Bicycle Mechanics - Advantage/Disadvantages of Integrated Headsets?

As a novice interested in building up a bike, I've been looking at a lot of frames lately. I understand the structural difference between integrated and non-integrated headsets, but I'm not sure that I understand the tradeoffs involved. I've seen some rants about it being a bad thing (from a wear/replacement perspective), but many of the newer bikes seem to come with them as a "feature" (easy install/build).

Anyone care to weigh in and enlighten me?

Thanks in advance.

^^....dang, Wonder how many times this one has been kicked around.FWIW, take the negatives as primarily barn yard waste. Integrated and zero stack has been on the market long enough to have proven the doomsadyers and fear mongers wrong.

Thanks Sydney - I knew I could count on you to not pull any punches!

This is just personal preference - but integrated also looks nicer especially for bigger frames instead of that super long head tube!

Biggest knock against integrated is limited replacement options when the headset does pit.

I can't think of any negatives. Integrated headsets are lighter and (with the exception of the crown race) can be installed and taken apart with just a hex wrench.

I don't know about their advantages but the limited replacement options and dedicated frame geometry that is wedded to one design is not progress.

FWIW Litespeed seems to be getting away from them and they were one of the first and most enthusiastic users.

^^....dang, Wonder how many times this one has been kicked around.FWIW, take the negatives as primarily barn yard waste. Integrated and zero stack has been on the market long enough to have proven the doomsadyers and fear mongers wrong.
I refuse to allow a frame maker to tell me what headset I'll use.
http://www.chrisking.com/tech/int_headsets_explained/int_hds_explain_1.html

I refuse to allow a frame maker to tell me what headset I'll use.
http://www.chrisking.com/tech/int_headsets_explained/int_hds_explain_1.htmlThere had to be a nose picker just waiting to drag out that lame link.

I don't know about their advantages but the limited replacement options.........

A valid point that likely really stress out the CK crowd. ;)

There had to be a nose picker just waiting to drag out that lame link.
Can you disprove ANY of it or are you just talking out of your posterior again?

There had to be a nose picker just waiting to drag out that lame link.

Yep - that's the link that got me anguishing over this question to begin with...

I loathe!! integrated headsets. For all the Reasons that Chris King describes and more to boot. I have to agree fully with "Barnyard Waste" crowd as well as the manufacturer of world's finest headsets.

@ Sydney: Yes indeed, rather than calling people nosepickers or links lame come up with some sort of substance, argument or refutation of that link. Otherwise all your post amounts to is unsubstantiated opinion which according to Raiyn you seem to give out more often...?

I don't mean to be offensive Sydney by the way. To each his own. I simply disagree with you.

As for the other 'Pro's' But i personally find "looks" and a few grams of weight savings of a bike significantly less important than standardization. As for simplicty in replacement and installation, i find this pretty insignificant as well. Installing or replacing any headset is not particularly hard or expensive (if you have it done instead). If you have a decent or good headset doing so is a rare event anyway so saving a few minutes seems moot. I think the only people served by integrated are frame manufacturers and assembly lines where bikes are put together.

My advice to you (and this is purely opinion if an informed one!) is what i write on my page go for a non integrated design and maybe even threaded. If you do that then you can choose the the Tange Levin CDS I.S.O. headset.

According to Rivendell (manufacturers of some of the finest frames/bikes i think) "This is the workhorse of the headset world. Spec'd on thousands of bikes over the years, basically the same design as the Campy Nuovo Record but it is steel so it might even last longer. It's a no frills, no logo, bundle o' value of a headset...good enough for any bike. Made for 1" threaded steerers."

It uses smaller 5/32" ball bearings and more of them than a standard headset. I have the same headset on my other bike and it is smooth and durable, i recommend it highly.

My page with a pic of the headset can be found on:

http://www.rhizomes.nl/twenty.html

But if you choose something completely different that is of course your perogative but i would advice anything!! (1/ 1/8, threadless, whatever) but an integrated.

Can you disprove ANY of it or are you just talking out of your posterior again?Well, how many documented failures can you point your posterior to.....?

I loathe!! integrated headsets. For all the Reasons that Chris King describes and more to boot. I have to agree fully with "Barnyard Waste" crowd as well as the manufacturer of world's finest headsets.

