[Rip]

Hey RM, can you PLEASE start a new poll, this one is getting very old.

 

[SandMan]

Still think the larger steerer is not a good idea, but the oversized headtube can actually help DHers.

Here is a few past threads:

Ridemonkey thread 1
MTBR Thread
Ridemonkey thread 2
Possible comprimise solution

The 1.5 steerer is there to make one product possible, the Manitou 6" single crown. This is to much of a pain for a solution. Just make a bigger headtube, in order to reduce headtube damage and stick with the 1 1/8" steerer. Much less expensive solution in the end for the consumer.

 

[brit_spears20]

:angry: frigging bent ass gayboy 1.5 anal standard. Its all hype trying to get you to spend cash, theres no point. It looks gay and its gonna mean all sorts of compatability issues, between people that give the finger to the standard (the sensible ones) and those that take it up. All that will happen is frame manufacturers will have to give customers the option of either a 1.5 or a 1 1/8 headtube, in the end this will cost them more money. This cost will be passed on to the customers (bikes are expensive enough as it is) and I think you'll probably see a few names go out of business for making stupid decisions. :devil: :angry:

 

[hardtail_hucker]

the thing i haven't heard people mention is the fact that stanchions are what need to be improved out of forks that break with 1 1/8 im guessing maybe 1 in 10 has something wrong wiht the steerer the other 9 have problems with the stanchions or other mechanical stuff so i think that their focusing on the wrong thing!

 

[TwoWheelinTim]

Good idea, BAD timing. Where were they with this one twenty years ago? It can only be a "standard" if they can get industry wide compliance. I'd say it has a snowball's chance in hell.

 

[jabberwocky]

I'm of two minds: first I'm pissed because I only got over problems with a 1"steerer two years ago, and now I have all good bike equipment at 1 1/8. At the same time, stiffness is a good thing on the front end of a bike.

That being said, I've never had a problem with the standard, so I don't see the point in changing it accept for making more $$$$ for the bike companies. It makes me think that they made 1 1/8 the standard with this eventual evolution to the 1.5 in mind; or that they are dumb asses who did very little in the way of R&D.

I won't be making a rush to buy a 1.5 anything unless it is a complete bike, and that is some years away (as I said, I just up-graded).

 

[teflon]

Originally posted by GrahamKracker
The 1.5" headtube is an absolute necessity for 6"+ single crown forks. Smaller steerers will definately snap off. The only problem is that the idea of a 6"+single crown fork is nothing but a stupid marketing gimmick . The 1.5 std is aimed at a fairly small market segment, whose needs would definately be better served by a double clamp fork.
Why are we designing yet more incompatible equipment when existing equipment serves our needs? Look for the answer to that question on the onepointfivestandard website. Notice how they talk about 1.5 bikes being visually different from 28.6mm bikes, and how much smaller the old standard looks compared to the new standard (read: "mine is bigger than yours"). This emphasis on the visual sounds like a way to get fools to give up their $, not a strategy to engineer a better product.
Notice that motocross bikes, able to routinely clear enormous doubles at the hands of abusive riders, still use a 1" steerer tube. Granted they have really heavy, bombproof headsets to go with that tiny steerer, but they are not breaking their equipment. Has anyone snapped the steerer off a properly installed double clamp fork? I didn't think so.
Protect yourself and your wallet by ignoring these fools and voting with your purchases. Buy equipment that works well and has the added benefit of cross compatibility (worth so much more than $ when you're in god knows where). And for heaven's sake, if your going to ride your bike off your cousin's house, get a triple clamp fork and a bike made to do it.

GrahamKracker

HERE,HERE..I,m with u!

 

[Dave]

Hey who said bigger steerer is stronger? Motorcycles use a 1" steerer and they never break. so for dual crown the steerer issue is dead. For a single crown, there really is no weight advantage because one of the 2003 freeride boxxers is the same price, stiffer and only weighs half a pund more than the sherman fork.
-Dave

 

[kaj]

Originally posted by SandMan

The bending of the stanction is "prevented" from a much longer area on a double crown (the distance between the 2 crowns), as opposed to a single crown which "prevents" bending from only a much smaller area (or distance) that being the single crown.

The difference in stiffness between a single and a double crown comes not from less flex in the stanchions themselves, but from the lower crown that gets twisted less.
The flex happens because of the very great torque on it, created by the force applied to the lower end of the fork by the hub i.e. when braking. The large force and the relatively long distance to the "fixation" of the stanchions (in the crown) results in a large torque in the crown.
When using a second crown on top of the steerer, these forces get partly cancelled out by the counterreaction in the upper crown. I have tried to illustrate it in my ASCII drawings below. The upper lines repersent the steerer tube, the lower ones the stanchions, the rings are the crowns on the fork, while the lowest ring is the axle. Arrows represent forces applied to the fork. (Cant be bothered to start a drawing program at this hour of the night...

