1.5 to 1 1/8 headset- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 34 of 34
  1. #1
    GERONIMO!!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    138

    1.5 to 1 1/8 headset

    what is the best option for reducing your headset?

    I have a fsa 1.5 headset. is there anything i can put in that to reduce it to 1 1/8? if not what are my best options
    and please post pictures of them if you can
    thanks matt

  2. #2
    Will to Win
    Reputation: albertomannil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    708
    Chris King Devolution

    2008 Transition Dirtbag Custom
    2003 Schwinn Moab 2 Singlespeed

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hardtails Are Better's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    6,294
    Quote Originally Posted by albertomannil
    Chris King Devolution

    Expensive.


    I've got e13 reducer cups with a Cane Creek IS2. I like it, but if I was getting one now, it'd probably be a Hope.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,280
    I have a Cane Creek double flush. Works great!
    Go BIG or Go HOME

  5. #5
    Will to Win
    Reputation: albertomannil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    708
    he said nothing about $
    2008 Transition Dirtbag Custom
    2003 Schwinn Moab 2 Singlespeed

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hardtails Are Better's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    6,294
    Quote Originally Posted by albertomannil
    he said nothing about $
    So you assume price is utterly irrelevant.


    I actually think the Hope is a better headset, regardless of price. For one thing, it's lighter. It's got a lower stack height, and a better system of securing the upper bearing.

  7. #7
    Will to Win
    Reputation: albertomannil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtails Are Better
    So you assume price is utterly irrelevant.


    I actually think the Hope is a better headset, regardless of price. For one thing, it's lighter. It's got a lower stack height, and a better system of securing the upper bearing.
    you may be right, though I like the looks of that Chris King hehe...

  8. #8
    General Rabble-Rouser
    Reputation: Karupshun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtails Are Better
    So you assume price is utterly irrelevant.


    I actually think the Hope is a better headset, regardless of price. For one thing, it's lighter. It's got a lower stack height, and a better system of securing the upper bearing.

    But it's still not Chris Bling

    Chris King is the biggest tree hugger ever running a top notch facility. Another plus if you care about that stuff

  9. #9
    GERONIMO!!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    138
    is there anythjing i can use in my current 1.5 headset to reduce it

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: misctwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    3,034
    Quote Originally Posted by matthew4president
    is there anythjing i can use in my current 1.5 headset to reduce it

    nope. i have an orbit extreme 1.5-1.125 zerostack, brand new if you want it? cheap, pm me.

  11. #11
    Gold it's the new Pink!
    Reputation: Crimson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    535
    Matt I highly doubt there is anything for you. Buy a new headset and stay away from reducer cups get a proper reducing headset. Less chance off multiple parts of moving.

    I personally have the Chris King De Evolution 1.5 to 1 1/8" and love it.

    Crimson

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Crimson
    Matt I highly doubt there is anything for you. Buy a new headset and stay away from reducer cups get a proper reducing headset. Less chance off multiple parts of moving.

    I personally have the Chris King De Evolution 1.5 to 1 1/8" and love it.

    Crimson
    If you are refering to cups that you press a standard 1 1/8 into, then I agree with you, however the e-13 set-up is absolutely awesome and offers several MAJOR improvement over the king.

    1 You can put several different grades and materials of bearing from several manufacturers into the e-13 cup....from standard carbon steel to stainless to ceramic.

    2 the e-13 option has a propper compression ring that sollidly attaches/clamps the steer tube to the the upper bearing race. King cannot use this method as it is patented and their one piece top cap is a work around designed in the days of 3" DH forks with very little radial force appled to the headset. This design is fault prone and the reason many king headsets continually creak and loosen when used on longer (5" +) travel forks.

    3 The stack height of the 1.5 king is absolutely ridiculous. One major benefit to a 1.5 headtube with a 1 1/8 steerer is the adjustability in headtube angle and bottom bracket height to fit personal preference and terrain. Bar height is also SIGNIFICANTLY higher with a headset like the king and again this is quite important to propper set-up of long travel DH bikes.

    I have owned several CK headsets (have one on the little bike currently) but in all honesty, I would not ever buy one again, even at cost, because of the poor design (quality materials, yes, but..) and their poorly though out aproaches to anything 'new' or not strictly XC in nature.

  13. #13
    Ideas Above My Station...
    Reputation: Orange-Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,506
    CK devolution.

    Never had a problem in all my days of hammering. I know a few peeps with E13 issues, but hey, different strokes for different folks.

    STack height isn't an issue for me, feels great.

