I'm becoming a bit worried about the useable 'lifetime' of my 2007 1 1/8" headtubed Five.
Should I be? 
Bike Forum
For how long will Fox et al. continue producing 1 1/8" steerer stuff for?
-
Posted 8 months ago #
-
Naaaa, plenty of 2011 bikes still had 'normal' external bearing'd 1.125 headtubes
Posted 8 months ago # -
I'm
becoming a bit worried about the useable 'lifetime' oflooking for a semi-valid reason I can use with my partner for why I need to replace my 2007 1 1/8" headtubed Five. There's nothing wrong with it, but a new bike is always nice.FTFY
Posted 8 months ago # -
I can't see any reason why everyone doesn't just go 1.5 all in, stronger etc.... The tapering shite I have looking up at me on my lapierre is crap, I don't know what it achieves, just go 1.5 through, simples, no compatiblity issues - backwards too
Posted 8 months ago # -
cant think why id want a 1.5 headtube on my XC bike though viv .....
Posted 8 months ago # -
i dont reckon it will be fully replaced.
Posted 8 months ago # -
So long as there's a demand there I guess.
I've ranted at length about the stupidity of having four steerer tube standards, but these seem more driven by marketing than actual need. If it were the latter, all head tubes would be 1.5".
The only thing I can assume is that the colossal helmets in the marketing departments have run out of new ISCG standards to invent.
Posted 8 months ago # -
i dont reckon it will be fully replaced.
It will, in the same way you could still get 'zocchi MX Pro's with a 1" steerer for ages stuff like Tora's will still be available in 1.125, but I can't see 130mm+ frames coming out with 1.125 for much longer, but then again America has gone 29'er mad, whereas they're still niche over here and the need for tapered forks is greater on those.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I think the headtube standard has settled now, although the manufacurers will start to piss us off with new and increasingly stupid BB & rear axle standards
Posted 8 months ago # -
I can't see any reason why everyone doesn't just go 1.5 all in, stronger etc
Because my extensive collection of 1.125" stems would be obsolete, so there
Posted 8 months ago # -
1 1/8" will carry on for a good while yet, and is likely to remain at the lower price points. At the high end, they'll make aftermarket options for ages yet, but with most manufacturers going taper at original equipment the second hand market will start to fill with taper forks which I think is the main reason why most brands are moving to some kind of compatible head tube.
Posted 8 months ago # -
yeah, having stem choice is all there is keeping 1.1/8 - trail rat - cannondale used to do their headshox with 1.5 on xc bikes - they always looked quick up hills.
But getting a 1.5 headset and filling it with spacers and devolving headsets is dumb... i'd rather have all that space taken up with the air inbetween a 1.5 fork steerer - get moi blud
Posted 8 months ago # -
What do you think is next?
Obviously, there is bound to be another completely nonsensical rear axle standard coming our way soon, promoted with words like "gnarly", "rad" and "dude" a lot. It's probably be 139.5mm and made specifically to require a new frame, a new cassette, new spokes and an expensive range of tyres to go with it.
Although, no doubt someone is working away on a new brake mount somewhere too...
My level of confidence in bike manufacturers has hit an all time low.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I think all frames should have a plain 1.5 headtube and let the consumer choose the fork and stem type. I'd even have a 1.5 on my road bike to really stiffen the front end up in sprints. I don't really see the disadvantages of not using 1.5 except for the aesthetics on steel frames.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I just hope that stuff remains around. 1" with front suspension was never really a standard, more a blink and miss it. So hopefully you'll still be able to buy 1 1/8 in ten years.
Posted 8 months ago # -
Surely we're due a new handlebar standard now oversized has become ubiquitous?
Posted 8 months ago # -
trail_rat - Member
cant think why id want a 1.5 headtube on my XC bike though viv .....As above c'dale have been using them on all ther frames for year without issue... also you get the choice of lot of bargain tapered and 1.5 fork though, what's not to like?
Owner of some bargainous 1.5 steerer Blackbox Rev's
Posted 8 months ago # -
I can't see any reason why everyone doesn't just go 1.5 all in, stronger etc.... The tapering shite I have looking up at me on my lapierre is crap, I don't know what it achieves, just go 1.5 through, simples, no compatiblity issues - backwards too
'Cos 1.5" steerers are a disaster - massive heavy headsets, heavier stems, massive heavy steerers, heavier frames.
Tapered gives the strength at the base of the fork (the whole point of 1.5") without the other disadvantages. Sure, you can't fir a 1.5" fork, but having had one, **** knows why you'd want to.
Posted 8 months ago # -
Just wait, in about 3-4 years Giant will come out with their incredible new "Underdrive" headset standard and 1 1/8th forks will be all the rage again.
Posted 8 months ago # -
My 1 1/8" headset/steerer/stem are coping just fine doing pretty rough downhill daily - bike has had more abuse in the past month than it would get in a whole year in the UK. Can't see why I'd need anything bigger and heavier, just marketing crap I guess.
Posted 8 months ago # -
'Cos 1.5" steerers are a disaster - massive heavy headsets, heavier stems, massive heavy steerers, heavier frames.
Eh? Do what? So my 1800g for 150mm travel Rev's are heavy? Along with my obviously overweight 140mm travel 7 year frame @ 6.4lb's? (Prophet)
Stopping thinking about 2005 Sherman's.. things have moved along since then.Posted 8 months ago # -
I think the hysteria over the Cane Creek Angleset will probably help (and their cheaper, better, less glamorous alternatives) , some companies are picking it up as an OEM thing and others are certainly aware... So tapered and 1.5 headtubes are being seen a bit more as a route to flexibility while using a standard steerer.
Posted 8 months ago # -
The larger the diameter of the head-tube/steerer the thinner the walls can be made without losing strength and possibly gaining some and losing weight. os so i seem to recall? shoot me down if i'm wrong
owner of some bargain 1.5" Fox 140 floats
Posted 8 months ago # -
1800grams for a pair of forks! a set of DT XRC's is c 1250grams. and yes i know they are a different market, but that is the point. 1.5" may suit one part of the market but it may not suit another part of the market.
Posted 8 months ago # -
The whole idea of 1.5" is that thinner tubes can be used without sacrificing strength. I don't buy the argument that it's significantly heavier. Moreover, you can run an internal headset to drop the front end.
If we're all bothered about a hundred grammes, we'd all eschew our favorite platform pedals in favour eggbeaters wouldn't we? Or we'd all be using the lightest XC tyres we could find.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I have heard from one of the pre-eminent bike designers in our industry that the tapered head tubes on their bikes are a nightmare to make, add a considerable amount of cost (which cannot be passed on as the frames retail now for what they did before they adopted the tapered standard) and don't really add any benefit over a 1 1 1/8th inch headtube. He said that you can measure the increase stiffness of a 1.5" tapered fork on a dyno, but you couldn't 'feel' it when riding.
He felt strongly that a straight 1.5" HT would make the most sense because it allows for any and all forks to be used and did provide some benefit to frame design and manufacture because you could have a larger weld area, plus the 1.5" tube is easy to make.
Posted 8 months ago # -
GT'72
+1
Cannondale headshock forks were insanely stiff*, and lighter than SID's, although IIRC the stem and headset added about 200g over a 'normal' 1.125 setup so there wasn't any net weight loss.
*partly through the headshock system, partly the 1.5 steerer.
Posted 8 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
