Tapered Head Tubes - Debate

[One_Track_Mind]

OK, What's the deal with tapered head tubes?

This seems like a royal pain in the a$$ for minimal benefit. Please correct me if I'm wrong but the steer tube on the fork stays 1.125" while the bottom crown race/bearings change to 1.5" and the top headset bearings remain 1.125".

So, same fork, same top headset, different bottom headset/race. Is this an evil conspiracy by headset manufacturers to sell twice as many headsets? If one wants to upgrade their headset, because most stock headsets suck, you'll need parts of both a 1.125" and parts of a 1.5"... leaving you with useless parts.

This whole thing supposedly makes the front end stiffer while keeping weight to a minimum. Is the increased stiffness quantifiable? How much weight is saved by not making the whole system 1.5"? Wouldn't greater stiffness be achieved by making the steer tube of the fork a larger diameter as well?

And finally, does the design even make sense? The lower headset/crown race is the pivot point for unwanted movement. The actual movement occurs on either end of that lever, either in the fork legs or at the stem/handlebars. In terms of physics, wouldn't it be most beneficial to have the upper be larger than the bottom, to resist the leverage produced by the bottom pivot point? And if that is indeed the case then all this really boils down to is looks, marketing and sales while making life more difficult for the consumer... Your thoughts please...

[davidB]

. Please correct me if I'm wrong but the steer tube on the fork stays 1.125" while the bottom crown race/bearings change to 1.5" and the top headset bearings remain 1.125".

The steerer tube on some forks is tapered.



And yes, it's a PITA. One or the other is fine with me, not a both option.

[mtnbikej]

Acrually fork manufacturers are making steerer tubes that taper from 1 1/8" to 1.5.

[DISCO]

About as much sense as a 15mm axle, stiffer than 1 1/8ths or a regular QR but not any stronger than a 1.5 or 20mm. Pros are being able to use any stem, cons are needing a new frame/fork and limited replacement choices. having more surface area makes sense for welded frames but see less of an advantage in carbon. Not a bad thing but not enough to open my wallet any time soon.

[CalEpic]

I'm not sure there is a ton of weight savings vs a 1.5 top and bottom but one of the arguments for a tapered system is greater choice of stems in 1 1/8. It sounds like several bike manuf are going this new route now so embrace the change I suppose.

[vukyle]

Don't forget that by using a taper system, interchangeability between stems is easy.

[BH1]

I love how our industry sets "international standards" so bike companies and component manufacturers can make interchangeable frames and parts... yet those standards seem to change just as everyone is caught up with the last "international standard" update.

On the other hand, change is good so I guess we can't complain about technological innovation. Reviews I have read have reported nothing but good for this new design.

[XS NOIZ]

Remember that product evolution is good for the sport, but it's always better for the manufacturer.

[cid`]

Makes a lot of sense.. but adaptability is questioned by cost and availability.

The 1.5 bottom of the head tube allows for more material/welds/carbon thus more surface area for impact/abuse. But if it costs more and they require diff forks or what not, then that just makes it less attractive. Cost is always the driving factor for the masses..

They have those little adapter rings to reduce the 1.5 to 1.125 now a days so makes it more compatible i guess.

[Iwannabinsocal]

The stem selection is the biggest win here. I just built a 6.6 and let me tell you, 1.5 stems, with any length to them (greater than 30mm) were hard to find. I found that FSA and Syncros both made 1.5 80mm stems and went with the Syncros, but those appeared to be my only choices.

To me, the easier solution was stem manufacturers to start offering more 1.5 stem options, but the market decided it was better to make peoples existing parts less versatile so they could sell more stuff

[Drakethomas]

Being in the indudstry and designing and building lots of things from remote dampers to building rocket engines, you will come to realize a few things. Lighter is always a benefit, but to get lighter you have to get thinner, but to get thinner you need more surface area. If you increase the area 2x you increase stiffness and strength by a factor of 4.All benes if you ask me.

[SAR_boats]

The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them.

[CeeDubb]

Standardization is stagnation. Nowadays, major players in most industries do not follow a new "trend" unless there's a benefit.

Remember when 29ers seemed silly?

[cid`]

standards are good when it comes to certain items.. look at shimano for example.. f?ck it up for everyone buy doing odd end crap.. some stuff is good, but a lot never takes off due to pricing..

eg; wth would i pay 2-3 times more for centerlock rotors versus regular 6 bolt

[DirtymikeTDB]

Makes a lot of sense.. but adaptability is questioned by cost and availability.

The 1.5 bottom of the head tube allows for more material/welds/carbon thus more surface area for impact/abuse. But if it costs more and they require diff forks or what not, then that just makes it less attractive. Cost is always the driving factor for the masses..

They have those little adapter rings to reduce the 1.5 to 1.125 now a days so makes it more compatible i guess.

Strength on the bike is what the big deal is. 1.5 headtubes, tapered or straight up 1.5 allow for a stronger frame. More surface area to weld up, more stiffness in the frame itself. As far as the fork goes, You really cannot tell the difference in 1.125 and 1.5. Now the reason for the taper, is quite simple. Noone was making a good selection of stems for the 1.5 steerers. Thats all, thats the only reason we have tapered HT's. Its a better way of reinforcing a Steerer on a SC fork. The 1.125.15 steerer is the same strength as what I have on my bike, 1.125 reinforcerd, but its lighter because of the taper iteslf.

The cool part about it is, Headsets are readily available for whatever combo you want to run. waht to run a tapered steerer fork? Great, everyone is making the headsets for that, want to run a straight up 1.125 fork? Also great, those headsets are also ready to order. The manf.s already had all the parts needed to supply the demand for this. There is nothing hard or complicated about it.

This is truly the one standard I have seen in bikes in a long time that actually amkes sense.

[dirt addict]

It is just like any other standard developed in the bike industry, until it is fully accepted there will be limited availability and product choices. Also look how well accepted 1.5 steerer tubes have been. Although any 1.5 frame could be used to create a 1.5 to 1.125 stearer with the proper headset sorting out. I haven't ever ridden a tappered steerer fork, but I have als never said "ugh i wish my steerer was stiffer". I guess till everyone does it we will all gripe about it.

[cid`]

haha, after rereading it, i never once said it was stronger, good point out :P

[Chewyeti]

stem choice... thats it!

LAME.
make more 1.5 stems? Nah... that would be too easy! Lets make whole bikes that use different headset parts!

I LOVE my 1.5 straight head tube on my lyrik. Good stuff... stem choice, I did ok. They are out there... way more than 'iwannabeinsocal' alludes to.

one or the other.... girls or guys... no david bowies.

[Iwannabinsocal]

I only said I could only find ones with length from two manufacturers, there are plenty if you want on 30 or 50mm, but 80 was the longest I found and only from the two manufacturers in my OP.

[Chewyeti]

i run an FSA gravity 90, they are out there from sunline, cannondale, etc