  14. #14
    N* Bomber Crew
    Reputation: Raptordude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,271
    The thing about the Devolution is that it looks as if the stack height is sort of high. Since you're reducing from 1.5 to 1 1/8th you may as well take advantage of it and give yourself a low stack height, granted you want one.

    I ran a traditional No Threadset Chris King on my older Foes 4X bike, I run a e13 Zero Stack and FSA IS Headset on my DHR. I honestly can't tell the difference between the two.

    Choose at your own discretion, but there are lots of options out there.
    Northstar 2008 Riding Crew

  15. #15
    Ideas Above My Station...
    Reputation: Orange-Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,506
    Quote Originally Posted by davep
    I have owned several CK headsets (have one on the little bike currently) but in all honesty, I would not ever buy one again, even at cost, because of the poor design (quality materials, yes, but..) and their poorly though out aproaches to anything 'new' or not strictly XC in nature.
    With all due respect i think thats utter crap. I have had 2 CK headsets, one which outlasted my last bike, and two hubs, both still running maintenance free. I have no idea where 'poor design' comes from, do you design hubs / headsets yourself?

    How many CK products have failed you, and if so why did you not take them up on their 5 year/ ten year warranties?

    I've never had hubs or headsets so good before, and certainly think that they are worth the money when i see my mates parts breaking and them missing out on rides. But hey, if you don't like em then thats your bag, just giving the other side of the coin.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange-Goblin
    With all due respect i think thats utter crap. I have had 2 CK headsets, one which outlasted my last bike, and two hubs, both still running maintenance free. I have no idea where 'poor design' comes from, do you design hubs / headsets yourself?

    How many CK products have failed you, and if so why did you not take them up on their 5 year/ ten year warranties?

    I've never had hubs or headsets so good before, and certainly think that they are worth the money when i see my mates parts breaking and them missing out on rides. But hey, if you don't like em then thats your bag, just giving the other side of the coin.


    Engineer, not a designer....and I have seem MANY faulty products from CK (of course CK won't admit to the majority of them as for the most part, they come down to a 'our way vs every one elses way' arguement....and obviously CK thinks their way is the correct way...so they put the fault on frame or cassette or other mfg) BTW, wear and tear is not a warranty issue ie broken axles, worn out top caps, loosening hubs...).

    For instance, they use a non-standard headset skirt diameter that causes problems with many frames (standard Ck headset will not work in a Specialized frame), The hubs for at least 10 years have continually self loosened (only just recently fixed, by taking campy's design). The standard aluminum rear axle will break quite easily if you ride outside pure XC. The cassette carrier is made out of very low quality aluminum and will be destroyed by many cassettes. The cassette carrier is of non-standard shape, requiring a 'special' CK lock nut or a spacer (king blames this on Shimano..yet there is no issue on any other mfg hub). The drive side (I think) lock nut is smooth, not knurled, allowing the hub to slip in the dropout and cocking the wheel sideways...the only fix is the HD axle and fun bolts (proprietary threads..so you have to buy from CK) for several hundred more dollars on top of one of the most expensive hubs made. The new 150mm rear hub has a non-standard drive side offset (distance from cassette carrier to the drop out lock nut) that places the first cog about an additional 1/4 inches away from the drop-out. This changes the chainline, and could cause problems with the chain droping between the cassette and dropout.........

    The top cap that they had to design to work around the 'aheadset' patent is a poor design plain and simple. It was designed when forks were short, and people were not putting the kind of forces into a bike that they are now. As I said earlier, their materials and workmanship is top notch....it is that their designs are old and not suited for many current applications. I have written several long explinations about the CK headest design here on MTBR, mostly trying to explain to die hard CK fans, why they cant get their headset to stay tight or stop creaking. If you care to read it, you can search.

    It is great that you are so gung-ho on CK, but I suspect that you (much like CK) would not admit to a problem even if ther was one because of your bias.

    They make beautiful parts that work well in light weight XC applications. When you move significantly beyond that usage, their are MUCH better options that were designed from the ground up to deal with todays longer travel, larger force riding.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,113
    Watch out guys. We got ourselves an engineer in the forums now!

    Talk as much as you want bud, but 2 CK headsets have outlasted any of the bikes/parts you prolly own. One is 10 and the other is 12y.o. I'm 250 and ride and raced in the Mid atlantic. Do you think these fixed rocks with my weight forcing that fork up/down, fore/aft isn't taking a toll on the HS?

