New Industry Nine Reynolds Carbon 29er XC Hubs Wheelset 2012 US Made | eBay

    I must emphasize what I said earlier that the hub is not that nice of a place to spend money. The rest of the wheel is important too. If you're on a 29er, a quality rim should be a higher priority.

    The hub debate will go on endlessly. People will say CK is like old fashioned US made stuff, solid, well-built, made to last, and good for mechanics. People will find i9's US made and uniquely high quality advanced fabrication methods highly appealing. If you're going to mill metal, why settle for a shape that forging can match? DT rep is legendary and goes far back. Makes me wonder if these guys bring up the topic on purpose, as the more you talk about them, the better they all seem. Doesn't really help with indecisiveness.

    Throw in Hadley and Kappius, Extralite (Tune and all the other exotic brands)... can't really say anything bad about them besides price. They're all pretty well designed. When brands compete with better designs, you win. If you buy are and happy with them, they may just settle for that status quo, like CK seemingly has. CK honestly has unique differences that can be marketed, like their super high quality expensive ball bearings, their made-in-house specific for the task at hand, angular contact bearings (most others use radial), precision side load adjusting caps, etc. I would say that precision and craftsmanship is hard to mass produce, but DT seems to have found a balance between that precision and craftsmanship and mass production to please me.

    i9 Torch hubs solving small issues? Maybe small issues in i9s eyes, wanting to improve their hubs. They are still offering their older hubs, as they are solid performers compared to the competition. This is just a newer design that's the result of R&D, pushing for more performance, and tapping the potential they have with such machinery they have available to them. It's more refined, and relatively innovative. At least, that's my perspective on it.

    I'd say DT is close to what I define as perfection. I consider perfection as a state where you can't take any more away, yet does its intended task efficiently without fault. For DT to "innovate" and improve, it seems that they basically had to offer new lines, such as the Spline line and Tricon, and improve their rims, nipples, and complete wheelsets. The difference between DT's 240s and 190 is minor... very slight weight savings due to being less modular and with a carbon hubshell and ceramic bearings instead of steel, for a whole lot more money. Fewer color options too . It's like how Cannondale uses integration for weight savings and simplicity, at cost of customization. Seen some custom carbon bar and stem combo recently... anyways, 240s is pretty close to a perfection in my eyes. If you ask what I consider a masterpiece, it would need to think of something creative, thoughtful, thought-provoking, with great attention to detail, and artfully done--basically the exact opposite of perfection, and definitely not a 240s hub. Rohloff maybe a candidate for masterpiece? What about that CVT hub?
    Last edited by Varaxis; 02-23-2013 at 05:58 PM.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    580
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    i9 Torch hubs solving small issues? Maybe small issues in i9s eyes, wanting to improve their hubs. They are still offering their older hubs, as they are solid performers compared to the competition. This is just a newer design that's the result of R&D, pushing for more performance, and tapping the potential they have with such machinery they have available to them. It's more refined, and relatively innovative. At least, that's my perspective on it.
    Only i9 complaints I've ever heard were with regard to drag and durability.

    From someone who has ridden both in an i9 Torch thread:

    "Performance-wise, they are similar. That said, the improvements in the bearing arrangement, pawl springs, tool-free maintenance, pawl design, no more bearing preload dust cap/set screw, reduced drag...

    There's a lot going on to appreciate that doesn't necessarily affect the ride quality one way or the other, but are certainly improvements from the old design."

  11. #11
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Ah, the drag. I need to take a look inside and see what they did. I think it's safe to look cause I don't have enough cash nor good reason to buy a new Torch wheelset, cause I recently got the Haven Carbons, and I'd feel that they might entice me.

    My first impression is that it's like asking them to mix the best parts of DT with best parts of i9, and ending up with Torch. Slightly heavier (than DT), with more features such as 20mm front compatibility, and gotta go with the i9 spokes. I wanna see what they mean by bearing arrangement and the new drivesystem. Maybe find a pic with the freehub body pulled off, and maybe the axle too.
    Last edited by Varaxis; 02-23-2013 at 11:49 PM.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    II highly recommend carbon rims. Enve rims > Easton Haven > Reynolds/SRAM > Roval > Chinese/Alloy.
    I am curious why you like the Enve's better than the Easton? Is there something specific?

