[url= http://www.vitalmtb.com/photos/features/Giant-Bicycles-Introduces-New-Steerer-Tube-Standard-Seatpost,2586/Slideshow,0/bturman,109?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=spotlight ]Giant's new head tube and headset standard.[/url]
lol
....everybody please discard all your old frames, forks, and wheels immediately, they have been declared obsolete. Oh and if you are still on a 9sp drivetrain, you need to get rid of that old crap too. For now, you may keep your stems, handlebars, brakes, and grips - but not to worry, R&D have found an additional 30% of stiffness in all of those components as well, so keep some money in the piggy bank for more "upgrading" in the near future. Stay tuned!Yours sincerely - Corporate Profit.
So - Fox, Rockshox and Marzocchi have all bought into this too. How many [i]more[/i] models of forks does that mean a bike shop would have to stock?
FFS...Was there ever a problem with standard 1.1/8"?!
Biggest improvement that can be made is make the soggy bit steering the bike (the rider) go to the gym.
No to yet more silly sizes!
So Giant Overdrive 2 is a 1 1/4" - 1 1/2" tapered steerer. 1 1/4" was the Evolution headset diameter, wasn't it? Is Gary Fisher feeling half vindicated now?
If this is on the 2012 Anthem X frames that'll be a bit of an arse as I want one but I've got a fork with a 1 1/8" steerer. If the 2011 frames had been available in XL I'd have had to find a reducer for the bottom of its head tube but what's the chances of finding 1 1/4" - 1 1/8" reducers for top races anytime soon?
What a great reason to buy anything other than a giant!
So we've had 1.5 to 1 1/8th steerers for a couple of years now. And we're about to get 1.5 to 1 1/4 steerers.
By that rate of progress, around 2014 we should all be back on 1.5" steerers, and old Cannondales and Manitou Sherman forks will suddenly be all the rage again! 😕
OR NOT...
I like technology, I like the fact that things evolve and get pushed forwards, but this really does seem like another ridiculous standard purely for the marketing boys to exploit!
someone will make an anti-stupidity conversion system.
They always do.
Betd are usually pretty quick at doing it
We could probably do with new a rear wheel axle size & maybe a couple more BB standards too.
*looks at Pitch*
yup, still 1.1/8, still 135mm, still a normal BB, think I'll be keeping it a while 🙂
In fairness actualy there isn't a headset standard anymore is there, and at least this one will presumably define everything from headtube diameters and insert depths to how long the taper should be on the fork to stop problems like on the 456 carbons?
And arent 142 and 157 axles just 135mm and 150mm with the ends of the end caps defined as being 3.5mm each side?
It's not the new standards that anoy me, it's that no one uses the existing ones, if everyone uses this then it'll be great, but I suspect we'll still see the same mix of diameters, tapers and cup styles we've had for years.
30% stiffer, just by increasing the diameter of the steerer tube at the top by 1/8" - about 3mm?
I smell sh!te
Awesome, good job Giant! What a relief that we've got a new standard!
[img] 
[/img]
has anyone noticed the increased stiffness of a 1.5 steerer over a 'standard' (in my eyes) 1 1/8?
and what is the point in stiffening the front end of a full sus frame when the flx occurs in the rear of the bike?
i've a 1 1/8 steerer, 20mm front axle and 10mm rear. plenty stiff enough for me.
FFS...Was there ever a problem with standard 1.1/8"?!
I'll think you'll find it was far too standard, everybody used it and there was nothing new.
How can you possibly say anything about something so standard and universally accepted.
Personally I'm waiting for the next version as it will be much better, stiffer whilst being lighter and inspiring much more confidence due to it's newness.
alpinhas anyone noticed the increased stiffness of a 1.5 steerer over a 'standard' (in my eyes) 1 1/8?
Yes.
and what is the point in stiffening the front end of a full sus frame when the flx occurs in the rear of the bike?
To make it stiffer. See above.
I think it's about time we had another rear axle width standard don't you?