    "because of your bias"
    Who's calling the kettle black? That is the stupidest thing posted yet! If you're so great yourself and can judge everything so greatly then why not pull out the caliper and micrometer while you're on the trail and tell CK what he's doing wrong? I'm a cnc operator and cut anything from 1040 CS to brass accuratley down to .0002" ( 2 ten-thousands of an inch). Their tolerances are just as good. To give you an idea of how accurate that is, a human hair is .003 (3 Thousands of an inch) Take a hair and divide it by 15 and that's my tolerance. Am I "bais"? Nope, I'm telling you what I've seen by CK and I have the proof on my bikes.

    "standard Ck headset will not work in a Specialized frame" But they work on every other frame!
    BUT!!! This is obviously CK's problem cause "S" isn't following an industry standard or something?

    Fahn
    Hubbard Bike Club

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,130
    I have a CK headset in a specialized frame.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Blonde's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by matthew4president
    is there anythjing i can use in my current 1.5 headset to reduce it
    Yes there is. The FSA 1.5 and 1.5R headsets are identical except for the topcap, wedge, and crown race. These are available from FSA for less than $20.

  20. #20
    Freetard.
    Reputation: Nut!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    670
    Quote Originally Posted by 006_007
    I have a CK headset in a specialized frame.
    Same, This is the first I've heard about it nor working.
    Quote Originally Posted by Khemical
    Those cables on the Socom look flexy

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    Watch out guys. We got ourselves an engineer in the forums now!

    Talk as much as you want bud, but 2 CK headsets have outlasted any of the bikes/parts you prolly own. One is 10 and the other is 12y.o. I'm 250 and ride and raced in the Mid atlantic. Do you think these fixed rocks with my weight forcing that fork up/down, fore/aft isn't taking a toll on the HS?

    "because of your bias"
    Who's calling the kettle black? That is the stupidest thing posted yet! If you're so great yourself and can judge everything so greatly then why not pull out the caliper and micrometer while you're on the trail and tell CK what he's doing wrong? I'm a cnc operator and cut anything from 1040 CS to brass accuratley down to .0002" ( 2 ten-thousands of an inch). Their tolerances are just as good. To give you an idea of how accurate that is, a human hair is .003 (3 Thousands of an inch) Take a hair and divide it by 15 and that's my tolerance. Am I "bais"? Nope, I'm telling you what I've seen by CK and I have the proof on my bikes.

    "standard Ck headset will not work in a Specialized frame" But they work on every other frame!
    BUT!!! This is obviously CK's problem cause "S" isn't following an industry standard or something?

    Fahn

    Not sure what your presumption or prejudice against me because I have a degree in Engineering....Should I make similar assumptions about you because of your job 'bud'?? Or should I just assume because of you job that you don have much of an ecucation???

    Fortunately I dont make those kind of judgements of poeple I dont know.


    Anyways,
    Please show me where I made any mention of tolerances, or quality of materials or mfg? It is their design/engineering that is not up to par with current loads seen by long travel bikes. I could draw you a FBD with input forces and the reaction forces if you like. In the end, there is a resultant force upwards on the top cap of a king headset from each and every input at the fork that IS NOT THERE on other headset designs.

    Open your eyes, do a little searching around and you will find many stories of CK headsets that loosen, top caps that wear,and resulting galling causing creaks when used on with a long travel fork. If cane creek did not own the patent on collet clamp devices in headsets, you can bet that King would use it, but they cannot.

    I own a King HS currently and it works fine on a shorter travel bike (but had continual issues on several longer travel bikes and gone through several top caps). I purchaced my first king headset over 20 years ago. I have been building, riding, and racing bikes since the early 80s....I do have a little bit of experience in what I am talking about. I also have the physics, material science, kinematics and mathematical background to be able to understand the forces involved and how this all works...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Nut!
    Same, This is the first I've heard about it nor working.
    http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/sho...alized+headset

    http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/sho...alized+headset

  23. #23
    Ideas Above My Station...
    Reputation: Orange-Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,506
    Quote Originally Posted by davep
    Engineer, not a designer....and I have seem MANY faulty products from CK (of course CK won't admit to the majority of them as for the most part, they come down to a 'our way vs every one elses way' arguement....and obviously CK thinks their way is the correct way...so they put the fault on frame or cassette or other mfg) BTW, wear and tear is not a warranty issue ie broken axles, worn out top caps, loosening hubs...).

