Cycling UK Forum

DiTBho

Brucey wrote: ↑21 May 2024, 4:43pm which do you think might be wrong ? Would it really make any difference, since they are both good headsets?

To order the right caged-balls kit.

DiTBho wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 5:00pm why would you want to do a thing like that? it will only make the bearing more susceptible to damage.

easier to install

DiTBho

Brucey wrote: ↑20 May 2024, 4:26pm the anodised finish is quite hard and cannot be polished without taking it back to bare metal, which may not be a good idea with some Al alloys, because they corrode too easily.

I found a Campagnolo rear derailleur (Mirage/8speed, I guess, I'm not sure) very scratched and with strange stains of what looks like "chain oil", penetrated inside the aluminium.

It was on sale on eBay for 5 euros (really!), and just as an experiment I took it with the intention of dismantling it and sanding it to remove all the surface anodization, both from the body and the cage.

Then I polished it and installed it on the balcony of my house, protected from the rain by the roof that protrudes above the balcony, to understand for a moment how bare aluminum behaves.

for now it has just become much more opaque, everything uniformly, there seems to be no corrosion of the parts.

Four months have passed, and it rained for about five weeks, not continuously.

DiTBho

hi
I am considering the purchase of an IRD Techno-Glide headset for a Titanium frame.
According to the IRD website, there are two versions available:

IRD Headset Techno-Glide Threaded 1" / Anodized { silver, ... }
IRD Headset Techno-Glide Threaded 1" / zinc-plated finish silver

I don't know anything about the "zinc-plated" finish.
Is it better than the anodized finish?

"better", not in aesthetic terms, but in terms of durability and being able to polish.
Maybe even remove the logo writing.

DiTBho

peetee wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 9:17pm I was happy with Triomphe. It covered over 6k miles in my ownership with no failures and kept its finish well.

they are made of chromed steel, I think they only get ruined in contact with salt, running near the sea or ocean

DiTBho

if the information on that site is correct, it's not always correct, that's why I opened the typical, let's say I ask for confirmation

Is it also possible to install caged balls bearings on the Gran Sport heatset?

DiTBho

Headset:

Campagnolo 1040/A Gran Sport, 1973 - Mid 1980's, see here
Campagnolo 404/000 Victory, 1984?!?, see here

(both in chromed steel)

What differences are there between these two headsets?

DiTBho

Brucey wrote: ↑17 May 2024, 1:51pm then bond them in place using epoxy resin

That's *very interesting* ...
... just in case something goes wrong, or if we want to change the headset, how do you remove the resin or glue?

DiTBho

Considering that I am fussily analyzing this stuff because I will necessarily have to disassemble and reassemble the fork between 4 and 5 times a year, as I have a bicycle travel bag that does not accept the frame with the fork mounted.

You have to disassemble and insert the fork into a reinforced behavior on the bottom of the travel bag.

I had a second homemade fork made, with exactly the same thread of the the other fork, just to keep things simple and avoid problems.
It's a NivaCrMo steel 1" fork, they are only 650g more and I have two dedicated compartments in the bag.

I may change my bicycle travel bag, but for now I want to avoid it because it is a size that does not create any problems putting bikes in the hold of planes, even the cheapest ones.

DiTBho

Brucey wrote: ↑15 May 2024, 4:59pm I think all headsets should be a sliding fit or worse, then bonded into place using adhesive. This way the headset can always be fitted without stress (or preload if required).

Do you think this is a preblem for "thin" 80s headtube titanium design like in SpeedWell Titalite?

They are neither Litespeed' nor Raynolds' tubes, and the headset tube is very thin, much thinner than anything built in the 90s when titanium bike frames still had the same geometry and thicknesses as the old steel bikes of the 80s.

I'm quite worried, that frame is not mine, it's very rare, and the diameter of the headtube is 29.9mm. I'm almost tempted to mill out +0.1mm, not to use the press, but a sliding fit without interference, in this case. But... should use adhesive? Which one?

DiTBho

Brucey wrote: ↑15 May 2024, 4:59pm if you look on the 'cyclebasket' website it shows what I think is tange-seiki's interpretation of the ISO 1" headset standard. It clearly says 30.0 mm for the cups.

Yup, seen here, and it made confused because EC30 should have 30.2mm for the cup as "measured diamester" on the cup.

According to the above table, there are "interpretation", and Tange's one reports 30.0mm, which is different from what Sheldom reports, and here there is a lot of confusion and contradiction.

EC30 should be ISO to avoid interpretation, but then from company to company ISO has interpretations?!?
W___T___F___?___!___?

Brucey wrote: ↑15 May 2024, 4:59pm Any time I have a headset that is a slack fit, the epoxy resin comes out. In fact I think all headsets should be a sliding fit or worse, then bonded into place using adhesive. This way the headset can always be fitted without stress (or preload if required).

