Headset cheap fix - works

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

Rollers have a binding problem because they don't center themselves on their conical races,
shifting off axis to causing varying amounts of drag that is apparent on a closely adjusted
bearing. With a little slack, the rollers just slide around, unnoticed by the person making
adjustments. The usual perception is that the bearing was too tight and had to be run looser. In
fact it wasn't too tight but without slop, it binds from the roller complement running off axis.
These things are dogs. I have some with fretting dimples from the days when I believed what the
bike shop said.

Quoted message said:

The Stronglight A9 headset on my bike is working no slop and no binding. How do you explain that?

How do YOU explain it? How many miles does it have and what sort of bicycle are you riding and
where? This all makes a difference.

Quoted message said:

I have had binding problems with a Stronglight O'Light on another bike. This model has smaller
rollers in "sealed cartridges".

I have not seen this unit but what do you mean by sealed cartridges? Rollers have been discredited
and are not a solution to anything that ball bearings don't do better. How do you explain that the
leading head bearing manufacturers other than Stronglight do not use rollers?

I assume you saw the pictures of the dimpled roller head bearing offered here in this topic. How do
you explain that?

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

Carl Fogel wrote: -snip what are presta valve bodies made of? Couldn't tell from a
hacksawed section-

Maybe try a file instead. The resistance of brass to a file is distinctive and the color is obvious:
yellowjersey.orgnuvalve.htmlOpen ↗

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Stronglight A9 headset on my bike is working no slop and no binding. How do you explain that?

How do YOU explain it?

But I am not claiming that they cannot work, I don't need to explain it. Your posts imply that they
can't work without either slop or binding. That is not true.

Quoted message said:

How many miles does it have and what sort of bicycle are you riding and where? This all makes a
difference.

This latest case: Only fitted recently, to Raleigh tourer, done less than 1500 miles, general riding
on roads in the UK. It is working well - with no slop, no binding, smooth steering.

I previously used one a road bike for about 10,000 miles (without replacing bearings, regreased
three or four times). I did have to leave a trace of play in (from the start) but I thought that was
because the head tube was not faced properly. It was not enough play to notice *except* when rocking
the bike hard with front brake on, and steering felt good, no trace of indexing, binding or
excessive friction.

I don't see the big deal if the innards need replacing every so often if headset is used for
more miles or in tougher conditions - when the parts are so inexpensive, readily available and
easy to fit.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have had binding problems with a Stronglight O'Light on another bike. This model has smaller
rollers in "sealed cartridges".

I have not seen this unit but what do you mean by sealed cartridges?

Stronglight describe them as "needle cartridge bearings". Unlike the A9 with loose parts, bearing
retainer fits tight into the tracks and incorporates plastic seals. Designed to be maintenance-free,
the parts require firm prising to separate (I did this to remove seals to improve performance). THIS
model was a dog right from the start.

Quoted message said:

Rollers have been discredited and are not a solution to anything that ball bearings don't
do better.

After experiencing slight indexing problems with ordinary headsets, I bought an A9 after reading
many reports of good performance (from users and experts) and because I liked the idea that the head
cups would never need replacing.

Quoted message said:

How do you explain that the leading head bearing manufacturers other than Stronglight do not use
rollers?

I wasn't actually claiming rollers are superior to balls but merely challenging the idea that they
can't ever work well at all. We have to wonder how the A9 has been so popular for so long.

FSA is a popular make. They have models with rollers. I could probably find some others as well.

Quoted message said:

I assume you saw the pictures of the dimpled roller head bearing offered here in this topic. How
do you explain that?

It would be interesting to find out how much good service that headset provided before it failed. I
don't see why it matters if it was tens of thousands of miles as A9 bearings are cheap to replace.
Replacement every so often should prevent the problem.

I can't see the pictures - website doesn't load.

~PB

jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It clearly shows the deformation pattern from a Brinell indentation, including the crater "lip".
In practice, this lip may not be massively noticeable because it's going to be largely flattened
each time the ball rolls over it, but over time, the crater become more pronounced, and of
course, the index will become noticeable.

Because there are such tests and materials does not make it happen in ball or roller bearing
races. Please read up on bearing failure before trying to educate wreck.bike.tech on the matter.

1. you need to read your testing lit.

2. check timken.comprevent.aspOpen ↗.