  13. #13
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Ride feel. It's like trying to tell someone the difference between a Yeti frame and Santa Cruz frame, without talking about the suspension. Or a steel, ti, carbon frame vs alloy. Or maybe the difference between an Enve carbon handlebar and a RaceFace SixC handlebar. Really hard to explain in exact words, but Enve really makes the ride feel smooth and comfortable, while being precise. Kind of makes riding things easier, which may or may not be more fun, depending on how much challenge you want. The comfort leads to better control and confidence, basically.

    Those that actually like a lot of feedback might feel a disconnect though. I know I was a little baffled why I thought Flows felt stiffer at one point in time--it was actually the amount of feedback I was noticing a big difference in. Stiffness does not necessarily need to mean bone jarring, basically. Feedback can both positively and negativity affect how you ride, depending on how you react to it. If you are actively feeling for certain feedback to act on it, you might miss it. If you think feedback is like noise, you won't miss it. There's no lack in responsiveness, just feedback. Some people say they don't want the trail smoothed out for 'em, but if you're deathgripping your bars in the braking bumps, that smoothness really is a relief.

    Haven't ridden much on the Havens yet, but I've rim striked hard enough to check, fussing with tubeless and pressure, and I'm thoroughly impressed with its durability. They spin fast, but like other things that spin fast (Token BBs and Mavic hubs), I worry about longevity in the bearings. Maybe they're using some really light grease. The rims are impressive enough to give me confidence to say they're up there with Enve. They just don't have that nice ride feel in them.

    Thinking about doing Haven front and CK Enve rear on a HT and see how that goes. And maybe CK front and Haven rear on the FS bike, to get the most out of the wheels' characteristics and better match my riding style.
    Last edited by Varaxis; 02-23-2013 at 08:53 PM.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Whisperer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Ah, the drag. I need to take a look inside and see what they did. I think it's safe to look cause I don't have enough cash nor good reason to buy a new Torch wheelset, cause I recently got the Haven Carbons, and I'd feel that they might entice me.

    My first impression is that it's like asking them to mix the best parts of DT with best parts of i9, and ending up with Torch. Slightly heavier, with more features such as 20mm front compatibility, and gotta go with the i9 spokes. I wanna see what they mean by bearing arrangement and the new drivesystem. Maybe find a pic with the freehub body pulled off, and maybe the axle too.
    I9 Torch uses the same 3 x 3 pawl system with a 60 tooth ratchet for a 120 poe engagement. The rest of the hub has been significantly changed but the drive system is the same.

  15. #15
    I like rigid MTB.
    Reputation: edle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    159
    What about Phil Wood and White Industries hubs ?
    Are they in the same league with the I9/CK/DT Swiss ?

  16. #16
    Single Speed Junkie
    Reputation: crux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,108
    Quote Originally Posted by edle View Post
    What about Phil Wood and White Industries hubs ?
    Are they in the same league with the I9/CK/DT Swiss ?
    Some what. Both Phil Wood & W.I. make really nice hubs. The difference is the hubs are going to use a freewheel where as the I9 & king are going to use cogs. Having built up several high end wheels for my money I9 is the way to go. The drag is reduced with the newer hub design or if you are so inclined update the large bearing over to ceramic and it will reduce drag as well.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Whisperer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,214
    Quote Originally Posted by crux View Post
    Some what. Both Phil Wood & W.I. make really nice hubs. The difference is the hubs are going to use a freewheel where as the I9 & king are going to use cogs.
    On single speed hubs...

    On multi-speed hubs both Phil Wood and White Industries hubs use freehub bodies. They are very solid US made hubs and easy to service but if you're looking for high POE hubs, these are not the best choice.

