Cycling UK Forum

The problem is that the biggest critics tend to be the ones who've never used the system. I have five bikes in the garage with the Ahead system and one with the conventional threaded headset. Guess which needs the most adjustment? Which one is always coming loose? and which one is the trickiest to adjust? Not the Ahead ones that's for sure.
if you're pulling the starfangled nut up the steerer tube then you aren't adjusting the bearing tension properly. in my experience they don't work loose, ever. The stem is clamped to the steerer after the top cap anyway and holds everything in place - you could most likely remove the cap completely and not loose any tension. No more fiddling about with two oversized spanners at the same time just one allen key for the cap and often another for the stem.


I don't like Guiness - that's why I've never tried it!

cycleruk wrote:

MikeF wrote:Like the OP I was wondering the same. The A head system seems very crude to me especially the star wedge nut just jammed in the tube, the fact adjustment is dependent on spacers and the fact you have to readjust the bearing tightness every time you change height stem etc.

But how often do you actually alter the height of your stem?
And it only takes a minute to adjust the bearing pressure.

True, once you have finally got it right, but it still seems unnecessary to make two adjustments when you're only wanting to make one. The adjustment to get the bearings just tight enough is quite critical (I never want to over tighten them), and the fact you need to do this after each stem adjustment I find irritating.

Hi,

Fundamentally the Aheadset system is lower weight, and on my cheap bike
a doddle to adjust for bar height, but a smaller range, noting that the
two finger preload method for adjusting the front bearings is far
more friendly than big spanners on the bearings, and it is far
more difficult to get the front bearing preload wrong.

rgds, sreten.

My stem is slammed, others could always fit a bottom clamp that
is then a rarely set adjustment, and fiddle away with bar height.

The Aheadset is also far easier to sort your bike out to box to fly abroad.

MIKETHOMAS wrote:The Aheadset is also far easier to sort your bike out to box to fly abroad.

Not sure I understand. With a front loading stem (and you could get them for quill stems) you just take the bars out. With a traditional clamp quill stem you just take the quill out of the steerer. Never seen a non front loading aheadset stem - but it would be bad news!

Threaded headsets are just bad, don't even contemplate them on a new bike. They are an old design from the past, when fitting a crude ball race to a rough steel tube needed to be done cheap and cheerfully. Bad to adjust and topped off with a dirty great iron wedge that distorts the tube when tightened, barely water proof from the top and not waterproof at all from road spray. Bike maintenance gets neglected with the thought of having to tackle them in open combat ; knowing nothing less than a sledge hammer will loosen the stem & bearing adjustment will take at least a week to perfect (AND finish up with a front facing cable hanger).

Attempts at modernising them with lighter wedge systems, caged bearings and water deflector 'bits' have not improved them - just moved problems around & stirred them up a bit. The only advantage that their stick in the mud ‘never move on’ supporters can scrape together is that the stem height can be adjusted a little bit and they have a slightly more pleasing look to them - big deal.

Ahead is one simple system to adjust,change stem,strip and replace bearings.
Arguable of the two systems it's the less elegant for looks but IMO thats it's only shortcoming and even that is in the eye of the beholder.
Ahead/threadless everytime for me

jb wrote:Threaded headsets are just bad, don't even contemplate them on a new bike. They are an old design from the past, when fitting a crude ball race to a rough steel tube needed to be done cheap and cheerfully. Bad to adjust and topped off with a dirty great iron wedge that distorts the tube when tightened, barely water proof from the top and not waterproof at all from road spray. Bike maintenance gets neglected with the thought of having to tackle them in open combat ; knowing nothing less than a sledge hammer will loosen the stem & bearing adjustment will take at least a week to perfect (AND finish up with a front facing cable hanger).

Attempts at modernising them with lighter wedge systems, caged bearings and water deflector 'bits' have not improved them - just moved problems around & stirred them up a bit. The only advantage that their stick in the mud ‘never move on’ supporters can scrape together is that the stem height can be adjusted a little bit and they have a slightly more pleasing look to them - big deal.

Spot on

sreten wrote:Fundamentally the Aheadset system is lower weight.

Is it? Is it really? If we are talking road/audax/touring bikes in comparable materials, if the choice is between 1" threaded and 1-1/8" A-Head, you might 'save' 50g on the headset etc, which IMHO in no way makes up for the extra 200-500g in the fork.... Modern steel framesets are mostly pretty heavy, and this is a good part the reason why.

jb wrote:Threaded headsets are just bad.......... barely water proof from the top.....

I've ridden tens of thousands of miles on bikes with threaded headesets with no need to even touch them. For less than £20 you can buy a threaded headset that will outlast everything else on the bike. The quill stem is exactly as waterproof as the seat post on almost every bike made ever; you need to use antiseize on it, just the same. The A-Head system is actually less waterproof than that in most implementations; it just looks as if it isn't.

I think that everyone is entitled to their opinions but that plenty of them may be, erm, 'coloured' by a failure to distinguish between bad manufacture, bad design details, bad adjustment, bad installation, bad maintenance etc rather than inherent features of the design.