It's ridiculous. All bikes should have 1.5" head tubes, end of. You could then fit whatever fork you like to it with one of three different headsets - 1.1/8" - 1.1/8", 1.1/8" - 1.5" or 1.5" to 1.5".
It means fewer steerer assemblies for fork manufacturers to work around, stiffer front ends and everyone is happy.
Until someone decides that our gears could all do with being made to work back to front instead.
and what is the point in stiffening the front end of a full sus frame when the flx occurs in the rear of the bike?
Because the bike steers from the front, not the back?
Can we have a brainstorming session here to come up with ideas for some new standards? It might save the manufacturers the trouble of hiring a Marketing Cretin to do it.
I think we should reverse the pedal thread on cranks personally, because it will make bikes 21.75% more awesome (based on my own scientific calculations).
I think that the days of zip ties are numbered too. Let's come up with another way of attaching cables and hoses to frames that requires not just a new frame and hoses, but a specialist, espensive tool that can only be sourced from bike shops around the time of every third new moon. Provided that it falls on a Thursday.
TBH, it means you can run whatever forks you want. Just get the correct step down fittings. 9 times out of 10, you're going to keep the forks that come on the bike, otherwise you'll be getting the custom build route which will come frame only with the step down adapters.
In their defence.
It's commonly known that Giant make frames for many other big names.
And although Giant have a bit of an image problem i.e the least niche brand you can buy, they do one thing. They properly chuck money at what matters R&D
What you have here is an improvement, and improving things means changing things.
And this from the website that want's to see disc brakes on road bikes.
well, i can't say i noticed any difference using a 1.5 RS Reba w/ Maxle and a 1 1/8 Revelation w/ Maxle. ok, the Reba was 120mm and the Revelation 140mm, but i honestly couldn't tell the difference. the flex in the rear of the bike was noticeable with both bikes (cannondal one20 and one40, respectively).
Can someone please explain to me why 1.25" to 1.5" is better than just having 1.5" to 1.5"?
Can someone please explain to me why 1.25" to 1.5" is better than just having 1.5" to 1.5"?
because Mr Giant said so; "Ours is not to question why but to go and buy"
because it's lighter and no weaker apparently.
Surely a thicker tube can be made with thinner walls, thus saving weight? And we're only talking about a few tens of grammes.
What I've learned is about their road bikes. They appear to have concentrated on ride quality by reducing the weights, stiffening the frame in the important areas and tweeked bits for comfort, look at the road seat pillars. And they seem to have some new super resin in their carbon frames.
Almost the opposite of cervelo who work on weight and aerodynamics to gain advantages, Giant seem to work on getting the advantage out of rider input.
Until someone decides that our gears could all do with being made to work back to front instead.
Say hello to Low Normal!
GOOD NEWS: The important thing that people are overlooking is that you will now be able to run 30% wider stupidwide handlebars while maintaining the torsional stiffness of current steerer tube standards.
or something.
Haven't Canyon been doing this on there road bikes already?
PJM1974 - MemberCan someone please explain to me why 1.25" to 1.5" is better than just having 1.5" to 1.5"?
It looks less horrible. Also can be a little lighter apparently but tapered beat 1.5 purely because of the looks of the head tubes IMO.
grum - MemberOh and if you are still on a 9sp drivetrain, you need to get rid of that old crap too.
What does this mean for my 7- and 8-speed bikes?
its not an improvement is it its an other marketing hype iteration
next year there will be a tube thats 1-4/8" all the way along its length
All bikes should have 1.5" head tubes, end of.