    For instance, they use a non-standard headset skirt diameter that causes problems with many frames (standard Ck headset will not work in a Specialized frame), The hubs for at least 10 years have continually self loosened (only just recently fixed, by taking campy's design). The standard aluminum rear axle will break quite easily if you ride outside pure XC. The cassette carrier is made out of very low quality aluminum and will be destroyed by many cassettes. The cassette carrier is of non-standard shape, requiring a 'special' CK lock nut or a spacer (king blames this on Shimano..yet there is no issue on any other mfg hub). The drive side (I think) lock nut is smooth, not knurled, allowing the hub to slip in the dropout and cocking the wheel sideways...the only fix is the HD axle and fun bolts (proprietary threads..so you have to buy from CK) for several hundred more dollars on top of one of the most expensive hubs made. The new 150mm rear hub has a non-standard drive side offset (distance from cassette carrier to the drop out lock nut) that places the first cog about an additional 1/4 inches away from the drop-out. This changes the chainline, and could cause problems with the chain droping between the cassette and dropout.........

    The top cap that they had to design to work around the 'aheadset' patent is a poor design plain and simple. It was designed when forks were short, and people were not putting the kind of forces into a bike that they are now. As I said earlier, their materials and workmanship is top notch....it is that their designs are old and not suited for many current applications. I have written several long explinations about the CK headest design here on MTBR, mostly trying to explain to die hard CK fans, why they cant get their headset to stay tight or stop creaking. If you care to read it, you can search.

    It is great that you are so gung-ho on CK, but I suspect that you (much like CK) would not admit to a problem even if ther was one because of your bias.

    They make beautiful parts that work well in light weight XC applications. When you move significantly beyond that usage, their are MUCH better options that were designed from the ground up to deal with todays longer travel, larger force riding.
    Thankyou for backing up your remarks with actual references, that is genuinely appreciated, rather than just flippant sweeping remarks often posted.
    However, none of the things you mention have ever resulted in a problem for me, so regardless of wether these issues annoy you, or you think they are substandard, they have no real-world negative effect - that i can see.

    The only evidence i have to go on is the fact that all of my Ck products have been faultless over a period of years. How this makes me bias i have no clue. I in no way consider myself bias, no more than yourself. I am certainly not a fan boy, if i do have a problem, i will be taking it up directly and expect it to be sorted.

    I have also never come across anyone who has had a problem with CK, whereas many of my fellow riders have had issues with HS's from E13, FSA, Hope and the like, and plenty of problems with other Hubs.

  24. #24
    Ideas Above My Station...
    Reputation: Orange-Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,506
    Wow. Those two links in no way back up your arguement. Congrats!!!

    The first has one guy saying he installed it with a punch (Wrong) and another saying he cranked it up too much, (User Error) and then concludes that Spec' blame CK, and CK blame spec'.

    The second mentions that CK and Specialized have 'different' tolerances and mentioned that CK make a special HS for the SX Trail.

    Where in all of this does it say anything about poor design by CK or factually back up your points?

  25. #25
    -C-
    -C- is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    567
    I wouldn't have a problem with running a CK on a short travel bike <100mm on the front.

    I actually have a 1.5" CK Devo on my big bike now. Would I buy another? No. As others have said, the lack of compression ring may have been fine years ago, but there are far better options available now.

    I to have suffered the infamous 'CK Creak' and the other common issue on a longer travel application of the scored steerer tube. Which is only light currently but its only ever going to get worse...

    I'll probably be swapping the CK out for one of the new Hope 1.5" Reducers; lighter, no crazy high stack height and replacable bearings, and pretty good on the VFM scale.

    The worthless US$ made the CK seem attractive at the time. However its not all about price.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange-Goblin
    Wow. Those two links in no way back up your arguement. Congrats!!!

    The first has one guy saying he installed it with a punch (Wrong) and another saying he cranked it up too much, (User Error) and then concludes that Spec' blame CK, and CK blame spec'.

    The second mentions that CK and Specialized have 'different' tolerances and mentioned that CK make a special HS for the SX Trail.

    Where in all of this does it say anything about poor design by CK or factually back up your points?
    I said that king headsets were not compatible with 'S' frames, and someone asked for confirmation of this. The two links have two responses from two 'S' dealers explaining that due to the 'smaller than normal' King headset skirt diameter, they were not to be used in 'S" frames and would void the warranty.

  27. #27
    Living Ghetto Fabulous!
    Reputation: Uncle Cliffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,746
    My 2 cents on this is CK could've designed a flush mount that IMO would've looked cleaner, and reduced stack height...

    The current design is too "fat" looking. I admire it's heritage, but the fat cups are behind the times for this type of design. The Cane Creek Double XC flush headset is much cleaner looking and does a great job... I know the King is built nice and all, but I feel I'm digging deep in my credit account for the CK name.

    If I had a 1.5 steerer, maybe.
    Quote Originally Posted by kidwoo
    The internet sounds like a tough place to ride.