  18. #18
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,349
    I ordered my Chris King S.S. rear hub with Stainless driveshell, instead of Aluminum. Maybe this is only an option for ss? Any more input about White Industries? I Have always wanted to try WI hubs.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mazspeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,056
    I have ridden all 3 hubs to the death. All of them are great hubs. You won't go wrong with I9-CK or DS. If I was building the ultimate wheel I would start with I9 with King being a very close second. I enjoy the engagement and rebuild ability of both I9 and CK. You do need a special tool with I9 but their parts are becoming more available as time goes on. CK is everywhere which makes it really nice. DS is a fabulous hub, but doesn't have the engagement, and if you're building a high dollar wheel, you have to start with either I9 or CK. I would even toss Hadley in the mix. That hub is stout, strong, but a touch heavier than the rest, but it's also cheaper. The drag factor on I9 and King goes away when it's broken in, and it does take a while to break in, but that's a good thing. I have 1 CK wheel set and 1 I9 wheel set and looking for another CC I9 wheel set. You will not be disappointed in either hub.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Whisperer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,214
    Quote Originally Posted by hoolie View Post
    I ordered my Chris King S.S. rear hub with Stainless driveshell, instead of Aluminum. Maybe this is only an option for ss? Any more input about White Industries? I Have always wanted to try WI hubs.
    Single speed WI is a freewheel hub, but they also make really nice freewheels including their 72 poe trails versions.

    Multi-speed WI is a 3 pawl, 24 poe hub with either a very durable cro-mo freehub body or a lighter but still more durable than aluminum Ti freehub body. They are solid. But the lower POE and only two color options (black and polished) makes them less popular than others.

  21. #21
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Bike Whisperer View Post
    I9 Torch uses the same 3 x 3 pawl system with a 60 tooth ratchet for a 120 poe engagement. The rest of the hub has been significantly changed but the drive system is the same.
    Sorta.

    The pawl geometry/springs are all new. Still six of them, still three engaged at one time, still 3° engagement.

    I have not torn into mine to look, but Jake at I9 gave me a rundown on all the features.

    You can sorta see the new springs in the drawing below:

    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3¢ every time I post on MTBR.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    Neither, DT.
    Ditto.

  23. #23
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,858
    Quote Originally Posted by teamdicky View Post
    Sorta.

    The pawl geometry/springs are all new. Still six of them, still three engaged at one time, still 3° engagement.

    I have not torn into mine to look, but Jake at I9 gave me a rundown on all the features.


    I'm swapping the XD driver for a standard cassette body freehub.

    Since I had the thing out of the hub, I figured I'd give you a look inside.

    You can see a bunch of differences (BTW: the new body comes off WITHOUT tools).



    Previous design:

    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3¢ every time I post on MTBR.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Whisperer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,214
    New one looks less burly...sacrificing strength for less drag and lower weight?

  25. #25
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,858
    The big bearing was the major cause of drag... eliminated.

    The springs were prone to damage, especially during rebuilds if hamfistedly done (I did it once... oops).

    Fewer small parts.

    Easier to maintain. Just pop it off, clean it up, and stick it back on. No tools.

    I remember something about the angle of engagement on the pawls...

    Reduced the points of contact on pawls from three to two.

    Certainly not less burly, past the looks of it.
    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3¢ every time I post on MTBR.

  26. #26
    West Chester, PA
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,923
    Quote Originally Posted by teamdicky View Post
    The big bearing was the major cause of drag... eliminated.

    The springs were prone to damage, especially during rebuilds if hamfistedly done (I did it once... oops).

    Fewer small parts.

    Easier to maintain. Just pop it off, clean it up, and stick it back on. No tools.

    I remember something about the angle of engagement on the pawls...

    Reduced the points of contact on pawls from three to two.

    Certainly not less burly, past the looks of it.
    My amateur engineer alter-ego doesn't like how the pawls mount to the freehub on the new design. Looks like a downgrade to the standard way of doing it. The "C" that the pawls slide into... that thin area at the top... it's deformed or cracked on other brands of hubs. On the old version it looks like it would be nearly impossible for the torque on the pawls to deform the mounting points. I don't know... just talking out loud. Time will tell.

  27. #27
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,858
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    My amateur engineer alter-ego doesn't like how the pawls mount to the freehub on the new design. Looks like a downgrade to the standard way of doing it. The "C" that the pawls slide into... that thin area at the top... it's deformed or cracked on other brands of hubs. On the old version it looks like it would be nearly impossible for the torque on the pawls to deform the mounting points. I don't know... just talking out loud. Time will tell.
    The only thing holding the springs in before were the springs. They just sat in the saddles.
    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3¢ every time I post on MTBR.