3. learn to leave your abused childhood at the door.

then we can talk.

When I go to that web page, I see the following:

"False brinelling is recognisable by the grooves worn into the raceways by axial movement of the
rollers during transportation."

Jobst has said many times that the fretting mechanism he describes is also known as false
brinelling. In any event, it's not true or "classic" brinelling as you maintain, is it?

I think I see a pattern -- the more adament and obnoxious "Jim Beam" or "Tux Lover" or whatever his
name is, the more spectacularly wrong he is.

Do you care to give your real name and your qualifications? That way, maybe we could get a sense of
when you've reached the end of your tether.

Quoted message said:

You are seeing fretting damage:

really?

how come timken say:

"Brinelling is the *plastic* deformation of bearing element surfaces due to extreme or repeated
shock loads."

my emphasis.

you've heard of timken i presume. are they just another "bike type" sales driven company selling to
unsophisticated retail consumers? why does this happen to fit the experience of indexing after
crashing a brand new headset?

you're really pushing your luck on this one jobst.

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It clearly shows the deformation pattern from a Brinell indentation, including the crater "lip".
In practice, this lip may not be massively noticeable because it's going to be largely flattened
each time the ball rolls over it, but over time, the crater become more pronounced, and of
course, the index will become noticeable.

Quoted message said:

Because there are such tests and materials does not make it happen in ball or roller bearing
races. Please read up on bearing failure before trying to educate wreck.bike.tech on the matter.

1. you need to read your testing lit.

2. check timken.comprevent.aspOpen ↗.

3. learn to leave your abused childhood at the door.

then we can talk.

Seems to me if you're going to take gratuitous potshots at people, you should have the balls to
clearly identify who they are with proper attribution.

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

You are seeing fretting damage:

really?

how come timken say:

"Brinelling is the *plastic* deformation of bearing element surfaces due to extreme or repeated
shock loads."

In which case there'd be no relationship between Brinelling and mileage, because sufficiently hard
impacts could come within 100 yards of leaving the bike shop on the first ride. Yet that's not
what's being described here.

And if your claim that impact causes Brinelling in headsets was true, then such damage would not
occur in track headsets which see shock loading from riding over bumps nor in pro team spare bikes
that have never been ridden but only clamped in fork-mounting roof racks.

And again, have the guts to do correct attributions.

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Stronglight A9 headset on my bike is working no slop and no binding. How do you
explain that?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How do YOU explain it?

Quoted message said:

But I am not claiming that they cannot work, I don't need to explain
it. Your posts imply that they can't work without either slop or binding. That is not true.

I am fairly sure you don't know that. How about giving it the front end bounce test to see that it
doesn't have slop and then give it the vertical swing test to see that it isn't binding. Lift the
bicycle onto your shoulder and lean it forward just enough to make the wheel point straight ahead
and then lightly let it swing from side to side. It is this test that all clearance free roller head
sets showed that they were running off axis as the one pictured at:

geocities.comindex.htmlOpen ↗

You'll notice that the rollers can even cross up in their plastic cage let alone the whole cage
slipping off to one side as this one did.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How many miles does it have and what sort of bicycle are you riding and where? This all makes a
difference.

Quoted message said:

This latest case: Only fitted recently, to Raleigh tourer, done less than 1500 miles, general
riding on roads in the UK. It is working well - with no slop, no binding, smooth steering.

I think it's too early to say anything about the head set after such a short run. Study the picture
on the web carefully and see if you can endorse such a design. In my appreciation it is flawed in
several aspects that I have explained in detail.

Quoted message said:

I previously used one a road bike for about 10,000 miles (without replacing bearings, re-greased
three or four times). I did have to leave a trace of play in (from the start) but I thought that
was because the head tube was not faced properly. It was not enough play to notice *except* when
rocking the bike hard with front brake on, and steering felt good, no trace of indexing, binding
or excessive friction.

The bounce test is the only one that replicates reality because it is this chatter that one hears
while lightly braking on average pavement, the place where the bearing is in the load transition
zone. It is this rattle that is most disconcerting and brings people to try and adjust clearance
only to discover that without clearance, the bearing binds.

Quoted message said:

I don't see the big deal if the innards need replacing every so often if headset is used for
more miles or in tougher conditions - when the parts are so inexpensive, readily available and
easy to fit.