I doubt that'd be popular with lovers of skinny-malinky steel hardtails. 🙂
I can't believe the steerer (fixed laterally at near-enough both ends, only 6-8 inches apart) has much bearing 😉 on how stiff the fork is overall - surely the twangy bits lower down do that
1.5 was initially to prevent snapping when MASSIVE 150mm travel s/c forks came out wasn't it ?
the tube still bends maybe i beam steerers next
Oh, I'm sure there's a deflection but compared to the flex in the press-fit into crown and then the relatively long (2-3 times longer) stanchion/lower assembly (with bushings between) below that, what proportion of any flex is in the steerer ?the tube still bends
My guess is very little - even in, say, a fox36
i just wish that all mtb dimensions were done in metric
what steerer would that be in that vid then - 1.5, "normal" taper or standard ?
whatever it is, the top end (where "you can really feel the difference") doesn't seem to move much compared to the inch or two the lower bit (and the major give in the steerer seems to be at the lower end/crown insertion which is no different to current tapered ones)
I'm missing something aren't I ? 😳
It looks like I'm in a small club here, as I've no problem with a company trying something new - none of you have to buy it.
I like innovation, but I'm not a first adopter, so rarely waste my cash.
Yay, more cheap second hand frames that still fit all my kit with outdated standards.
Same as someone said earlier you fit taper fox floats 150 to your bike there still slight flex in the forward/ back of the stanction and in the legs on heavy cambers not the headtube.
They're not standards, they're proprietary designs.
You can't fit ford parts to an audi engine, if you want high-tech high-performance bikes the same will apply increasingly as things develop.
There's always adapter widgets available to side-step these things so don't stress over them. Let's face it most of these bikes are bought as 2-3 year purchases and by then things will have moved on and stuff wears out. It's not worth worrying about it, or berating companies that are either trying to tie you into their product and / or making things a bit better somehow. It's just commercial competition and the upside of it is in general we get better stuff.
true-ish jameso but,
I'd prob buy new 15mm forks if my bulbs would convert
I'd go 1x10 when I next replace my cassette if I only had to buy the shifter and not an expensive (and seemingly fragile shadow) mech too
(I'd go 1x9 if they did a decent 11or12-36)
I'd buy new hbars if all my stems weren't standard
I'd like one or two seatpost sizes to choose from, instead of a dozen
Fine by me, as long as you can get a 1.25" stem that will also take my new 35mm handlebars..
http://bikehugger.com/post/view/deda-35mm-handlebar-bigger-is-better...hehehehehe
Jameso hit the nail .the beration comes from companies year on year forcing their opinion and fashion on punters
After twenty odd years of watching companies change their mind , they told us last year this was the best but this year they changed it to be better....or did they just not have a ****ing clue to start with but prefer to call getting it right this year R&D call me a cynical engineer....
cpro, you should know, you never get the best design first time, things evolve don't they. One evolution spawns ideas in a new area and on it goes. There are times when i think 'you must have thought of that before / why did that take so long..' but in any area of design there's the balance between development time available and need to have a product in the market. £ gets in the way.
Scaredypants, I know how it feels. I have 15 and 20mm forks, taper and std steerers, 15mm specific wheels, a 20mm wheelset without adapters for 15mm to hand, it drives me fin nuts. But i'd rather have this than what we had before, 100mm QR axles.. I'd also rather we didn't have 15mm as an option, 20mm is better and was already there. Thanks fox + shimano.. But that's how it goes sometimes.
How much does it wind you up? Enough to get away from it all and ride rigid SS? I started riding my rigid SS again this spring when i had 2 bikes out of action due to not being able to swap parts between them - incompatible axles and forks etc. I carried on riding it, it was a great regular-ride bike once i got used to it. I saw a path and I like where it goes.
Sure, I can see that some standards are outgrown, for example bottom bracket shells could do with being larger and Post Mount disc brakes simply work better than IS, at the expense of a little extra weight if you run adaptors. Likewise, aheadsets were a good idea as were bolt through hubs, especially if your frame has modular replaceable dropouts. Win-win.
Bad ideas include flippy shifters, that needed new mechs to work properly, the constant piddling about with rear axle widths, the idiotic fixation with 15mm front hubs when 20mm already exists and does the job just fine.
A good new standard is one that can be easily accomodated without incurring massive investment. Right now, we're looking at all the fork manufacturers having to tool up for a third size of steerer tube (fourth if you count Manitou's 1.5" tube) at considerable expense and confusion of the aftermarket customer. This seems like a massive waste of time when all frame manufacturers need to do is fit 1.5" headtubes to frames and be done with it.