I've always wondered:

how to remove the headset fixed with resin in that case? With what chemical product and mechanical process?
why not use the same technology with which the bottom bracket is made, i.e. thread the inside of the headtube both above and below, and both the cups of the headset? In this way no interference would be needed, and disassembly would be much more practical.
why not use a temperature gap of 50 degrees and exploit the thermal expansion of metals? e.g. placing both the cups in the freezer at -10C, and heating the head tube to 40 degrees with a heater. This way you wouldn't need tons of pressure for the press. The cups would fit almost as if there wasn't even interference, and once at room temperature they would be fixed.

DiTBho

rogerzilla wrote: ↑14 May 2024, 7:27am It's not free to access ISO papers, so I can't check whether 30.2 is measured at the cup or the tube. There is indeed an interference fit. I will try to find an unused ISO headset and measure the cup. I believe the crown race dimension of 26.4mm is measured at the race and the fork is more like 26.5mm.

A Coke cam shim is about 0.1mm for a single wrap and works very well if you have an undersize cup, or a belled head tube.

Thanks for this!

I am an electronic engineer, and I am used to look at datasheet every time I have to deal with unknown components, so I find very "unusual" that I can find neither tecnical documentation about headsets nor the ISO/others specs.

DiTBho

Next week I have to go to Zurich, Switzerland, and I have the opportunity to collect in person a IRD headset techno-glide.
See here

brand new, but completely polished, therefore without any logo, for something like 45 CHF

IRD, Interloc Tange-Seiki, headset techno-glide, threaded 1" ISO

I've never heard of it, I have no idea how good it is, nor any flaws.

It's a classic headset with sealed bearings in both upper and bottom cups.
I don't like sealed bearings, but I am tempted to pick up.

DiTBho

and this is what may also happen

[..]The headset's manufacturer is XLC and the model is HS-S01. The eBay listing describes its dimensions as "1" EC30/22.2 EC30/26.4". When installing it on my bike frame, the cups went into the headset bore without requiring any press-fitting, and they are so lose that they slide right off when not held in place.

The frame has a headset bore of 30.1mm. According to my research from the Park Tool documentation and other sources, this is compliant with the EC30 SHIS standard, and a headset advertised as EC30 should achieve proper press-fit.

There is actually no mention of a SHIS code on the part label, which simply describes the item's dimensions as 22.2/30.0/26.4. It's unclear if the 30.0mm figure refers to the frame bore diameter, as the manufacturer's website seems to indicate (see the link to XLC above), or the cup diameter. On the part I got, I measured a 30.03mm cup diameter.

My argument is that the vendor's mislabeled the item by adding the EC30 SHIS code, which specifies a bore diameter that is incompatible with the part, regardless of how you interpret the manufacturer's labeling. If anything, this is an EC29 part, which would fit the actual cup size[..]

[..]In pre-SHIS days (SHIS is young in the history of bikes), the "22.2/30.0/26.4" label would be the piece of information that communicates this mixed standards configuration. It is naming the physical sizes of the parts, not the frame fitment.[..]

(bicycles stackexchange, questions 65614)

There are also mixed standards around, with crappy and very confusing documentation. So it's not easy to buy an headset that you don't already know.

Now, in this specific case, if there is no interference, what do you do? I've seen people "glue" the parts with resin... one of the worst things to do. Or, use special, certified 0.1mm thick tape to "fix" the matter.

DiTBho

rogerzilla wrote: ↑13 May 2024, 3:59pm Some of those figures sound wrong. ISO is 30.2mm

This is something that confuses me.

The old 80s and 90s Campagnolo headset are 30.2mm, and I am 100% sure about this as I measured it on a brand new Victory headset.
ISO headsets like the IRD RollerDrive are advertized "EC30": what does it meam?

EC = External cup -> classic headset
"30" = { 30.0mm? 30.1mm? 30.2mm?!? } what the frog?!?

The interference fit must be 0.1mm.

Then there's the fact that I got a brand new titanium frame designed in 2007 for an ISO headset, and, wanting to install the Campagnolo Victory on it, I had to give it a 0.1mm cut with a Campagnolo cutter, because it was neither 30.1mm nor 30.2mm but 30.0mm.

found headset tube ID=30.0mm
modified headset tube ID=30.1mm
headset OD (Campagnolo Victory)=30.2mm
interference fit 0.1mm

DiTBho

Jezrant wrote: ↑12 May 2024, 8:09pm There are also good similar looking 1” threaded headsets like Tange that will work on an Italian threaded steel fork for a fraction of the cost of an old Record headset. These are interchangeable with old Record headsets (same height).

Modern Tange Headsets are ISO, which brings us back to the table above.

Cycling UK Forum

Search found 236 matches

Re: headset, 1040/A Gran Sport vs 404/000 Victory

Re: headset, IRD Techno-Glide, which one? zinc-plated, anodized

headset, IRD Techno-Glide, which one? zinc-plated, anodized

Re: headset, 1040/A Gran Sport vs 404/000 Victory

Re: headset, 1040/A Gran Sport vs 404/000 Victory

headset, 1040/A Gran Sport vs 404/000 Victory

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: (Headset) IRD RollerDrive, 1″ Threaded, roller bearings

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head

Re: 1" headset threading, help me clear up the mess in my head