The innards are the plastic cage and the races. What's left?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have had binding problems with a Stronglight O'Light on another bike. This model has smaller
rollers in "sealed cartridges".

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have not seen this unit but what do you mean by sealed cartridges?

Quoted message said:

Stronglight describe them as "needle cartridge bearings". Unlike the A9 with loose parts, bearing
retainer fits tight into the tracks and incorporates plastic seals. Designed to be
maintenance-free, the parts require firm prising to separate (I did this to remove seals to
improve performance). THIS model was a dog right from the start.

The A9 shown on the web site and the one on my shelf have their cylindrical rollers in a plastic
cage. I have never seen a "cartridge" bearing roller head set.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Rollers have been discredited and are not a solution to anything that ball bearings don't do
better.

Quoted message said:

After experiencing slight indexing problems with ordinary headsets, I bought an A9 after reading
many reports of good performance (from users and experts) and because I liked the idea that the
head cups would never need replacing.

Well we see what the experts know and don't know. I'm not so sure that "experts" are actually being
quoted here, like Jim Beam Whiskey's professor who taught him all about Brinelling. Its a sham.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How do you explain that the leading head bearing manufacturers other than Stronglight do not use
rollers?

Quoted message said:

I wasn't actually claiming rollers are superior to balls but merely challenging the idea that they
can't ever work well at all. We have to wonder how the A9 has been so popular for so long.

For short distances, their feet of clay probably won't show up but if used to the tune of 5-10K
miles a year they are dogs.

Quoted message said:

FSA is a popular make. They have models with rollers. I could probably find some others as well.

FSA has some of the goofiest designs on the market. I would not hold them up as a standard for
bicycle equipment. At InterBike, I saw all sorts of things some equipment freaks will buy just to be
avant-garde. Let's get back to people who, even if its trial and error, come up with working
solutions... because they try their stuff.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I assume you saw the pictures of the dimpled roller head bearing offered here in this topic. How
do you explain that?

Quoted message said:

It would be interesting to find out how much good service that headset provided before it failed.
I don't see why it matters if it was tens of thousands of miles as A9 bearings are cheap to
replace. Replacement every so often should prevent the problem.

Quoted message said:

I can't see the pictures - website doesn't load.

Go to a place where you can see it. It is an excellent picture of exactly what is wrong with roller
bearings in this use.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

Gary Young:

Quoted message said:

jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>It clearly shows the deformation pattern from a Brinell indentation, including the crater
>"lip". In practice, this lip may not be massively noticeable because it's going to be largely
>flattened each time the ball rolls over it, but over time, the crater become more pronounced,
>and of course, the index will become noticeable.

Because there are such tests and materials does not make it happen in ball or roller bearing
races. Please read up on bearing failure before trying to educate wreck.bike.tech on the
matter.

1. you need to read your testing lit.

2. check timken.comprevent.aspOpen ↗.

3. learn to leave your abused childhood at the door.

then we can talk.

When I go to that web page, I see the following:

"False brinelling is recognisable by the grooves worn into the raceways by axial movement of the
rollers during transportation."

Jobst has said many times that the fretting mechanism he describes is also known as false
brinelling. In any event, it's not true or "classic" brinelling as you maintain, is it?

I think I see a pattern -- the more adament and obnoxious "Jim Beam" or "Tux Lover" or whatever
his name is, the more spectacularly wrong he is.

Do you care to give your real name and your qualifications? That way, maybe we could get a sense
of when you've reached the end of your tether.

He's claimed to be a "materials guy". This obviously qualifies him as an expert in absolutely
everything, and a pox on you and everyone else who have the gall to ask him for quantitative proof
of his super-fantastic theories.

Pete Biggs said:

dianne_1234 said:

One of the A9s finally indexed on our tandem. Photo here:
geocities.comindex.htmlOpen ↗

How many miles before the failure?

(Unfortuantely the web page is not loading for me so I can't see the pic).

~PB

I'd estimate about 400 to 800 miles, but that's just a guess.