Single crown fork:

      ||  
      ||
      O<- 
      ||
      ||
      ||
    ->O     Force applied to fork, by hub of wheel

This situation creates a great torque in the crown, as that is the only part to hold the stanchions from rotating.

Double crown:

  --->O   Force applied to fork stanchions by the frame
      ||   (partly) cancelling out the torque in the lower crown
      ||
      O<----  Force applied to fork by the frame (through crown)
      ||
      ||
      ||
      ||
      ||
    ->O    Force applied to fork, by hub of wheel

Here the upper crown can take up a lot of the torque by applying a counterdirected force to the stanchions, thereby preventing the flex or twist in the lower crown.

Please correct me if im wrong...

Greetings
Kenneth


Oh, and BTW: 1.5 sux IMHO. Purely a marketing gimmick.

 

[shocktower]

This way we can all be screwed , The only people who want this is a starving/hungry company manatou only make one DH fork ,and these have been having problems ,so let`s change every thing to 1.5 and this will be better Facking Ice hole`s ,obviously they don`t have the answer (answer/manantou)

 

[Wade]

Six inch travel single crown forks are the worst idea since trigger shifters. Who the hell wants a fork with huge stanchions and sliders in a single crown version? Now I saw the poll and I see that it is almost dead even between yes or no on the subject and I respect riders who stand up for what they belive in but this freerider thinks that this is just another lame atempt by fork companies and frame builders to screw you royaly on prices. Ask any true hard core rider and he'll tell you GO DUAL CROWN !!

 

[jonikl]

This is FUNNY!! The same thing was said about disc brakes in the day."It's a gimmick" What about the threadless headset and twist shifters? Or 9sp drive? Or cartridge bearings? Or heavy suspension bikes?

I have to say, everything at one point in time is a gimmick.
Have any of you had a bottom cup pop out?
I have. If this 1.5 standard can reduce the likeliness that this will happen through the distribution over a larger area, then I am sold already.
Maybe, just maybe it's not the steerer that's the whole issue.
Regards
jon

 

[bighitbomber]

yea i can see al the advatages, but at the cost of us buying a new frame and fork. and what is the advatages of a six inch single crown, yea u get one more inch, but if u are really going that big, get a double crown, u will save money. also i dont think that this will cetch on. so as i see it, u have a new 1 1/8 inch frame then u got and buy a new fork and frame, then it stops being made and u are screwed. also i read that the production sherman forks are not even that good. they said they were not that plush and a little flexy. and also u are forgeting that if u wanna put a smsller travel fork it will mess up ur geometry. and one more point. when u go try to pick up one of these bikes, u will have so little choices of frames. and i cant stress this enough is it really worth over a grand for a few advantages. and if u want a double crown, u wasted ur money on a new 1.5 frame.

sorry to bored u, but if u read it u might like it

 

[bwagner]

I've been working in the bicycle business for over sixteen years now, and I've seen tons of "Gimmicks" come and go. Height-rites, ringle on board chain lube systems, odyssey air pump seat posts, bolt on drop bar extensions for mtb's etc,etc,etc..... but the fact remains that there are always going to be people who think their "new" idea is the best thing since sliced bread. I'm personally all about this 1.5 headset standard. I'm a firm believer that the threadless headset is the best "modern" invention the bike world has ever seen, and this could only lead to stronger forks, and more time on the trails. A lot of people will argue the fact that they just picked up a new bike and that it's not cross compatible, but so what! The next time you are contemplating a frame(or bike) purchase, you might not even consider getting one without disc mounts, where were they about five years ago??Our lifestyle(or sport as some may view it) feeds on progression, and change is going to play a HUGE part in it. It's entirely impossible to keep up with technology one hundred percent of the time, or we'd all be driving some super powerful, ZERO emissions vehicle around that runs on water, or better yet air. My point is that NOT ALL product engineers are money grubbing idiots, some are actually TRUE riders, and love this biking thing more than you or I might. They dedicate their lives to trying to improve things for themselves, and others like themselves. And one last thought, even if the 1.5 standard did take over, thats not to say that your current tone inch threaded headset bike would fail to suit your retro-grouch needs, ......or would it? Ask yourself one question, are you just worried about your own personal needs, or the safelty and fun of millions of others in the future who just might do stuff WAY bigger than us in this current day and age, and son't tell me to ride a dual crown.I've ben there, and done that, they're strong and stiff, but maybe some people just don't like the aesthetics of them, or the ability to turn sharper turns in technical section reigns supreme over the big hit capability of a scaled down motorcycle fork. Enough, have a GREAT DAY

 

[lovebunny]

i dont rele think 1.5 is neccesary. i mean who breaks a 1 1/8 steear anyways? how much stiffer can it be?