  28. #28
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    My impression is that it looks simplified. I wouldn't say it's worse. I consider it smarter. The older one looked intricate, more like art-level quality. This one seems more for performance. It's not like the free hub bearings carries a significant the load, such as from the wheel, as the load is carried from the rim, to the spokes, to the hub flanges, to the hub shell bearings, to the axle. Larger diameter bearings with more bearings in them might be more durable and carry loads better, but smaller diameter bearings with fewer balls, spin more freely. Good choice in bearings if you want speed. Looks like the freewheel mech got bigger, while the bearings got smaller, and they fit the biggest axles that they could in them. They simplified the hub shell too to reduce mill time, and probably don't even need their fancy 4-axis machine to make it, maybe reserving it to mill/tap the spoke holes.

    Not sure if they are 100% correct about that particular large diameter bearing being the culprit for drag. I thought the drag came from simply having 6 pawls with more surface area contact and pawl springs absorbing the spinning inertia, without returning it. Fewer pawls and lighter springs = less drag when coasting. The believe that the axle doesn't spin and the freehub bearing don't spin when coasting, only the hub shell bearings do. The freehub bearings turn when you pedal or backpedal--a large diameter bearing on the freehub body is definitely overkill.

    Interesting thing about the King's hub design is that the drive side hub shell bearing rests on the freehub shell, and with the freehub shell also somewhat solidly connected to the drivering inside the hub, it makes the freehub carry a good deal of the load, unlike DT's design, able to spread the load out over wider spaced bearings. Likely part of the reason why King hubs are considered durable. Still, I wish they were faster.
    Last edited by Varaxis; 02-28-2013 at 03:27 PM.

  29. #29
    I wonder why?
    Reputation: i1dry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    552
    I've got CK, I9 (both proprietary and classic), and DT hubs. I like to do a lot of technical riding so "instant" engagement is more important to me than weight or drag. All of them are quality hubs though.

    Based on my experiences, I'd rate these hubs as follows:

    Engagement: Best - I9, second - CK, third - DT
    Drag: Least - DT, second - I9, third - CK
    Durability: Best - I9, second - CK, third - DT
    Serviceability: Easiest - CK, close second - I9 and DT
    Customer service: Best I9, poor second CK, and poorest by far - DT
    Weight: Lightest - DT, second CK, third I9

    I've had zero problems with the I9 hubs, but have had both CK and DT rear hub shells crack. The CK cracked around a rotor bolt hole and a DT shell cracked catastrophically (i.e. the shell basically broke into three or four pieces). Both CK and DT ultimately replaced the hubs, but both companies were a huge hassle do deal with on top of being really slow to respond to communications. CK took at least 4 months to replace the hub and DT took over a year.

    Based on my experiences, if I could only use one of the three, I'd go with the I-9s (either proprietary or classic).

    i1dry?
    ...some drink from the fountain of knowledge..some only gargle...!!

  30. #30
    reading comprehension wat
    Reputation: dv8xin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    328
    Tried to find out how fast my CK hubs rolled and got the impression that they weren't that fast. With a caveman-like test, in terms of scientific accuracy, some cheap shimano hubs rolled the fastest, followed by my beater commuter road bike's hubs, followed by DT, and dead last was CK.

    Riding on the trail, it was weighing on my mind that they were slow. About 4-5 miles in, I tried loosening the preload a bit that allowed a slight amount of play; I don't know if it warmed up and the lube got thin or what, but it felt a lot faster. I took out the axle at home to check out how smooth and free the bearings were, individually. They weren't silent, and sounded kind of clacky, but I think that's just the retainer making sounds. I took off the retaining ring and the black rubber seal and inspected it closely (under high magnification) and it looked clean and smooth. Before putting some lube on the bearings, I spun them, and noticed that the bearings spun much more freely. It wouldn't free spin for more than a fraction of a rotation, but compared to the other side with the seal still on, there was a vast difference in drag.