Donald Gillies said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> One of the A9s finally indexed on our tandem. Photo here:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

geocities.comindex.htmlOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's an interesting pic!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Maybe I'm just seeing what I want to see, but it appears that you have classic Brinelling going
on there.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

i.e._ / \ \_/ < crater "lip" ______/\ /\______ \_/

Quoted message said:

I have a very old headset from someone else's bike that I'm interested in trying to restore
(rather than discard). What do you think about this proposal for fixing the indentations in the
races (I won't use "pitting" or "Brinelling" or "fretting", to avoid stirring up the mechE's on
this list) :

Quoted message said:

1. For each bearing race, take one side of the headset (cup or race) and rotate by 1/2 the space
between bearings. Goal is to reduce the pit depth halfway.

Quoted message said:

2. For all 4 races/cups, rotate by 1/4 the space between bearings. Goal is to have the "straight
ahead" direction not correspond to any particular pit orientation.

The dimples don't have any particular bias toward any location and for typical old style fixed
headsets with 20 bearing balls the dimples are only 18 degrees apart just like the rollers in the
picture offered at:

geocities.comindex.htmlOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

3. Remove the bearing retainer, add bearings until they don't all seat, then remove 3 bearings,
yielding a headset that's 2 bearings short of a full load. Hearsay from Barnett's bicycle
manual.

That is correct. That puts them at 16.363636... degrees apart. From this you can see that most of
the balls will be teetering in or on the edge of a dimple. Get a new head set and while you're at it
get one of the Shimano, Cane Creek or King units that get around most of this problem.

Quoted message said:

4. Reinstall everything and pack headset until fork turns freely with no front wheel / handlebar,
but doesn't "click" when front brake is locked and I'm on the seat and bike is rocked.

Quoted message said:

5. Ride 1000 + mi on the headset to reduce or redistribute the bearing indentations.

You can try this on a disassembled and cleaned bearing by placing the balls in the race and rotating
it under hand load on the table. I think you'll see a wave of dimple engagement wandering around the
bearing as it turns. This is doomed to failure. What have you got against installing a new head set?
If it is antique consistency, just ignore the dimples. They are only functional for someone who
descends hard and rides rough roads where the clunks can be heard.

Quoted message said:

6. Sand/re-finish the races and then re-chrome the headset to make it look like new. Will nickel
plating of the chrome layer be too soft for the headset races? Should I mask off the races
before attempting to re-chrome this headset? Or should I just skip the nickel plating in the
races?

It will flake off under load. It is sub surface shear loads that cause bearing races to spall. These
will spall immediately.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

I said:

Quoted message said:

So a head-on crash couldn't cause headset indexing?

[email hidden] wrote in message news

Quoted message said:

No but it could bend the steertube of the fork and cause binding and one sided loading of the
lower ball bearing. That in turn could accelerate fretting damage if the bicycle were used
coasting down long straight hills, the cause of indexed steering.

Quoted message said:

So how did it look before the crash. There are many indexed head bearings running around, most
of which are recognized only when they come to a mechanic who recognizes the problem. As I said,
try dimpling a head bearing by hammering on it. A bicycle has a tire between its bearings and
the ground.

You are right that I did not see this bike before the crash. However, I felt safe assuming it was
crash damage because the bike was so new. perhaps not brand new, but certainly little used. it was
one of these trek hybrids that gets used once a year for the annual trip to cape cod.

how long would it take for severe indexing to take place if a bent steerer was the true cause?

IIRC, the indexing on the top bearing was less severe, ie: much smaller dimples, or perhaps none at
all (can't remember, but i did note the difference). At the time I thoguht this uneven dimpling also
suggested crash damage, but i cant nail down the science behind this dubious intuition.

ever curious, anthony

Jim Beam said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> It clearly shows the deformation pattern from a Brinell indentation, including the crater
> "lip". In practice, this lip may not be massively noticeable because it's going to be largely
> flattened each time the ball rolls over it, but over time, the crater become more pronounced,
> and of course, the index will become noticeable.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because there are such tests and materials does not make it happen in ball or roller bearing
races. Please read up on bearing failure before trying to educate wreck.bike.tech on the matter.

Quoted message said:

1. you need to read your testing lit.

Quoted message said:

2. check

timken.comprevent.aspOpen ↗.

Quoted message said:

3. Learn to leave your abused childhood at the door. Then we can talk.

The page you list shows a spalled bearing whose race surface broke out from heavy loading that
caused surface fatigue failure. The false Brinelling picture could just as well be the one here on
the newsgroup:

geocities.comindex.htmlOpen ↗

Just the same, false Brinelling is not caused by the mechanism cited. This must be an ancient text
that no one has bothered to update. False Brinelling is caused by fretting, not lateral sliding of
rollers. In fact the roller sliding concept ignores that ball bearings suffer the same fate if
allowed to fret.

