New Chris King Headset Standard?

Chris King is trying to introduce another headset standard. This was actually brought out a few years ago, but it never took off. Do you think it can now?

"Integrated headsets" (the drop-the-bearing-into-the-headtube type) rely on frame manufacturers to make the headtube perfect. There is no way (currently) for a bike shop to ream or face one of these frames. If you get a bad frame, or if you damage your frame, your shop is helpless to fix it. Not so with Perdido™.

Perdido™ is not just a headset, it is also a Standard (Standard.pdf) that is free for everyone to use and refer to. We designed this new standard to make a strong headset/headtube that is easy for shops and manufacturers to work with. Reaming and facing tools are available directly from us (check out the tools).

For the moment, we are making Perdido™ for 1 1/8" steerers and stems only.

Some frames designed to work with the "Zero-Stack" or ZS system can be converted to Perdido™ using our tools. To provide a better interface between the headset and the frame, Perdido Headsets require a deeper and larger diameter bore than the Zero-Stack headset. This increase in bore depth may damage or weaken some frames. Not all Zero-Stack frames can be converted to Perdido, contact your frame builder to find out if your frame can be converted

Soon you can have a sexy-looking, low profile headset that won't turn into a headache. Available in all of our standard colors.

 

So, it is slightly deeper, and a bit bigger diameter than zero stack?

I am perfectly happy with Zero stack, or a 1.5 with a flush reducer headset.

Mr. King is probably a lot smarter than I, so I am sure there are benefits that I am overlooking.

How about tapered drop in 45 45 to Perdido etc all. Edit nevermind, "For 1 1/8 steerers only".

 

Call me old-school but what's the point of an integrated, Perdid or ZeroStack headset? It seems like another case of looks before function to me. I'd rather have something that is simple and works. What's wrong with the traditional headset?

 

As forks get longer, it is nice to get the front end down. Also, 1 1/8 head tubes sometimes ovalize. This is much less with the bigger standards.

I just don't understand why we need another zero stack standard.

 

so, does this mean I can get a king headset for my reign X now? seems like the exact same thing that's in there (or is that a zero stack?)

I'm confused, and I'm not usually confused on this kinda thing. that'll tell you something.

I suppose the name perdido is fitting in that respect...

Main Entry: perdido, perdida
Function: adjective
Language:Spanish
1 : lost
2 : inveterate, incorrigible <es un caso perdido : he's a hopeless case>
3 : in trouble, done for
4 de perdido Mexico, familiar : at least

I like #1 and #3...

 

This topic has become confusing for sure. Folks call zero stack 1.5, drop in zero stack, and there are two standards of drop in with no distinct terminology other than the bearing angle designations which nobody uses. Is it 45 45 and 43 45?

 

well I know my current reign HS has a 38.4389572938452*x45* bearing dimension. honestly, this is a really weird release from CK. they usually have their stuff together and have a good, concise reason as to why they're doing what they're doing.

this? not so much the norm. there's no mention of why this is any better than any other HS standard. I like shiny colors, but I can always pull my old cups out and get them anodized...

 

i dont care if it is logical or not, but its Chris King, etiher way, its Frekaing Pimp :bang:

 

Will it come loose and creak like ll other CK headsets?


Only benefit this has, is to make CK more money, his parts, his tools, his his his.........


Why do we need another new standard? To make more manf's money

 

I've used the same CK headset for the last 9 years.

At one point I had some creaking. I took it apart and sanded a couple of rough spots that had developed in the bearing cap and the base plate (CK terms for the upper and lower bearing races) and put it back together with a light coating of grease on the metal-to-metal contact points. It's run quietly and reliably ever since.

My current frame is the third frame used with this headset.

I'm not saying that you didn't have a CK headset come loose and make creaking noises. I'm saying that I've been more than happy with mine.

 

i like how bmx bikes are switching to integrated, the new king looks cool but you still have to deal with press fit parts

 

soooooo..... will this or will this not work on a reign x? xD

 

Eh, I'll save my money and keep using my Cane Creek ZS cups and 110 bearings.

 

from CK website:
"Integrated and Internal style headsets
We recognize the popularity of these systems and choose not to produce one of our own. We presented an opinion on internal and integrated systems several years ago and our belief remains the same today. We simply believe these systems do not have the long-term durability and performance characteristics to carry the King name. To find out more, please download our "Integrated Headsets Explained" document. (450kb)"

okaayyyy... so they finally gave in but decided to make it their own standard?

 

It's the American way, however I can build an entire bike for less than the cost of that one headset.:?:

 

I was hoping for something like this to come out!

 

I am old school, I have a bike with the FSA Pig Pro and 3 others with the Pig....seems like the big balled headset lasts pretty long, I mean, why spend more than you have to?
Unless youre riding a BMX bike and doing railing or flatland tricks which take a toll on the headset, especially the lowers... If I could afford CK I'd buy it but if FSA is half the price, why not.

 

Here is one thing to consider. As MTB's have evolved, this is just something new. To evolve and advance we must be open to new ideas. So, look at it as a step forward.Evolve it will, regardless of the skeptics. So lets just see how it pans out and reap the rewards if it works.

 

Why doesnt somebody use a tapered roller bearing on the bottom instead of ball bearings and then make something better then a star nut so you can actually load the fork into the headset uber tight(uber = 30ft-lb in bike speak). With the current headsets out if you do this the steering is either slow or notchy and for obvious reasons since the current headsets are made to be loaded only radially and not axially other then to hold the fork in place.

This would solve the ovaling problem that is usually a result of loose components.

 

Chris King's main objection to integrated headsets was the way that the bearing cartridge runs directly on the head tube with some integrated headset designs.

Since the new Perdido headset presses a pair of cups into the frame, the bearings to not ride directly on the head tube.