@ Sydney: Yes indeed, rather than calling people nosepickers or links lame come up with some sort of substance, argument or refutation of that link. Otherwise all your post amounts to is unsubstantiated opinion which according to Raiyn you seem to give out more often...?

I don't mean to be offensive Sydney by the way. To each his own. I simply disagree with you.

As for the other 'Pro's' But i personally find "looks" and a few grams of weight savings of a bike significantly less important than standardization. As for simplicty in replacement and installation, i find this pretty insignificant as well. Installing or replacing any headset is not particularly hard or expensive (if you have it done instead). If you have a decent or good headset doing so is a rare event anyway so saving a few minutes seems moot. I think the only people served by integrated are frame manufacturers and assembly lines where bikes are put together.

My advice to you (and this is purely opinion if an informed one!) is what i write on my page go for a non integrated design and maybe even threaded. If you do that then you can choose the the Tange Levin CDS I.S.O. headset.

According to Rivendell (manufacturers of some of the finest frames/bikes i think) "This is the workhorse of the headset world. Spec'd on thousands of bikes over the years, basically the same design as the Campy Nuovo Record but it is steel so it might even last longer. It's a no frills, no logo, bundle o' value of a headset...good enough for any bike. Made for 1" threaded steerers."

It uses smaller 5/32" ball bearings and more of them than a standard headset. I have the same headset on my other bike and it is smooth and durable, i recommend it highly.

My page with a pic of the headset can be found on:

http://www.rhizomes.nl/twenty.html

But if you choose something completely different that is of course your perogative but i would advice anything!! (1/ 1/8, threadless, whatever) but an integrated.Diasgree all you want but you have done nothng more than regurgitate more barnyard waste. Have any actual experience with them, or just find a nice soap box today?? :rolleyes: There is no white paper that statistically validates greater or lesser problems with either type. The refudiation is the fact the Kings self serving doomsday senario and fear mongering haven't been proven out in years of actual use. The easy answer for the thinking person is that if integrated or zero stack gives you the willies,go with traitional.There are plenty of options.

... The easy answer for the thinking person is that if integrated or zero stack gives you the willies,go with traitional.There are plenty of options.

But aren't one's choices dictated by the frame?

^^^... Well yes ...They aren't all integreatd or zero stack tho.So make a decision....The whole point you raise is so lame and beaten to death it just stinks. It gets dredged up on a regular basis and then just dies. It's like a number of other arguments that can't be proven or disproven either way. You will get lots of ' opinion ' .

^^^... Well yes ...They aren't all integreatd or zero stack tho.So make a decision....The whole point you raise is so lame and beaten to death it just stinks. It gets dredged up on a regular basis and then just dies. It's like a number of other arguments that can't be proven or disproven either way. You will get lots of ' opinion ' .

It's not my intention to befoul the air -- I am just trying to learn about this stuff...

Isn't this really the Shimano vs. Campy debate in drag? First off, your frame of course is going to dictate your type of headset so unless you go after frames with only a specific headset design, the point is moot. Secondly, some people may like or dislike integrated HS, but I have to agree with Syd that aside from personal preference neither style has been proven to be better or worse than the other. Been there, done that on this and the other forum many times.

I've had no problem with either type, having owned both - a traditional setup for 20 years, integrated for about 10. When it does come to replacing that old headset after 20 years, I'd probably replace the frame/bike anyway.

ALthough I suspect if you need to replace (a properly installed headset) every few years, you're probably not steering :)

Sure, it is opinion, everything written by me and anyone else here is pretty much opinion (some of it based on a foundation some less so, it is for each to make up one's own mind). Nothing wrong with that or even with disagreeying completely with one another. As for some other personal attack type comments, sorry but i don't feel like dignifying them with a response.

@ Jazzy Cyclist, personally i don't think your questions or this thread stinks or is lame or whatever at all. Of course you should ask questions, any you like. That's what a forum is for after all. Even if the question has been posed before it would appear there are still a lot of people that feel it is good to give their two cents. If people feel the question is useless or doesn't warrant response well,... no nobody is making them read it or reply to it..