You should read Tedric Harris, who is the true authority on Rolling Element Bearings.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

I have a very old headset from someone else's bike that i'm interested in trying to restore
(rather than discard).

that is a highly questionable exercise. it's technically feasible, but unless you are prepared to
spend many times the value of the piece /and/ have access to some interesting machinery and/or the
piece is fundamentally irreplacable, it's just not worth it.

Quoted message said:

1. For each bearing race, take one side of the headset (cup or race) and rotate by 1/2 the space
between bearings. Goal is to reduce the pit depth halfway.

works for the straight-ahead position, but still doesn't get rid of the previous damage.

Quoted message said:

2. For all 4 races/cups, rotate by 1/4 the space between bearings. Goal is to have the "straight
ahead" direction not correspond to any particular pit orientation.

see above

Quoted message said:

3. Remove the bearing retainer, add bearings until they don't all seat, then remove 3 bearings,
yielding a headset that's 2 bearings short of a full load. Hearsay from Barnett's bicycle
manual.

works, but is not "perfect". see above.

Quoted message said:

4. Reinstall everything and pack headset until fork turns freely with no front wheel / handlebar,
but doesn't "click" when front brake is locked and i'm on the seat and bike is rocked.

5. Ride 1000 + mi on the headset to reduce or redistribute the bearing indentations.

???

Quoted message said:

6. Sand/refinish the races and then rechrome the headset to make it look like new.

it's not perfect, but istr seeing something on andy muzi's site about his refinishing bearing races
for customers with hard to replace components. imo, that is your "least bad" technical solution.
other than being content with keeping it "as-is" and viewing it as an interesting museum piece.

Quoted message said:

Will nickel plating of the chrome layer be too soft for the heaset races ?? Should I mask off
the races before attempting to rechrome this headset ?? Or should I just skip the nickel
plating in the races ?? Thanx,

you're plating on a small section concave surface. this is
a. prone to uneven plate distribution - various field effects
b. prone to rapid spalling.

for a high value/irreplacable component in a shop environment, it's also possible to spray new
material onto the bearing surface and then regrind, but to be hinest, i've only ever seen this done
on large pieces and i doubt the original races are big enough to survive such a proceedure.

if you really must reuse this headset, your cheapest bet is to just use the barnett's solution and
restrict milage as much as possible.

Anthony Anagnostou said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So a head-on crash couldn't cause headset indexing?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No but it could bend the steertube of the fork and cause binding and one sided loading of the
lower ball bearing. That in turn could accelerate fretting damage if the bicycle were used
coasting down long straight hills, the cause of indexed steering.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So how did it look before the crash. There are many indexed head bearings running around, most of
which are recognized only when they come to a mechanic who recognizes the problem. As I said, try
dimpling a head bearing by hammering on it. A bicycle has a tire between its bearings and the
ground.

Quoted message said:

You are right that I did not see this bike before the crash. However, I felt safe assuming it was
crash damage because the bike was so new. Perhaps not brand new, but certainly little used. It was
one of these trek hybrids that gets used once a year for the annual trip to cape cod.

Quoted message said:

How long would it take for severe indexing to take place if a bent steerer was the true cause?

It probably would have little effect other than concentrating the fretting damage to the rear
quadrant of the races because that is the only place the ball would bear after damaging the
steertube. Usually only the fork blades bend on such collisions but the steertube also takes a
slight bend.

Quoted message said:

IIRC, the indexing on the top bearing was less severe, ie: much smaller dimples, or perhaps none
at all (can't remember, but i did note the difference). At the time I thought this uneven dimpling
also suggested crash damage, but i cant nail down the science behind this dubious intuition.

After such a collision, inspecting the frame and fork is important. Often the kink in the system is
only detected by the bicycle not riding straight ahead no-hands. I often see people riding such bent
frames and when I ask them whether they can ride straight ahead no-hands, they look at me with
disbelief that I would suggest doing something so stupid and dangerous as riding no-hands. The
response is generally "I never ride no-hands!" with a tone of disgust.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

jim beam said:

Tim McNamara said:

And again, have the guts to do correct attributions.

attribute what? forgive me being a [censored] but i don't understand what you want with this.

