Originally Posted by ginsoakedboy
No -- sounds like bearings are too large or not seated correctly. The only arguable advantage (and it's very arguable) of integrated is the aesthetic, so you wouldn't see exposed bearings. Do you still have the ability to return the frame? If so, take a look at this article from Chris King's website about why the integrated headset is an inherently flawed design:
http://www.chrisking.com/pdfs/Int%20...0Explained.pdf
That's not exactly correct. Another advantage of integrated headsets is being able to just drop bearings into the headtube (after greasing, of course), and not having to press (or pound, as the case may be) in headset cups. Chris King's claim that the bearings on integrated headsets wear out faster is, in my experience, incorrect; my integrated headset has lasted over two years with no maintenance, while every Cane Creek traditional headset I've used has simply not lasted. A second advantage could be that, in many cases, the reduced stack height of integrated headsets (over the typical, traditional headset) is preferable to some who would rather not run spacers. Perhaps this is an issue of aesthetics, but one should bear in mind that aesthetics aren't just something to sneez at; indeed, almost everything tries to appeal to a certain aesthetic, and headset systems are no different.
Also, before just writing off integrated systems by putting all your faith in Chris King , remember that Chris King isn't a charity organization, it's a business. What kind of products does Chris King sell? Headsets that aren't integrated; of course, any business knows that it's not exactly good policy to promote products that the competitors make (and that your business does not). At the end of the article, Chris King claims that the person reading the article ought to forward the PDF file to everyone they know, lest the consumer be left with only one headset option (here, the integrated system is being alluded to); forgive me if I'm a cynic, but would someone please remind me what headset system has been the "standard" in the industry for decades? What system would therefore be threatened by other, new systems? What kind of system does Chris King make money off of? This plea to the consumer is hardly a matter of philanthropy, and much more so a plea to the consumer to not let Chris King go out of business by making a headset that might be (dare I say?) on its way out?
I'm not writing off traditional headsets at all; they work quite well, and the test of time proves so. However, to write off a new system based on an article by a rival headset system manufacturer is simply narrow-minded in my book.