plz help identifying correct headset for this fork
 

Please take a look at attached photo, this is a 1-1/8" threadless type and the lower race diameter is 30mm.
Tough I've installed many forks over the years and have the proper tools, I've not worked on any modern bikes and have never seen one like this,

A std 1-1/8 headset will fit over the 30mm crown, but what concerns me is that large tapered upside-down "funnel" type flange will make it nearly impossible to remove the lower headset race someday when I have to service it.

Makes me wonder if this is for some kind of special headset that is recessed into the frame's head tube, and the taper on the fork crown is intended to blend with the frame's head tube. Has anyone seen something like this?
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...bd24c6e6a1.jpg

It seems to be a standard 1-1/8" lower headset with a regular 30mm crown race/baseplate. I think the "funnel" is just a styling thing and, as you surmised, designed to match the frame's headtube. As to removing/servicing the crown race in the future, there are two options:

1. Get a "knife edge" type crown race remover, basically a bearing splitter. Park makes a very expensive shop quality one but there are far less expensive designs available.
2. Buy a headset with a split crown race which can be installed and removed by hand. The Velo Orange "Gran Cru" headset is this type and a very high quality one.

Why would you have to service a race?

I don’t think the tapered part at the top of the fork is intended to match up with the head tube. I think it will actually fit inside of the headset bottom bearing cup. If you look at this setup (photo) on my old Vitus, you’ll see that the same area on my fork fits up inside the bottom bearing cup (I apologize for the grime and poor photo quality). That part the pen is pointing to is the same area. That is part of the fork, not the bottom of the race. The bottom race is on top of it. And like HillRider said…it does take a knife edge, and a bit of patients to get it off. But…in all my years of working on my own bikes…I’ve really only ever had to remove one maybe twice. Once was when I had a frame/fork powder coated.

Dan

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...843b8bc57.jpeg

I guess he referred to if there's a need to replace headset lower race. But really if talking ball bearing headsets, you can replace the ball retainers with a full row of loose balls in a classic style headset, this allows better rolling and much better durability, keeping the races from getting pitted or "brinelled" Just make sure you don't jam each side with too many balls, or you get ball bunching and a binding sensation, so if you get to that mode you need to remove 1 or even 2 balls at that point.,and should result in a free rolling fork, just don;t allow any detectable bearing play since that makes for pits. My favorite way to make sure headset is solid is having the bike on floor, then drop front end for tire bounce, if there's any play you hear the fork chatter,so adjust so free rolling but solid with no HS play chatter heard in this front tire bounce test. Also another way to detect play if with bike hanging in stand, then whip front wheel into a fast spin, and lock up front wheel brake, this'll reveal any chatter if bearings have any play.

I agree that the fork's below the race seat shaping is for cosmetics. To better visually match a "hidden" headset lower fitting up in the huge headtubes that are the fashion now.

I also agree with the finding that removing a crown race from that fork would be less easy, especially if the race didn't have a bevel along its outer underside. One way around this is to create a feature that allows a small punch or other device to get under the race. Here's a shot of how I did this on a recent fork. While not anywhere nearly as fat a shape below the race seat this fork has already seen the need to remove this race and I'm glad I made this access scallop as it was very quick to merely punch the race off.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...ef2457b385.jpg

The last bit I'll add is that the OP's fork is about as ugly as I've seen. The attempt to join two such different aesthetics has not gone well in this case. Andy

Pretty much what I thought when I first saw it.

Thanks all for the replies

Umm the OP’s fork is lovely IMO. What makes it so unattractive?


Dan

Can't help with the question, but I like that style of that fork.

This is opinion...the change from what is likely an intended large diameter head tube to a small diameter steerer and blade set looks odd and not at all "flowing". Like a big pick up truck with a plow blade running tiny car tires or 26x1 tires on a mid 1990s MtB. Just a mix of styles that clash. Andy

I'll add that the fork's conical shape raises the axle to crown seat dimension by a fair amount. For those of us who are not tall in the saddle this high up front is not always a good thing. Andy

Those new large diameter headtubes are needed to allow fitting the currently fashionable 1-1/8"x1-1/2" tapered fork steerers. A 44mm headtube is about the smallest one that will work. Now why these tapered steerers are needed is another question.

I think most sealed bearing headsets will come with some kind of lower centering cone that is split which should make it relatively easy to get on and off.

The headset cups, of course, depend on the frame design.

I wouldn't be surprised if that fork was intended to be used with an integrated headset which would be mostly hidden inside of the frame.

Not in my experience. Chris King and Cane Creek headsets use sealed bearings and both come with solid "drive on" base plates. The Velo Orange is the only split base plate I've used but some FSA headsets may use them too.