 

[bwagner]

" i mean who breaks a 1 1/8 steear anyways? how much stiffer can it be?"
Are you kidding me?? Who breaks a 1 1/8 steerer?? They break all the time, and to the post that says this idea is to cater to a small group of riders?? Freeriders are far from a "Small" group. I understand the thinking behind being pissed that things are changing all of the time, and that there is almost ZERO compatibility with components and frames these days, but how can you not see that everyone doesn't want to have a bike that resembles a motorcycle without a motor. I've had dual crown forks, and I'm probably getting ready to get another one, but some people just don't want them. And I've said it before, and I'll say it again, "If you don't like the 1.5 headtube, JUST DON'T BUY IT!!" Like it or not things change and some of might not agree all of the time, but you CANNOT stop progression. Sorry, thats just the way it is. GO OUT AND RIDE YOUR BIKE!!

 

[Dartman]

It's a solution in search of a problem. Not a bad idea, it's just not really necessary. More than 90% of the bike that have them have reducers to use 1 1/8" steerers.

Mike

 

[Dartman]

It's a solution in search of a problem. Not a bad idea, it's just not really necessary. More than 90% of the bike that have them have reducers to use 1 1/8" steerers.

Mike

EDIT: Which would seem to be weaker.

What happened to edit your own posts???

Mike

 

[Echo]

I think it's pretty funny to read the original posts here 2 years later...

 

[Gonz]

1.5 Head tube ... great. I wish they would increase the Bottom Bracket shell size too. It's about time, don't ya think ?

 

[MtnbikeMike]

1.5 Head tube ... great. I wish they would increase the Bottom Bracket shell size too. It's about time, don't ya think ?

That has sorta taken place already: Shimano's Hollowtech II and Race Face's X-Type

 

[w00dy]

The standard is unwarranted for two reasons:
1. Motorcycles use 1 1/8 with no problems, and they withstand much much greater loads.
2. Nobody except for Manitou has had significant problems with breaking steerers, and they are the only fork manufacturers backing the idea.
I think it's a crock.

 

[MtnbikeMike]

The standard is unwarranted for two reasons:
1. Motorcycles use 1 1/8 with no problems, and they withstand much much greater loads.
2. Nobody except for Manitou has had significant problems with breaking steerers, and they are the only fork manufacturers backing the idea.
I think it's a crock.

Motorcycles actually use 1" steerers. Yes, they withstand much greater loads, but they are also powered by gasoline engines, not pedals. The frame is much beefier, and much heavier.

Also, I don't think any fork manufacturer has problems with breaking off the steerer tube, bike manufacturers are having problems with ovalized and broken-off headtubes.

 

[w00dy]

Also, I don't think any fork manufacturer has problems with breaking off the steerer tube, bike manufacturers are having problems with ovalized and broken-off headtubes.

Remember the manitou supernova? Answer's first attempt at a single crown freeride fork. I don't think there's more than a handful of them out there anymore, they all busted just above the bottom cup. This is why I think they came forth with this standard, they couldn't hack it with 1-1/8.

 

[Echo]

The standard is unwarranted for two reasons:
1. Motorcycles use 1 1/8 with no problems, and they withstand much much greater loads.
2. Nobody except for Manitou has had significant problems with breaking steerers, and they are the only fork manufacturers backing the idea.
I think it's a crock.

1.5 isn't just about single crown long travel forks. It's about stronger frames.

If it's such a crock, why do you think almost every bike manufacturer makes 1.5 headtube frames now? Do you really think they care what Manitou wants? The do it because it's stronger.

 

[MtnbikeMike]

That was one fork. The forks that use a 1.5 standard have 6 or 7 inches of travel. Sure, Marzocchi is making a 6" fork with a standard steerer, but that's a boat anchor.

It's not possible to make a 7"sc fork w/o a bigger steerer.

The Sherman Firefly and Flick are 1 1/8" steerer's. They're not breaking.

 

[MtnbikeMike]

1.5 isn't just about single crown long travel forks. It's about stronger frames.

If it's such a crock, why do you think almost every bike manufacturer makes 1.5 headtube frames now? Do you really think they care what Manitou wants? The do it because it's stronger.