Atribute the text you're replying to the author. Your newsreader should do this automatically (e.g.,
the attribution line above, which is "jim beam <[email hidden]> writes:"😉. You've made several
attacking posts which do not include the attributions- oddly enough, all of them being text from
posts by Jobst. Your last post, from which I took the above text, had a correct attribution to me.
If you're going to attack someone, at least be honest and up front about who it is.

dianne_1234 said:

Quoted message said:

How many miles before the failure?

Quoted message said:

I'd estimate about 400 to 800 miles, but that's just a guess.

Oh, I thought you had previously been happy with them and said this then "eventually" happened?
...Or have you left off some zeros!? (I'm wondering about total use before failure rather than
inability to ride after problem began).

I'm sorry I still haven't seen the picture, but surely something odd must have happened if this was
after just ~600 miles? Was the adjustment particularly tight or loose? Anything else unusual at all
(besides being on a tandem).

Thanks.

~PB

Quoted message said:

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

> The Stronglight A9 headset on my bike is working no slop and no binding. How do you explain
> that?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How do YOU explain it?

Quoted message said:

But I am not claiming that they cannot work, I don't need to explain
it. Your posts imply that they can't work without either slop or binding. That is not true.

I am fairly sure you don't know that. How about giving it the front end bounce test to see that it
doesn't have slop and then give it the vertical swing test to see that it isn't binding. Lift the
bicycle onto your shoulder and lean it forward just enough to make the wheel point straight ahead
and then lightly let it swing from side to side.

It passes the tests. No "noise" detectable when bounced (I know what a headset with play sounds like
when bounced: I recently re-adjusted just to remind myself after reading these threads!), wheel
swings freely.

Quoted message said:

It is this test that all clearance free roller head sets showed that they were running off axis as
the one pictured at:

geocities.comindex.htmlOpen ↗

I don't think the A9 is "clearance free" though if that means tolerable of minimal play. I find it
can cope with a small amount of clearance - just enough to enable it to turn lightly but not enough
to be at all noticeable while riding (even over bumps or light or normal braking).

Quoted message said:

You'll notice that the rollers can even cross up in their plastic cage let alone the whole cage
slipping off to one side as this one did.

Do you not think there could have been an unusual cause or exceptional mileage? Why isn't it more
commonly reported with this common headset?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How many miles does it have and what sort of bicycle are you riding and where? This all makes a
difference.

Quoted message said:

This latest case: Only fitted recently, to Raleigh tourer, done less than 1500 miles, general
riding on roads in the UK. It is working well - with no slop, no binding, smooth steering.

I think it's too early to say anything about the head set after such a short run.

My previous run (on other bike with the slight amount of headset play: which caused absolutely no
problems in practice) was 10,000 miles, with no deterioration in performance.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I previously used one a road bike for about 10,000 miles (without replacing bearings, re-greased
three or four times). I did have to leave a trace of play in (from the start) but I thought that
was because the head tube was not faced properly. It was not enough play to notice *except* when
rocking the bike hard with front brake on, and steering felt good, no trace of indexing, binding
or excessive friction.

The bounce test is the only one that replicates reality because it is this chatter that one hears
while lightly braking on average pavement, the place where the bearing is in the load transition
zone. It is this rattle that is most disconcerting and brings people to try and adjust clearance
only to discover that without clearance, the bearing binds.

I am familiar with the rattle that loose headsets cause but the play was not that much. I find the
rocking test, if done vigourously enough, detects play or clearance that is too small to even notice
when bouncing. I could only feel a small bit of play when rocking hard with brake on hard, and
occasionally at the end of extreme heavy braking as I came to a stop. No problems at all while
riding and the bearings and races survived. That'll do me - and all from an inexpesnive lightweight
headset that hasn't shown the slightest hint of indexing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't see the big deal if the innards need replacing every so often if headset is used for
more miles or in tougher conditions - when the parts are so inexpensive, readily available and
easy to fit.

The innards are the plastic cage and the races. What's left?

That's all I meant. Races are included in the replacement bearings package.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> I have had binding problems with a Stronglight O'Light on another bike. This model has smaller
> rollers in "sealed cartridges".

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have not seen this unit but what do you mean by sealed cartridges?