    I think CK should consider switching from their rubber and retaining ring seal to something else, to address the excessive seal drag. If you're an XC racer, they might be costing you a few seconds/watts due to the weight and drag, but still plenty of good reason for other people to get them, as long as they value things such as longevity, precision, and general craftsmanship.

    Edit for clarity.
    Last edited by dv8xin; 03-14-2013 at 01:52 AM.

  31. #31
    reading comprehension wat
    Reputation: dv8xin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    328
    In other words, I kind of agree with the others. CK is heavy, expensive, and rolls relatively slow, but is US made, made to be durable/long-lasting, serviceable, comes in many colors, and is from a company that run in a respectable manner. Money going to them is money going into good principles. If you demand outright performance, check out another brand. If you appreciate precision and American products made to last, as opposed to being made cost effectively (ie. cheaply) and disposable, CK is a good choice.

    If I were to do it again, even I would have a hard time choosing. I would probably just have gone XTR Trail, since they were on sale for $450/set. Or Easton Haven Carbon, since they're on sale for about $1000-1200; I would prefer one with the 142x12 rear, since it comes with the M1-121 hub with that's compatible with that spacer and preload fix, but I run a QR rear on my frame and the sale sets are QR rear only, which sadly, have that loose preload adjuster issue, and even with a NQA guarantee, having such issues isn't cool. For 29ers, I dunno... wait for an Enve/DT 240s/DT Aerolite or CX Ray combo to pop up used for around $1500-1650, I guess.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    564
    there is no better hub made than chris king. sets with over 20k miles made in the 90s are still going strong after rebuilds today.

    you also have extremely strong resale should you ever want to sell them

    king hubs literally can be a multi decade investment

  33. #33
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,939
    King all day long
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    King all day long
    They just need to come out with the frickin' XX1 freehub body. Actually this is the only thing preventing me from blowing a grand, so maybe they should wait. Yeah... my wife thinks they should wait.

  35. #35
    Dab-O-Matic
    Reputation: Simplemind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    They just need to come out with the frickin' XX1 freehub body. Actually this is the only thing preventing me from blowing a grand, so maybe they should wait. Yeah... my wife thinks they should wait.
    Has anyone talked to CK re a release date of XX1 compatibility?

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Simplemind View Post
    Has anyone talked to CK re a release date of XX1 compatibility?
    Someone earlier posted not in 2013. I just went 1x10. Working great!

  37. #37
    Dab-O-Matic
    Reputation: Simplemind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Someone earlier posted not in 2013. I just went 1x10. Working great!
    Thanks, may have to go with Project 321 then. Running 1X10 now, but the XX1 not only gives an extra gear, but the noise and chain slap is reduced.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Simplemind View Post
    Thanks, may have to go with Project 321 then. Running 1X10 now, but the XX1 not only gives an extra gear, but the noise and chain slap is reduced.
    I'm using a Wolftooth Components chainring and an XTR Shadow Plus rear derailleur, thereby capturing both of those features. All I'm missing is the extra gear.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,822
    I've been using both. They're both great, the I9 has bit less drag while coasting. While pedaling, about the same. The CK's easily use off the shelf spokes. The I9's use propriety spokes. However, if you use the right hub, I9's are able to use off the shelf spokes. I've had many, many, many years with my CK's without any kind of issue. The I9's are still only about a year of use. In the end, I think I like CK's better because of their reliability, ease of maintenance.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    300

    Chris King or Industry 9 hubs ?????

    I9 Torch Classic. Chris King is probably a better design, but you pay for it in weight. The I9 torch is the first high engagement hub that is also light.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  41. #41
    Dab-O-Matic
    Reputation: Simplemind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by kroe View Post
    I9 Torch Classic. Chris King is probably a better design, but you pay for it in weight. The I9 torch is the first high engagement hub that is also light.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I never read anyone arguing with CK quality. However since their current design doesn't lend itself to XX1, a solution will not come soon enough for me.
    I like the Torch design on paper and if the quality is up to par with my current I9's, then that's probably one of the best current options.

  42. #42
    MarkyMark
    Reputation: MarkMass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,152
    I went with Kings on DT Swiss XRC330 carbon hoops using Phil Wood (Sapim) double-butted spokes and Sapim brass nipples. Thanks to Ford at Tread in Campbell, CA for building these up for me.