  28. #28
    GERONIMO!!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    138
    thanks for all help
    davep i appreciate the info on CK whether or not everyone else does

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dascro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,149
    Sorry to bump this but one thing always comes to mind when I hear these headset arguments. How many headsets do people go through? I ride in the humid rainy mountains of PA and never worry about my headsets. I have a CK on my old xc bike. It works well. I have a CC s3 on my long travel bike, also works fine. No doubts the CK nicer looking and seems to be manufactured very very well. Though I understand the creaking issue with longer travel forks. I agree CC has a superior DESIGN and will only buy them from now on. I have one that has never been touched in many years and it works fine. For the price CC is hard to beat. But like I said...

    How many headsets do you guys need to replace? I have never needed to replace one. Never replaced a cheap aheadset or an expensive CK. Foolish argument IMO.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: irish_sloth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by davep

    2 the e-13 option has a propper compression ring that sollidly attaches/clamps the steer tube to the the upper bearing race. King cannot use this method as it is patented and their one piece top cap is a work around designed in the days of 3" DH forks with very little radial force appled to the headset. This design is fault prone and the reason many king headsets continually creak and loosen when used on longer (5" +) travel forks.
    doesthe e.13 come with a compression ring? I just got the cups....

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by irish_sloth
    doesthe e.13 come with a compression ring? I just got the cups....
    The e-13 is a pair of adapter rings (cups) that allow the use of any 'IS" headset. So FSA orbit IS or cane creek IS -2, 6 or 8. The compression ring, crown race, top cap and bearings are all part of the headset.

  32. #32
    Fearing the Reaper
    Reputation: GLIDE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    192
    Sunline also makes a reducer HS.... really light and flush.

    I'm running the e13 reducer and CC IS2. Perfectly fine.

    Couldn't even consider the CK Devo b/c of the stack. Looks sexy, though, but like has been said.... probably more bang for your buck elsewhere.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,013

    Nice retort!

    Quote Originally Posted by davep
    Not sure what your presumption or prejudice against me because I have a degree in Engineering....Should I make similar assumptions about you because of your job 'bud'?? Or should I just assume because of you job that you don have much of an ecucation???

    Fortunately I dont make those kind of judgements of poeple I dont know.


    Anyways,
    Please show me where I made any mention of tolerances, or quality of materials or mfg? It is their design/engineering that is not up to par with current loads seen by long travel bikes. I could draw you a FBD with input forces and the reaction forces if you like. In the end, there is a resultant force upwards on the top cap of a king headset from each and every input at the fork that IS NOT THERE on other headset designs.

    Open your eyes, do a little searching around and you will find many stories of CK headsets that loosen, top caps that wear,and resulting galling causing creaks when used on with a long travel fork. If cane creek did not own the patent on collet clamp devices in headsets, you can bet that King would use it, but they cannot.

    I own a King HS currently and it works fine on a shorter travel bike (but had continual issues on several longer travel bikes and gone through several top caps). I purchaced my first king headset over 20 years ago. I have been building, riding, and racing bikes since the early 80s....I do have a little bit of experience in what I am talking about. I also have the physics, material science, kinematics and mathematical background to be able to understand the forces involved and how this all works...
    I love it when someone throws out tolerances as if they are actually applicable to the bike industry.

    .0002" HAAA HAAA HAAA

    Good luck finding anything in this industry that is w/in .005" (that is 5 thousandths for you "commoners", see how smart I am ) of the actual intended dimension.

    They are bikes, not spaceships.

    I agree w/ King products not being the "end all". I have had tons of problems w/ their hubs loosening and headset issues as well. The stuff hasn't changed much since the early 90's. I mean come on, it is basically the same road headset Mr. King designed in the 80's w/ the exception of being threadless. Quality is top notch, but if the design is stagnant it doesn't mean much. And the stuff is uber-expensive.

    If you have a rigid mtn, or cross, or road bike, then King is sick stuff. If you have a modern 5"+ travel bike, look elsewhere.

    I know this doesn't have anything to do w/ the original post, but I couldn't help myself.

    By the way, anyone see Chris & Family @ Downieville? Damn that boy better get on the slimfast before his ticker gives out! Odviously not much bike riding going on anymore.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boogenman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,744
    Quote Originally Posted by GLIDE
    Sunline also makes a reducer HS.... really light and flush.

    .
    I'm running that headset on my M6 right now, so far so good. My other option woul dhave been the Cane Creek Double flush.

    The sunline is a pretty cool system, there is no wedge to hold everything tight, it has a washer that has two lips on it. I'm retard when it comes to explaining these kinds of things. I am sure one to you weenies will explain how the Sunline is either awesome of complete garbage.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.