Hollowtech 2 - The Discussion

[Imlach]

Re: Re:

Re: stiffness, Track cranksets, which are arguably the toughest test of strength /stiffness are still predominantly square taper, although there are now external bearing options ftom Sram, Sugino and Rotor. Part of this is undoubtedly tradition, but also strength and reliability.

Don't know much about track cranksets. I only speak out of my own experience, I find that my square taper cranks always had a lot of sway in them. In my mind I can't see how square taper could be more solid than a crankset with a welded spindle going through the whole bb shell, allowing an even load. On square taper I felt constant flexing, even with overbuilt components. But I agree with others that the bb last forever.

 

[legrandefromage]

more likely the frame swaying than the BB, or the chainset itself, plenty of bendy and not so bendy ones out there

 

[Madmax1993]

I think most BB standards since square taper have been designed purely for saving money in manufacturing and assembly.

My LBS told me they love the new standards because they're much easier to service, and they need servicing very regularly!

Same reason Aheadset became popular and took over.
there's no real headset benefit, but when manufacturers only need to make one steerer tube length for all forks (ok back then it was three sizes). and jobs a good one.
couple that with weight saving as you can use aluminium tubes with ease and you remove the cinch bolt parts.
So cheaper and then lighter.

My understanding is aheadset is much better than quill and threaded headset, as threaded headsets are prone to slackening off over rough terrain as they were designed for road use, and borrowed by MTB. Aheadset solved a very real problem and is genuinely much better.

 

[legrandefromage]

Just bear in mind that the 'ahead' system had been around for decades before it was sold by Dia Compe as a new thing to get excited about. And threaded headsets last for years when done properly.

 

[FluffyChicken]

I think most BB standards since square taper have been designed purely for saving money in manufacturing and assembly.

My LBS told me they love the new standards because they're much easier to service, and they need servicing very regularly!

Same reason Aheadset became popular and took over.
there's no real headset benefit, but when manufacturers only need to make one steerer tube length for all forks (ok back then it was three sizes). and jobs a good one.
couple that with weight saving as you can use aluminium tubes with ease and you remove the cinch bolt parts.
So cheaper and then lighter.

My understanding is aheadset is much better than quill and threaded headset, as threaded headsets are prone to slackening off over rough terrain as they were designed for road use, and borrowed by MTB. Aheadset solved a very real problem and is genuinely much better.

Even Aheadsets come loose as part slip and bed in.

Threaded only did that if not set properly, designed well or people skipper out the lock spacer or damaging the threads etc.
But as I say ahead still do that, it was not a real problem, but an as good as, cheaper for the manufacturers and lighter, so overall a better system to sellers.
The amount of threadless headsets I see still rocking or grinding is just the same.

much like HTII, cheaper lighter simpler system.

 

[Pionir]

I've got a threaded headset that hasn't come loose in 30 years so I'm not sure what people have been doing to make them slack off...

As mentioned already, ahead is better for manufacturers requiring fewer steerer lengths, but it's arguably is a worse design because if you cut the steerer too short, you can't extend it without a clunky adapter.

I'm actually running a threadless headset with a quill stem and a couple of problem solver clamps on my winter road bike, purely because quill stems look nicer and I couldn't be bothered to re-wrap the handlebar tape.

 

[FluffyChicken]

I've got a threaded headset that hasn't come loose in 30 years so I'm not sure what people have been doing to make them slack off...

As mentioned already, ahead is better for manufacturers requiring fewer steerer lengths, but it's arguably is a worse design because if you cut the steerer too short, you can't extend it without a clunky adapter.

I'm actually running a threadless headset with a quill stem and a couple of problem solver clamps on my winter road bike, purely because quill stems look nicer and I couldn't be bothered to re-wrap the handlebar tape.

How do you extend a threaded steerer cut too short?

At least threadless have a lot more leeway.

 

[Pionir]

You don't obviously, but you can move the quill stem to adjust height

 

[FluffyChicken]

You don't obviously, but you can move the quill stem to adjust height

which is what the 'clunky adaptor' is.
or if done properly, the steerer and spacers. So you get the best of both worlds.

 

[Pionir]

Re:

My point is you always cut a threaded steerer to the frame size, then adjust the stem.

With threadless you make a guess, and if you change your mind when it's cut low, tough.

Ok is if you buy the wrong frame size with threaded, it's also tough, but personally I prefer it. And the stems look nicer imho.