This will certainly stand against the prospect of me buying a Giant any time soon, I feel that strongly about it.
Will a lack of aftermarket stems be a problem?
onepointfive seemed to have a point, as single crown long travel forks were struggling. onepointfive was lighter and stiffer than 1.1/8th and tapered.
then tapered seemed to take over, now this. *sigh*. onepointfive also seems to be back in fasion as you can use an angleset to tweak your angles more..
Gears working the wrong way round? I stuck with low normal for years untill parts prety much ran out, it's wayyyyy better than 'normal' gears as you can 'crunch' through 4 or 6 gears up the cassette when your in a climb, back off the power slightly and the spring moves it up one gear at a time. Try that with 'normal' gears and it just goes "kerthunk" or bends the mech and snaps the chain. OK so you could argue that people 'learn to shift properly', but that's like people who still advocate double de-clutching in a full syncro gearbox, and heel and toe in a car with ABS*, utterly pointless and just causes more wear.
*yes it is, I've never found a situation on the (public) road where heel and toe was nececary to slow the car down without upseting the rear axle**, and bessides, how many cars have pedal boxes small enough to heel/toe properly these days? I can get my foot between the pedals in the Focus!
Refering to the 1.5" tube thing, I think the argument is that 1.5" is too stiff and actualy requires more material to keep the wall thickness reasnoble to prevent other modes of failure? Which is why oversize bars/stems are heavier than their standard counterparts.
**Having written that, most cars are FWD now so just easing off the brakes as you declutch would achieve the same effect.
If you go into a bike shop with a view to buying a 2013 Giant and say "Actually, I really like it but the stem is a tad too long for me" then the supply of a suitable replacement that isn't branded "Giant" may be a problem.
Morons.
I've never had an issue with head tube / steerer tube stiffness on any of my bikes that wasn't solved by going to a 20mm axle. If 32mm stanchion Fox forks had been 20mm bolt through a la Rockshox Pike in the first instance, we wouldn't be farting around looking at means of stiffening a fork by adding extra material at the steerer tube.
Emotions run very deep about new standards here.
I've never had an issue with head tube / steerer tube stiffness on any of my bikes that wasn't solved by going to a 20mm axle
Are you sure? 20mm axles stop the fork twisting due to the brakes or arround rocks, but they dont stop it moving ftron to back. They have a moderate impact in stiffness longtitunanaly (sp?) as both the 'fork' and steerer contribute to this (for the sake of argument you can't twist a steerer tube).
Pikes practicaly had a solid steerer tube at the bottom, so arguably that had as much of an effect on stiffness as the 20mm axle over the similar chasis/travel of the revelations.
As anecdotal evidence - CK headsets were particulalry bad at scoreing the steerer tubes as they flexed IIRC? And my Manitou minutes flexed the steerer so far under braking it rubbed the inside of the headset inserts!!!!
I'd like wider MTB hubs - 135 F and 150 R as standard. That would make sense.
BB30 is ok, but why not use the 54mm ID of a Bushnelll EBB or similar? Niner were close there with thier 'standard'.
Taper steerers are as much about bigger weld / join area from a wider HT and DT as they are about the fork stiffness. Same for BB30, join area as well as bearing sizes.
think the push for bigger headtube dia has a lot to do with the join ability to the increasing size of down and top tubes as well as all the new shapes
So is there actually any after market forks with the larger taper?
Aftermarket forks!! There are'nt any chuffin'bloomin'flipin aftermarket stems!!! 👿
Says the man with 5k of tcr sl he can't ride because there are no stems till JANUARY!!!
....not strictly true as syntace f119's fit but I can't find any to buy...and they are 3 times the price of a giant one.
What length are you after? Dunno if you saw my post, but I've got an unused F119 here.
Thanks njee but its a 115mm I'm after (I'm not picky or anything!!).
And I'll probably get the carbon one aswell 😯