Personally i Would let my choice for a frame or bike be dictated to a fairly large degree by standardization, and that includes the headset. That's for a couple of reasons. I am really into durability/long term use of a bike. Even if i replace my bike with another one, i like the idea that the next owner will be able to find all the replacement parts and have a big choice in what he mounts. Secondly if parts are standardized there are usually much more and better deals to be had. The headset i refer to for example is relatively very cheap and extremely established. The quality it offers would only be matched by integrated headsets that are double the cost or more.

Obviously you should select a frame you really like loads, but there is so much choice these days that you can get what you want as well as a frame with standard components.

I am not (and never was) arguing that one type of headset is more (or less) durable or technically superior per se. I am just saying that certain ones are more standardized, more readily available, often cheaper and have been doing the job more than fine for decades.

But once again, i am not trying to win you to my camp or start a holy war, choose what you like for whatever reasons you feel work for you. And if you want to get informed before you make that choice, well i applaud that.

Biking is all about personal preference and thanks the stars for that.

- the big worry about integrated seems to be concerning frame damage... CK's ominous: "All bicycle frames that use integrated headsets will ultimately have substantial performance and reliability problems due to the inherent flaws in this design." does nothing to inspire confidence in the design...

- if i were to spend more than $1000 for a frame that i knew i was going to use for a long, long time i might be concerned... but if i were building up a less inexpensive bike, i'd get the frame that works for me regardless of design...

- especially if it's your first build?

(oh, and don't forget to let us know how it goes - pics, please!)

:-)

Forgive my ignorance, I have absolutely no experience with integrated headsets, but what options does a person have if the races become pitted?
I'm assuming they are replaceable, but I've learned never to assume too much.

If they are indeed easily replaced I don't see the big controversy here.

Forgive my ignorance, I have absolutely no experience with integrated headsets, but what options does a person have if the races become pitted?
I'm assuming they are replaceable, but I've learned never to assume too much.

If they are indeed easily replaced I don't see the big controversy here.

The bearings are sealed units and easily replaceable. In fact it should take less than 5 minutes.

Forgive my ignorance, I have absolutely no experience with integrated headsets, but what options does a person have if the races become pitted?
I'm assuming they are replaceable, but I've learned never to assume too much.

If they are indeed easily replaced I don't see the big controversy here.The issue is not with the bearings,but the cartridge bearing running in an unprotected headtube as with the true integrated type. Semi integrated or zero stack HS use cups in the HT for the bearings to run in.

The bearings are sealed units and easily replaceable. In fact it should take less than 5 minutes.See post #24.

Sure, it is opinion, everything written by me and anyone else here is pretty much opinion (some of it based on a foundation some less so, it is for each to make up one's own mind). With all due respect to the PC crowd, everything isn't opinion,and there is a whole lot of bike stuff that deals with specifics.Typically when one is lacking in a real basis they defalut to 'opinion' :rolleyes: ....When it comes to integrated HS, when they first hit the maket, there was lots of room for opinion.Many still prefer to stick with their opinion even tho the record hasn't proven them right. There are a number of people here that work in bikes and the best one in particular seems able to do when the subject comes up is drag out that tired link. One would think that if the 'problem' were so real it would show up here on a regular basis...But it doesn't. Go figger.

Well, how many documented failures can you point your posterior to.....?
You didn't answer my question. Not that I thought you would or could mind you. I figured you'd try to spin it without giving an answer and you did just that.

The question remains: Can you disprove ANY of it?

If have met a lot of people that worked in bikes that have on occassion been dead wrong or mistaken. On one occassion i even went back to the shop to see how they felt about being so misinformed and telling me a total BS "fact". I did my best to be nic about it. But even then they managed to be pig headed. There is byword in Dutch. It is "fietsenmakersmentaliteit". Basically it means "Bike Mechanic Mentality". Which can be summed up as "If i don't have it, don't want to sell it, don't think it is any good, i will tell you what you want is impossible, doesn't exist and is stupid."

So "working in bikes" that means little to nothing to me. Plus you seem to be a broken record on the whole headset failure/inherent technical problems.. I gave rather different (and i think more important) reasons in my last post why i don't think integrated is a good idea. You have failed to refute any of that either.