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

The 1.5 standard is awesome, I'm all for it. The next step will be dual crown forks with a 1.5 steertube. Can you imagine the travel on those babies?
I think people will be suprised by how well a 1.5 will work, and that we will see it on sub 6 inch travel forks as well.

we already have up to 14" travel forks........do we really need to go bigger than that?

 

[w00dy]

Allright, I can see how making the frame larger in the head tube can add more weld surface, and distribute the headset loads better. This makes sense to me, and I reluctantly agree with it. I am still hung up on the fork thing though.

I own a DJ II, and I love the thing, yeah it's heavy, but so am I, and so is my riding style. I can't badmouth manitou that much becuse the last fork of theirs I owned was an X-Vert R, which I destroyed. In all fairness their new stuff is probably much better. Being a mechanical engineer, I can see how the larger the steerer is, the stonger and stiffer it will be. However, when you get up around 6 or 7 inches of travel, the crown has a large lever working on it.

I can only speak for myself here, but personally, wouldn't ride a single crown with that much travel because it makes more sense to put a crown on top and make the steerer tube a non-issue. Motorcycle and maveric (sp?) forks simply use a bolt and threaded spacers, no steerer tube. The two crowns can then be lighter than one because they have more mechanical advantage.

I have 1-1/8 and it works fine for me, I hate to be a republican about it, but I still think 1.5 is stupid.

 

[Gonz]

ahh, the voice of reason. wonderful, thank you. Actually what we need is a side-by-side comparison of the two designs, including layouts, freebody diagrams, and a matrix of the stresses, deflections, weight, cost, manufacturing inputs, etc to make a educated preference between the two designs.

Also, have you seen the new Maverick bicycle forks ? They employ the steerer tube replacement idea you mentioned that motorcycles use. I think there's a picture of them in one of the threads "bike porn Friday" or something like that. Peace.

 

[flatulant_man]

don't have enough money to buy a new headset along with other necessary parts when i change frames. would rather just switch over as many parts as possible. bad idea
besides, currents standard strong enough for me!

 

[binary visions]

Allright, I can see how making the frame larger in the head tube can add more weld surface, and distribute the headset loads better. This makes sense to me, and I reluctantly agree with it. I am still hung up on the fork thing though.

If you agree to the frame point, then the rest of your argument is moot. 1.5 allows you to run 1 1/8" forks in several fashions (spacers for a 1 1/8 headset, 1.5-1 1/8" reducing headsets, or the clever E.13 cups), none of which provide any disadvantages. So run your 1 1/8" forks, the standard is still a success. Companies will now have to warrenty fewer ovalized headtubes, which means savings for them, which means savings for you.

Aside from that, though, bigger steerers allow a much larger interface with the crown, and a much stiffer single crown fork. As someone who doesn't have enough money to afford a lot of different bikes, a 7" single crown fork provides a world of versatility that simply wasn't available before.

Not to mention weight savings - the Sherman Breakout+ is the lightest abuse-worthy fork on the market (barring modified Boxxers with Mojo internals, that is).

1.5 is nothing but good for the market. It allows 100% backwards compatibility with the old standard, assuming that you can scrounge up $15 for a couple of reducers, and allows for stronger and stiffer frames and forks. Why fight it when there's no real negative points?

 

[binary visions]

Remember the manitou supernova? Answer's first attempt at a single crown freeride fork. I don't think there's more than a handful of them out there anymore, they all busted just above the bottom cup. This is why I think they came forth with this standard, they couldn't hack it with 1-1/8.

That's just plain silly, now. Don't grasp at straws.

Manitou has had their share of flaws, just like any other fork manufacturer. But the single crown Shermans are a great piece of engineering and you don't see them breaking...

(tried to edit my post above to add this comment, but it's not letting me. Weird.)

 

[binary visions]

I just read the whole thread here... and holy crap is there a lot of stupid theories being flung around.

Let me list off some facts here and that will be the last I have to say on the subject for now:

FACT: 1.5 standard allows complete backwards compatibility with 1 1/8" standard, through any method your heart may desire.

FACT: 1.5 standard is STRONGER. Stronger = fewer frame failures, be it through ovalization or the headtube shearing off. Fewer frame failures mean less dollars for manufacturers to shell out, which means more money going elsewhere - be it R&D, or frame prices reducing. Also, less dollars for the consumer when your headtube gets ovalized past the warrenty. This goes for headsets too - bigger bearings means longer life.

FACT: nobody is making your precious 1 1/8" forks go away. Relax, your $3000 uber wonder Ti frame will still have fork choices in 10 years.

FACT: 1.5 style frames are not more expensive. They are, for now, coming on the higher end frames but I'm sure it will trickle down. The 1.5 headtube on the bike doesn't up the price much.

