[Bikerpunk241]

Now that we are hopefully done with ISCG05 rants (Turner's ISCG tabs work just fine, so not a whole lot else matters), headtube rants (You can have the same bar height with the new shorter headtubes, and yes, it will be strong enough), you guys should check out the original pic on this thread. Look at the rear dropouts, it looks like DT did his homework, now to put on the rear wheel you just have to put it in the frame and not fiddle with the axle, as there are holders for the rear axle, similar to what some fork makers have. Just put the wheel in, it holds itself, and slide the axle through to the redesigned hanger, no more little bolts to mess with. Looks sick.

 

[dhkid]

thats really cool. i have always wanted that ona frame. but how do make sure all hubs fit? or do all hubs have the same OD for their axels.

 

[A.P]

Seems as The Woo beat me to it, but WTF are you talking about??

What I so inarticulatley said, was that on the older turners, when I held the frame in my hands in looked at it, there seemed to be many spots on it that had an excess of thick metal plate that could be machined out and save some serious weight. When the guy above my first post said that "he would be nervous about it being 2lbs lighter", I told him about what I remembered. The vertical plate that connects the chainstay to seatstay on the old ones wasnt machined out. There are also a couple other places on the frame where there were large excesses of metal that could have been machined out. Im not trying to bash on turner, as the 07 dhr is probably one of my favorite new 07 bikes, and Im still a big fan of the older ones. My placement may have been wrong, but my idea that they machined out a lot of the cnc plate on the back end to make the 07's that much lighter, seems to be correct..

 

[Fury]

I replaced the yellow with grey in photoshop...

 

[frorider]

interesting discussion on the head tube issue. as an engineer i'm sorta inclined to point out that all else being equal, a taller head tube makes the frame stiffer and (in theory) stiffens up a DC fork. and a fatter head tube stiffens up the frame. bottom line seems to be that a 1.5 HT is the best of all worlds. better from a frame stiffness perspective. gives low and very low bar height (via zero stack headset) without the compromise of an extra-short head tube in a 1.125 ID.

 

[davep]

interesting discussion on the head tube issue. as an engineer i'm sorta inclined to point out that all else being equal, a taller head tube makes the frame stiffer and (in theory) stiffens up a DC fork. and a fatter head tube stiffens up the frame. bottom line seems to be that a 1.5 HT is the best of all worlds. better from a frame stiffness perspective. gives low and very low bar height (via zero stack headset) without the compromise of an extra-short head tube in a 1.125 ID.

Exactly!
whatever length they feel that they can get away with for the h.tube (within given durability, leverage, stiffness) then the same length in a 1.5 would be stronger. Or better yet, lengthen the tube a little to give a larger contact area for the down and top tubes. Gives a better connection without raising the (high due to 8" forks) front end any further. A little extention at the bottom, below the down tube, would also help prevent flat crown contact (a big issue with the current frame).

 

[Bicyclist]

They should just offer a 1.5" and a 1.125" HT version that'll end up with the same front end height.

 

[davep]

What I so inarticulatley said, was that on the older turners, when I held the frame in my hands in looked at it, there seemed to be many spots on it that had an excess of thick metal plate that could be machined out and save some serious weight. When the guy above my first post said that "he would be nervous about it being 2lbs lighter", I told him about what I remembered. The vertical plate that connects the chainstay to seatstay on the old ones wasnt machined out. There are also a couple other places on the frame where there were large excesses of metal that could have been machined out. Im not trying to bash on turner, as the 07 dhr is probably one of my favorite new 07 bikes, and Im still a big fan of the older ones. My placement may have been wrong, but my idea that they machined out a lot of the cnc plate on the back end to make the 07's that much lighter, seems to be correct..

That guy above your first post was me. I own an 05' dhr (same as 04 and 06) and am very familiar with the frame. There are very few areas that could benefit from further machining, as kidwoo alluded to. Go look closely at a current DHR. I stand behind my original statements, that 2 pounds is a LOT to remove and if that figure becoomes reality (I highly doubt it) I would be suspect of the durability of the frame vs typical 'Turner durability'.