As for PC, i don't consider myself PC at all, just a normal guy that is open to different ideas or opinions. That also means i have some strongs opinions mostly based on experience and fact. It doesn't mean that i find it necessary to fling insults at people that disagree with them. What is with these "crowds" you keep referring to anyway...

What do you think the chances are that Chris King will change his tune when he starts marketing integrated headsets to address what is becoming the new standard?

If have met a lot of people that worked in bikes that have on occassion been dead wrong or mistaken. .So you got one right.Even a blind squirrel sometimes finds a nut. But that was an easy one.There are lots of nose pickers in the bike business. Never been pat of that crowd myself.

What do you think the chances are that Chris King will change his tune when he starts marketing integrated headsets to address what is becoming the new standard?

King has already defined an internal headset standard and developed a product. It's been available for a while but AFAIK has only been used by a very small number of low volume frame manufactures.
http://www.chrisking.com/headsets/hds_perdido.html

It's very similar to the other internal headset standards on the market. Just deeper insertion and larger diameter. I'm sure the increase in diameter is for engineering reasons, not to allow more room for the all important logo ;)

I see the Chris King groupies are out in force. Like Sydney says, where's the proof integrated are bad? Because Chris King says so? Come, buy my $150 headsets, they are the best. It all boils down to personal preference. You find a frame you like, buy it. Doesn't matter what type of HS it has. My Devinci has an integrated HS and I cannot complain one bit about it. You like the look of Kings...then buy a frame to stick one in.

One would think that if the 'problem' were so real it would show up here on a regular basis...But it doesn't. Go figger.

Well, one place it did show up on a regular basis was with the first year Litespeeds to use integrated headsets. Litespeed tried to use headtube inserts that accepted both Campy and Cane Creek headset designs and wound up fitting neither. They settled on Cane Creek and replaced a lot of headtube insert sets. That apparently solved the problem, but as I posted earlier, they seem to be moving back to conventional non-integrated headsets in their newer frames.

One would think that if the 'problem' were so real it would show up here on a regular basis...But it doesn't. Go figger.

Well, one place it did show up on a regular basis was with the first year Litespeeds to use integrated headsets. Litespeed tried to use headtube inserts that accepted both Campy and Cane Creek headset designs and wound up fitting neither. They settled on Cane Creek and replaced a lot of headtube insert sets. That apparently solved the problem, but as I posted earlier, they seem to be moving back to conventional non-integrated headsets in their newer frames.Well, that deals with zero stack(not integrated) and a Litespeed screwup . Different standards, not a failure issue as per CK. One could envision similar problems with a traditional HS if a manuacturer tried to make a frame/fork work with both JIS and ISO 1" HS.

That apparently solved the problem, but as I posted earlier, [Litespeed] seem to be moving back to conventional non-integrated headsets in their newer frames.
OK, but was this because of reliability or was it cost considerations? Maybe it's cheaper to press a set of conventional bearing cups onto a straight Ti head tube than it is to get your Ti head tubes shaped to fit an integrated bearing in each frame size.

As I understand it the hypothetical problem with an integrated headset is that if you put several thousand miles onto a bike over several years you will eventually need a replacement bearing set. And when and if that happens you might just find it harder to find a replacement bearing for an integrated headset. However, this question was posed by a novice bike rider so I agree with sydney. There are a lot more important things to worry about for a novice rider. An integrated headset will serve you well for many years. You may never have to replace it. If you're the prudent type go buy a replacement bearing while the bike is still nearly new and put it on the shelf. It occurs to me that a 1 1/8" bearing diameter is a bit incongruous on an otherwise metric constructed bike. You might find that the industry has moved on to some new bearing standard by the time you need a replacement and having one on the shelf might be handy.

As I understand it the hypothetical problem with an integrated headset is that if you put several thousand miles onto a bike over several years you will eventually need a replacement bearing set. It's really the hypothetical wear and tear on the frame it'sself that CK is carping about with fully integrated HS. The current standards for some integrated and and zero stack are pretty well set(see www.paktool.com),and supported by several makers. Where one potentially gets in trouble with replacements is with some proprietary designs,with replacement parts only available thru the frame maker.