Quoted message said:

Stronglight describe them as "needle cartridge bearings". Unlike the A9 with loose parts, bearing
retainer fits tight into the tracks and incorporates plastic seals. Designed to be
maintenance-free, the parts require firm prising to separate (I did this to remove seals to
improve performance). THIS model was a dog right from the start.

The A9 shown on the web site and the one on my shelf have their cylindrical rollers in a plastic
cage. I have never seen a "cartridge" bearing roller head set.

The O'Light cartridge also has cylindrical rollers in a plastic cage but the rollers are much
smaller and more numerous; cage snaps tightly into the races. Several other Stronglight models have
same/similar cartridges. Adjustment and performance was dramatically improved after removing the
seals - and further improved after I replaced the lower half of the headset with an A9 one
(threadless forks on this bike). So I can't help thinking the free movement of the A9 cage/races
helps not hinders.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Rollers have been discredited and are not a solution to anything that ball bearings don't do
better.

Quoted message said:

After experiencing slight indexing problems with ordinary headsets, I bought an A9 after reading
many reports of good performance (from users and experts) and because I liked the idea that the
head cups would never need replacing.

Well we see what the experts know and don't know. I'm not so sure that "experts" are
actually being quoted here, like Jim Beam Whiskey's professor who taught him all about
Brinelling. Its a sham.

I'm thinking more about respected British cycling journalists and also Sheldon Brown whom I seem to
remember has written some positive words about Stronglight headsets.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How do you explain that the leading head bearing manufacturers other than Stronglight do not use
rollers?

Quoted message said:

I wasn't actually claiming rollers are superior to balls but merely challenging the idea that
they can't ever work well at all. We have to wonder how the A9 has been so popular for so long.

For short distances, their feet of clay probably won't show up but if used to the tune of 5-10K
miles a year they are dogs.

Ok, thanks, that's a more useful statement than saying they can't work at all. Personally, I don't
mind if I do have replace the bearings & races every so often and I think they're no problem to
manage for plenty more than 5K a year.

However, I probably will have another go with ball bearings some time out of ongoing curisosity,
perhaps on another bike: either Chorus or a Cane Creek/Shimano, but any trouble and I'll be back to
the A9 pronto.

--------
I would be grateful if any reader could email me the picture at the following website as I'm having
technical trouble seeing it (please email me first to see if I've already got it). Thanks.

www.geocities.com/dianne_1234/bikes/index.html

email: [email hidden]

~PB

I said:

I don't think the A9 is "clearance free" though if that means tolerable of minimal play. I find it
can cope with a small amount of clearance - just enough to enable it to turn lightly but not
enough to be at all noticeable while riding (even over bumps or light or normal braking).

Just to make this clearer (because I've been referring to experiences with three different bikes) :-

1. I've needed no play with my latest A9 (threaded) on my tourer.

2. I had to leave a small amount of play in with A9 (threaded) on previous road bike from the
start - but it worked well and did not deteriorate.

3. O'Light threadless on new road bike was [censored]. Ok with seal removed and bottom replaced with A9,
with a tiny bit of play but again no problems in practice apart from strange binding under
strong braking (which I've not experienced on any bike before and I'm not sure is headset
related or not; might be flex in the aluminium steerer?). I plan to eventually get head tube
faced and try another headset.

~PB

Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Gary Young:

Quoted message said:

jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote in message

[snip]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

timken.comprevent.aspOpen ↗.

[snip]

Dear Jim, Gary, and Jose,

When I peeked at the timken bearing page, it pandered to my desire for lurid pictures of failed
bearing surfaces, but it didn't pander quite far enough.

The pictures of the "false brinelling" aren't as good as Dianne's pictures (thanks again Dianne).

That is, there's no enlargement of the "false brinelling" damage on the Timken page.

But there is an enlargement of the true brinelling damage on that Timken page--and I don't
understand it.

I thought that true Brinelling would be a dent, possibly with raised lips, an impact crater.

But the enlargement seems to show nothing but a shadow or discoloration, with striations clearly
passing through it, as if undamaged. It's as if the so-called "plastic deformation" is just burning,
not deformation.

Can any of you (or any other kindly soul) explain what I'm missing in that picture? I hope this
isn't another damned optical illusion.

More perplexed than usual,

Carl Fogel