I am all for making super light frames, but lets call it as it is. No one will expect a SOCOM to last, as it is marketed as a 'sacrifice all for light weight' frame. As a 'consumer' I dont want to pay top dollar for a one season frame. I like all of my Turners a ton, and a lot of that has to do with durability, both in a physical form, and via the best-bar-none customer service comming from Turner.

 

[Bikerpunk241]

They should just offer a 1.5" and a 1.125" HT version that'll end up with the same front end height.

That might work, if you want to pay a whole lot extra for different front end tubing diameters and jigs to hold the tubing. Really though, how often have you gone through a corner and said "Wow, I would have made that race run faster if my headtube weld area was larger and stiffer..." I think so long as it holds the frame together, like the lightweight 1 1/8 inch headtubes did on Kirkaldie's custom bikes, it's alright. I don't think many of us are bigger bashers than him. That's why he was on it first.

 

[binary visions]

They should just offer a 1.5" and a 1.125" HT version that'll end up with the same front end height.

Yeah, I bet Dave Turner would just love to set up an different set of jigs and double the amount of product numbers he has to build, inventory and keep track of, not to mention trying to predict how many of each he will sell

 

[ElTORO]

Show me a dhr for 2600

Go-Ride has them for $2500. But you get a hub so? Or beyondbikes if your that lame (2500. + TAX. prob. more then $2,600.)

About the cuervo/dhr comparison, the numbers may be close but my money is on the turner in the weight dept. whats the ventana weigh anyways

Well 06 vs 06. Turner was around 12.2. Cuervo was I think 11.4. (All my sites are blocked so I not 100% but I know for sure it was lighter then the 06 Turner)

 

[bizutch]

Going to a 1 1/8th is a poor decision at best, and plain stupid at worst. 1.5 comes wiht far too many benefits that outweight the measly weight gain that it comes with. Man Turner is odd. So many brilliant things, then always something where you just sit there and say "guh??".

wow...you should probably go tell Brandon over at Specialized that right now. I mean, after all, of all the BigHit's, Demo 8's and 9's manufactured by them over the last 6-8 years, they must have figured out 1 1/8 is "a poor decision at best, and plain stupid at worst"
Gosh...wait til you tell him.....he'll be stunned.

 

[dante]

wow...you should probably go tell Brandon over at Specialized that right now. I mean, after all, of all the BigHit's, Demo 8's and 9's manufactured by them over the last 6-8 years, they must have figured out 1 1/8 is "a poor decision at best, and plain stupid at worst"
Gosh...wait til you tell him.....he'll be stunned.

I think he already knows that...

:biggrin:

 

[bizutch]

I think he already knows that...

:biggrin:

bad example. They had to make that bike that way to accomadate all the single crown park bikes that are coming with 1.5 diameter steerers....NOT a DH decision.

 

[Dogboy]

bad example. They had to make that bike that way to accomadate all the single crown park bikes that are coming with 1.5 diameter steerers....NOT a DH decision.

They make that fork with a 1 1/8" steerer too ya know.

 

[bizutch]

They make that fork with a 1 1/8" steerer too ya know.

Bro...go push other people's buttons with short sited posts and go do your homework. Yeah, so they do. Congrats on being e-brilliant. But Manitou isn't the only company producing 1.5 steerer tube bikes for park hucking, so Specialized is giving those of you out there who choose to buy a Demo 7 frame....versatility in fork choice.

On a Demo 8 you should be running an 8inch travel fork to maintain intended geometry. No Dual crown fork comes in 1.5 and Specialized last time I was told, had a total of 1 Big Hit over the lifetime of the design that had a headtube issue. Don't know the total Big Hits, Demo 8's and Demo 9's produced, but I'm gonna guess that to be a failure rate of something like 1/10 of 1% of all frames out there. Apparently, if you build it right...1 1/8 is more than sufficient.