Well that post on buying an extra headset seems like solid advice (if your frame of choice happens to be integrated). Planning ahead for possible obsolence makes sense in this scenario. You could probably cut a very good deal for the additional headset if you buy a brand new frame.

As for the other post.. it was not once but i was "right" on about 6 seperate occasions (at about 4 different reputable shops) in terms of this whole bike mechanic mentality thing. I only went back that one time to get the guys take, i am not interested in being petty or proving everyone wrong. After that one time i didn't bother and instead decided to talk to knowledgable people only, many of them not in the bike bizz. Being in the bizz sometimes also skews perspective.

As for CK groupie. Far from it, although i really like their product, bizz practices and agree with their stance of integrated i never have and probably never will buy a CK headset. I also find them way too expensive for my taste. Although i think the quality warrants the price and the price is fair it is just not necessary for my type of biking or bike.

But all of the above really doesn't matter, i don't care at all about "winning" any argument. I just hope that Jazzy cyclist can now make an informed choice/make up his own mind. Best of luck to you all and enjoy the ride (no matter what you ride on or use!)

:-)

Where one potentially gets in trouble with replacements is with some proprietary designs,with replacement parts only available thru the frame maker.

Like a Klein or Trek, but still available, just not cheap from the online retailers like Nashbar. CK uses the scare tactic of people's head tubes wearing out when it just ain't so. Seems good advice though if you're worried about, buy an extra to sit on the shelf. Not sure why Litespeed is changing, but mfg cost could be a factor. I have a couple of bikes with both types. The integrated does look spiffier, but who looks at a headset when you're hammering up a hill? So long as it does the job, all is well.

Being in the bizz sometimes also skews perspective.

Even the good ones likely get burnt out dealing with numbskulls... ;)

But all of the above really doesn't matter, i don't care at all about "winning" any argument. I just hope that Jazzy cyclist can now make an informed choice/make up his own mind. Best of luck to you all and enjoy the ride (no matter what you ride on or use!)

:-)

Yep, I am reassured now that I have a handle on it -- in short, I'm not going to let it influence my choice of frame. Thanks for the lively discussion.

Happy that jazz has made up his mind to not let headset design influence his decision. I did the same almost 10 years ago and never regretted it, never having had a problem with either integrated or non in 20 plus years.


Well that post on buying an extra headset seems like solid advice (if your frame of choice happens to be integrated). Planning ahead for possible obsolence makes sense in this scenario. You could probably cut a very good deal for the additional headset if you buy a brand new frame.

Sounds like good advice, but it appears that most integrated headsets use a standard bearing so finding a replacement shouldn't be an issue. Or is this not the case?

I don't buy into C.King's theory just as I don't buy into many manufacturers white paper concepts that don't reflect the real world numbers, sound good in theory and by some coincidence lead to their product as the only superior choice. Ritchey is one of the exceptions I'll make since during the days of early Ritchey, his reason to build stuff was because it simply wasn't available.

I'm curious though about people's actual experience. I've shared mine, but mine is very limited, even including those of my riding buddies who don't have a headset preference. Many of you guys work in bike shops and from your experience, what have you seen? Can you provide some numbers of folks who got stuck with the frame due to poor integrated headset choice?

There are lots of nose pickers in the bike business. Never been pat of that crowd myself.
You still haven't disproved anything.

You still haven't disproved anything. And you allegedly work in a bike shop and don't seem to be able to point your posterior at a single failure.

And you allegedly work in a bike shop and don't seem to be able to point your posterior at a single failure.
:lol: The onus isn't on me here. I asked you a simple question and you pathetically try to spin it away by tossing insults.

You have two options:

Answer the question: Can you disprove ANY of the CK article?
or
Admit that you can't


Why should I bother answering you when you won't give me a straight answer?

Less arguing more cycling.....

I'm in agreement with the people suggesting that integrated headsets are getting a bad reputation from Chris King marketing. If Chris King says that Integrated Headsets are junk, then please show us some valid real world cases of this. I don't care about reading any more 5 page dissertations on theory.

So, I think the onus is of proof should be on those claiming that Integrated Headsets suck. Just show us one real world example.

The integrated does look spiffier, but who looks at a headset when you're hammering up a hill? So long as it does the job, all is well.

no way, traditional looks better. and i always watch my HS while i climb. :)