    Front w/15mm SD hub was 615 grams
    Rear w/135mm QR hub was 850 grams

    I put a Conti Mountain King on the front and a Conti Race King on the rear. The first ride was this past weekend at Demo in Santa Cruz and it was a success. My GF says the new wheels rolls a lot faster than the Reynolds Carbon AM wheelset (w/ F=Mutanoraptor, R=Crossmark) it replaced. The Kings built up lighter than the Reynolds, but I was surprised since the King rear hub still had drag from being brand new.

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/40673922@N02/8707786035/" title="DT Swiss XRC330 w/ Chris King Hubs by markmass, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8558/8707786035_2f872440f0.jpg" width="500" height="375" alt="DT Swiss XRC330 w/ Chris King Hubs"></a>

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/40673922@N02/8707784807/" title="DT Swiss XRC330s w/ Chris King Hubs by markmass, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8139/8707784807_3771a26c2b.jpg" width="500" height="375" alt="DT Swiss XRC330s w/ Chris King Hubs"></a>

    I'll probably try the I9 Torch hubs on my next set of wheels.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bailey44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    755
    Since I just went with XX1, I gave my wife my CK wheels.

    I went with Crossmax just because I have never tried them.





    I still have CK on my roadie






    Quote Originally Posted by Simplemind View Post
    Thanks, may have to go with Project 321 then. Running 1X10 now, but the XX1 not only gives an extra gear, but the noise and chain slap is reduced.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: flipnidaho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,691
    Have had all of the mentioned rear hubs... A few sets of CK's, DT-Swiss 240, 340, 440, Hugi, I9 Original and Torch, Hadley, Hope, Shimano, etc.... I would rank them as follows:
    I9 Torch- I've only had them a few months but they have way less drag than the original and is almost DT-Swiss 240 light.
    DT-Swiss- I've used a version of them for the past 20 years. None have failed (including the original Hugi hubs I'm still using on a commuter). The POE needs improvement however.
    CK- Heavier and more drag but bulletproof.
    Shimano- Best spinning hubs when adjusted perfectly.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    438
    is the I9 Torch hub engagement as fantastic as it seems it should be? i have a Hadley and love it. i can't help but wonder what even greater engagement would be like, on a lighter hub yet. thinking of the next bike/wheelset...

  46. #46
    Stand back
    Reputation: dbabuser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,158
    Quote Originally Posted by racebum View Post
    there is no better hub made than chris king. sets with over 20k miles made in the 90s are still going strong after rebuilds today.

    you also have extremely strong resale should you ever want to sell them

    king hubs literally can be a multi decade investment
    Until the industry standards change. Again.
    Golden Bike Park

    Golden Connector Trails need your support!

  47. #47
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,939

    Chris King or Industry 9 hubs ?????

    Quote Originally Posted by dbabuser View Post
    Until the industry standards change. Again.
    Right... when industry standards change CK hubs are pre-programmed to self destruct. Erasing years of reliable service instantly.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    438
    today on the trail i came across a guy who was on a very unique bike. a custom Zinn. he was 6'9" and 300 pounds. i was eyeballing his ride and we got talking. every thing on it was specialized for his size. Chris Holm wheels, custom 210 cranks, etc. 39 pound trail bike 29er. he told me he routinely broke hubs and taco'd wheels for a couple years when he first started riding 10 yrs ago, then he got the Holm's with King hubs and he said that was the end of that. i like my Hadley's but it seems it would be hard to argue with the durability of King's given that giant's experience. he was a big technical climber too, which is where he said he would break hubs. visiting from north Vancouver, so he knows steeps.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,037
    Project 321 now has newer lighter than ever at 285g for rear hub with i9 innards, they seam to have better end caps and bearing design with adjustable preload. Project 321 are great to deal with.

  50. #50
    Chris Bling
    Reputation: dustyduke22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,380
    I have had a set of Kings since 2007. Still rolling strong. I would like to see some other hubs that will last that long and still perform as they did when they were new.

    They are few and far between
    The obsession of wheels fused with the passion of cycling
    Affordable Custom Wheels

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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