I rode DHR's from '02 to 05, 4 different versions. I don't ride Turner anymore for the simple fact that my local shop carries Specialized and we run what they want.

If not...I'd rep a DHR as long as they make them and have tremendous faith in Turner's bikes.

All this stuff you guys keep bagging on him about his "marketing ability"??? He's the owner, a hell of a designer and an intense rider. He doesn't have to be a good marketer because everything his company does is done the right freaking way. They're all great guys who care about bikes, riding, quality and offering people what they want. I'm going to fault the guy for not being a good mouthpiece or spinmaster!

Everybody is just trying to find something to nitpick about.

 

[Dogboy]

Chill Butch. I've already stated that I really dig the new design.

But, like others have stated, the choices to do a 1 1/8" headtube and iscg old mounts seem shortsighted.

 

[WhiteRavenKS]

so if a chainguide goes on the frame and stays there... and a fork goes into the headtube and stays there.... then why do we need 12 pages of interweb opinions?

i thought the point of making these changes was to deliver a better race bike. seems like that's being done quite nicely. if you really dont like the new one so much, i'll sell you my 04. it's in nice shape. where is that :rollseyes: guy at

 

[bizutch]

Chill Butch. I've already stated that I really dig the new design.

But, like others have stated, the choices to do a 1 1/8" headtube and iscg old mounts seem shortsighted.

I'm trying to say that a 1 1/8 inch headtube is NOT shortsighted if you do it right and install a quality headset. If 1 1/8 is shortsighted, why is it that every single DH and FR bike that Specialized has manufactured in the past 6-8 yearsdoes not have issues? Why is it that Intense, Santa Cruz, Ventana, Foes, Davinci, Norco, GT, Orange, Morewood...and the list goes on...are still building every single DH frame that they make with 1 1/8? Is it because they don't know what we e-know??? Why is it all these engineer and metallurgy and analytical bicycle company guys think they are so much smarter than us???

Just because 1.5 exists does not make it better.

And I didn't say anything about ISCG, ISGS, ISSCI, INS, or any other abbreviations..cause I know nothing about it. I just ask Tobler and he schools me...

 

[binary visions]

Is it because they don't know what we e-know??? Why is it all these engineer and metallurgy and analytical bicycle company guys think they are so much smarter than us???

It's funny, bizutch, I don't usually see your posts as being quite this hard headed and willfully ignorant.

Just because 1 1/8" works okay doesn't mean it's necessarily as good, okay? Bikes have worked fine for years without new innovations and new designs, but the new stuff works better and pushes the sport forward. There is no significant disadvantage to going to 1.5 headtubes, and yet there are significant advantages: strength of the headtube, strength of the weld area to the top/down tubes, increased strength and life of your headset and the option to run 1.5" forks. Going back to 1 1/8" saves a minimal amount of weight while decreasing strength of the aforementioned items, and limiting your choices.

Period.

Nobody is claiming that Turner's bikes suck, so go take your knee jerk defense of all things Turner and Specialized and stick it up your butt. There was a simple statement that they did have 1.5" headtubes, which carried the associated advantages, and it was suggested that going back to 1 1/8" wasn't a good decision in some people's eyes. My guess is that Turner simply did everything possible to shave weight this year and get that big weight reduction, which is fine. However the suggestion that it might have been short sighted is not without merit - if the number of people who would have been willing to make the weight tradeoff outweighs the number of people who would look to another frame because of the small weight increase (which is a very good possibility), then it's short sighted. You being a dick about it doesn't make your disagreement appear any more valid.

 

[Transcend]

Just to be clear, Orange does a 224 with a 1.5" headtube. I just don't think anyone bought it. They also do a hardtail freeride bike with one (SubZero I think it is called).

 

[klunky]

Im sure I read somewhere on here that 1.5 headtubes can be made as light as 1 1/8 (pretty sure it was DW that said it?)

 

[davep]

WOW

My point with the 1.5 is quite on target with what BV said. Positives w/o negatives, simple as that.