FACT: single crown forks are more versitile. More travel + more versitile.. Look, you can have your cake and eat it too!

FACT: it's lighter, AND stronger. Remember that "light, strong, cheap, pick any two" addage? We broke the mold here, guys. A larger diameter headtube is no more expensive to manufacture than the smaller one once you have the facilities for it.

Okay, I'm done

And, I have to quote this, just because it was priceless:

also i read that the production sherman forks are not even that good. they said they were not that plush and a little flexy.

"I READED TEH ARTICLE IN MBA AND TEY SAID IT WAS FLEXY"

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

im not gonna ovalize the 15mm thick headtube on my scream, thats for sure. not to add fuel to the fire, but i dont see whats wrong with standard 1 1/8" steerers/headtubes. i have an 04 scream (15mm thick "kegger" headtube) and an 03 monster t (beefy as all hell). i cannot see how much stronger you oculd ask your frame/fork to be..........go ahead, start throwing facts at me again.........just plain and simple, if you want more travel and a stronger fork, just go dual crown, thats what i think :-/

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

and also, i have nothing against the 1.5 by the way, im just happy with how things are now, and have been for the past decade. 1.5 just isnt for me. (dont care about versatility or weight at all) ;-)

 

[binary visions]

im not gonna ovalize the 15mm thick headtube on my scream, thats for sure. not to add fuel to the fire, but i dont see whats wrong with standard 1 1/8" steerers/headtubes. i have an 04 scream (15mm thick "kegger" headtube) and an 03 monster t (beefy as all hell). i cannot see how much stronger you oculd ask your frame/fork to be..........go ahead, start throwing facts at me again.........just plain and simple, if you want more travel and a stronger fork, just go dual crown, thats what i think :-/

Well, your 15mm thick headtube doesn't do a thing against compressive ovalization - that is, not a flaring of the headtube, but the material actually compressing inside the headtube. 1.5 addresses that.

The issue for 1.5 steerers isn't to make a stronger fork, it's to make a single crown fork stiffer and strong enough to withstand the stresses put on it by much longer lowers/stanctions. The 1.5 steerer is unnecessary for double crown forks as there is little to no stress even put on the steerer.

Don't think I'm trying to convert everyone - if 1 1/8 works for you, good - I was just responding to the various comments in the thread about it being stupid, useless, good for nobody, just a marketing gimmick, 1 1/8 is strong enough, etc.

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

Well, your 15mm thick headtube doesn't do a thing against compressive ovalization - that is, not a flaring of the headtube, but the material actually compressing inside the headtube. 1.5 addresses that.

The issue for 1.5 steerers isn't to make a stronger fork, it's to make a single crown fork stiffer and strong enough to withstand the stresses put on it by much longer lowers/stanctions. The 1.5 steerer is unnecessary for double crown forks as there is little to no stress even put on the steerer.

Don't think I'm trying to convert everyone - if 1 1/8 works for you, good - I was just responding to the various comments in the thread about it being stupid, useless, good for nobody, just a marketing gimmick, 1 1/8 is strong enough, etc.

well it seems to me that the 1.5 steerer is mainly for the urban/street/dj crowd, because i know i sure as hell would rather jsut have a dual crown fork with 7" of travel than a nearest 15 footer and hucks it

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

hey my last post got allllll messed up when i posted it, and i dont feel like completely retyping it. ill sum it up tho: i dont see the need for a 7" travel SC fork. if you wanna huck and are concerned about strength, get a long travel DC fork. if you wanna do park and street stuff with tricks, get a 4-5" SC fork. i can't see someone either a) using all 7" for street/urban riding or b) needing to do tricks that requires a SC on the trails. but what do i know, im jsut a kid that pushes my 55 lb bike to the next 15 footer and hucks it, so don't mind my gibberish. BUT, does anyone see where i am coming from here? it makes sense to myself. hah.

 

[Smelly]

what i like about 1.5 is the larger bearing capability and increased welding area.
if your scream had a 1.5 headtube it wouldn't need the kegger. more material doesn't necesarily make something stronger. i know you don't care about weight, but lotsa other people do. i bet banshee could drop almost 1/2 lb from their headtube area by using a smarter design, not just using a sh!tload of aluminum.
i agree though, if you need 7" of travel, you should get a dc fork. i see why people like the idea (i like the idea too. the as-x is a damn appealing bike, so are the sgs-freerides), but it kinda makes for a hybridized bike that doesn't go uphill all that well and doesn't go downhill as well as a dh/fr specific bike.
keep in mind i've never ridden a 7" single crown, so my opinion is all based on speculation. i've seen pics of people racing on them, so maybe they're ok after all.