People citing 'new', 'modern' etc as 'advantages' to A-Head systems need to take a look at headset designs from the middle of the last century. Many of these had features such as 'easier adjustment', steerer clamp top race securing, drop in races etc. The reason why these headset designs were abandoned was in good part because they were not reliable, and were a constant source of trouble. Statistically, today, if you buy a 'quality bike' (with a cheap A-Head headset fitted) I reckon you have never been more likely to have headset trouble. The fact that it is slightly easier to adjust the headset is scant consolation for having to do the work in the first place.

cheers

I still have one surviving threaded headset, we sit and glare at each other across the room - 'it' contemplating the most inconvenient time to wear out and me shuddering at the thought of what attempting to remove the rust encrusted top nut will reveal. whilst the cable hanger pirouetting around on its pretend keyway does its best to prevent me getting at the bottom nut

I can't understand why anyone thinks the design of an aheadset make it's bearings less affected by water - the only difference in the 2 systems is how the preload is adjusted. If a wedge is crude then God knows how you'd describe a star fangled nut. Similarly I can't see how a brake hanger design is anything to do with headset - if the kind that uses the keyway on the steerer doesn't work then you can use one of the many other designs.

In my experience both designs are just as easy to adjust. The advantage of the aheadset is that you only need an allen key to do it. Adjusting an aheadset on a cf steerer tube when the bung you're using won't grip properly is a profoundly irritating process just like worn threads on a threaded one are.

I've got no great preference for either threaded or unthreaded headsets. It makes no difference to how well or long the bearings work. The most beneficial feature is that aheadset adoption coincided with the uptake of front loading stems and few manufacturers redesigned quill stems to take advantage of this. The biggest real difference is that threaded headsets don't allow forums to have "my steerer tube's been cut too short what shall I do?" threads.

The real reason that they're in widespread use is exactly the same as external BB's. They can confer some advantages in weight and stiffness for top end racing bikes but the reason we all have to have them is that they're cheaper to manufacture and assemble. The same applies in spades to integrated headsets - which allow for the "my head tube is knackered and the araldite doesn't work anymore threads".

The biggest real difference is that threaded headsets don't allow forums to have "my steerer tube's been cut too short what shall I do?" threads.

My threaded steerer tube is too short what can I do about it?

Buy a new Fork (if you can find one)
or pay £90 to have a new steerer fitted.

The only reason the question isnt asked is because the answer is pretty clear, you can not do much about it.

MartinC wrote: The advantage of the aheadset is that you only need an allen key to do it.

That’s all the advantage that’s needed to make it vastly superior. Compare that to adjusting a threaded bearing race of 1" dia. so that there is no clearance but no preload, then everything is altered by the lock nut and all whilst trying to hold the bike steady. Trying to do it with the handle bars or wheel in place destroys any feeling for the adjustment, without you need a frame support.

The tubes they were originally designed for were far thicker, didn't flex & could accommodate a proper keyway so the non-turn spacer worked properly.
They were fine before anything else came along but times change.

TBH it seems to me that many many cyclists have done many many miles over many many years with threaded headsets and not had much to complain about, whereas, many many cyclists have done many many miles over many many years with none threaded headsets and not had much to complain about either. Thus whichever system you choose you ain't got to worry too much about having gotten the wrong one as if looked after properly it ought to do you proud.

I use both and both work well for me....the only real issues that I've had are of threadless steerers being cut short meaning that it costs a smidge more to get the bars up to the right position than it would with a threaded and the solution can be a tad less elegant. But for most people this won't be a problem.

jb wrote:

MartinC wrote: The advantage of the aheadset is that you only need an allen key to do it.

That’s all the advantage that’s needed to make it vastly superior. Compare that to adjusting a threaded bearing race of 1" dia. so that there is no clearance but no preload, then everything is altered by the lock nut and all whilst trying to hold the bike steady. Trying to do it with the handle bars or wheel in place destroys any feeling for the adjustment, without you need a frame support.

The tubes they were originally designed for were far thicker, didn't flex & could accommodate a proper keyway so the non-turn spacer worked properly.
They were fine before anything else came along but times change.

I think you are making a little much of the adjustment procedure. The method I use with either type is to set the headset so that the bearing is definitely not too tight, then tighten the locknuts/stem etc and try it. I am happy if there is a little play, because the next incremental adjustment will remove it without adding excess preload. It takes but a few seconds to adjust either type correctly if everything is in good condition. However I do find that adjusting used A-Head headsets properly an be troublesome; the wedge can bind or move unevenly and this makes adjustment more difficult.

AFAIK 1" threaded headsets have always been fitted to tubes with 1\16" wall thickness.

BTW If you have a cable hanger on a threaded headset, you can always hold this with a big adjustable whilst you tighten the locknut. The adjusting race should turn by hand when the locknut is loose; you don't need to get a spanner onto it.

I think it is worth commenting that headset perception is somewhat coloured by the type of riding you do and the length of the head tube. Bikes that have short head tubes really knock hell out of headsets of all kinds.

It is also worth mentioning that A-Head headsets with drop-in bearings/races are only reliable if they have enough preload on them; without this the parts work themselves loose (faster than they do anyway....) . By contrast a classical threaded headset can be run with a little play in it and (provided the locknut is tight) this usually does no real harm. This very simply means that a slightly rough or corroded A-Head headset is fit for the bin only (since with preload it will bind), whereas a slightly rough threaded headset can be set with zero clearance/preload and will often go on for years like that.

cheers