I want (like MANY others) a low front end. 1.5 Allows a lower front end period!!

It is true that many mfg still use a 1 1/8 and it is durable and works, but racers are still trying to lower the front of their bikes. Upside down stems, super low rise bars, modded forks to be shorter (7.5"), stems under the top clamp,and as Mr Turner said himself, facing down the head tube into the welds are just some of the ways that guys are trying to lower the front of DH bikes.

1.5 offers a 3/4" height rediction with no negatives, it is that simple.

Just so everyone knows that this is not a turner thing, I own two (just sold one).

 

[bizutch]

It's funny, bizutch, I don't usually see your posts as being quite this hard headed and willfully ignorant.

You being a dick about it doesn't make your disagreement appear any more valid.

And here I thought you knew me. :biggrin:
Hardheaded...yes.
Willfully ignorant. No.
Me being a dick...usually...but not in this instance. Just typed too much to put cute little smilies and big hugs and beer mugs in my posts. Just trying to join the banter.

Knee jerk reaction? All things Specialized and Turner? Just using examples of the products I've personally used and I knew the info about how durable the Specialized headtubes have been so I used that info in my argument.

Next time you call me ignorant and tell me to shove stuff up my butt, at least bitch slap me and call me your little woman so I can feel loved!

 

[dropmachine]

1.5 is stronger, allows for more headset choices, makes the front end lower, and basically fists 1 1/8th. THe negatives are....its slightly heavier, and your fork crowns might contact the frame.

Heavier, whatever. Do it right, and the weight gain is minimal.

For the fork crowns, I have a Rotec now and have never hit them, as i don't find many turns that require such a sharp steering angle. Besides the manufacturer can help with that in thier design anyways.

The simple fact is going to a 1 1.8th is a step back for turner. Theres just no smart reason to justify it. Just because its Dave Turner doesn't not mean the guy is always right. Hes freakin brilliant, and his bikes rock the house for sure, but this move makes no sense.

Far as the single crown debate goes....

I dunno if many of you have noticed, but we are in the middle of a movement here for forks. The Totem has basically slapped down a new wave of riders, those that can now count on thier 7 inch singlecrown to handle race stresses. Tyler Morland raced his Totem, and if he can do it, it'll hold up to anyone.

Look I'm the last guy to jump on a bandwagon. I love citing examples of bandwagon fad junk and ridiculing it. But the fact is 1.5 has far more positives then negatives, and not using it is questionable. Theres just not enough reason not to.

 

[OGRipper]

There is a stated goal of significant weight reduction. Reports vary, but everything I've read shows that a 1.5 with a reducing headset is slightly heavier than a straight 1.125 with a regular headset. Plus, unless you go integrated your stem is heavier too. It's race bike, and all the good race forks are 1.125 right now. If anyone has numbers to prove me wrong, I would love to see it, but otherwise those of you saying 1.5 has absolutely no disadvantages are a bit off - it's most likely heavier, particularly once you build a complete bike. The geometry will be corrected for 200mm forks and that combined with a short headtube should make it lower than the current version, so those worried about a low front end can chill. What's the big deal?

That frame looks sweet.

 

[davep]

It seems kind of silly comming back to this over and over again, but people keep grasping at straws to try and justify the 1 1/8.

OG...on thes application, 99% of people are going to run a king steel set or equivalent @ 225g, the bearing assembly used with the 'zero stack' is max 50g (2 bearings, compression ring, crown race). That leaves 175g for the e13's, most likely fairly close. If you are truely anal, there is room on the e13's to be driled out..

As for the stem...stem has nothing to do with it..DH forks run a 1 1/8 steer tube

I own a DHR and I have done EVERYTHING possible to lower my front. I would like to be able to run it lower, AND have the ability to adjust both hand position and head angle up and down independantly. A shorter 1.5 would allow ALL of these things, AND be lighter that the current design.

 

[Cant Climb]

Just because 1 1/8" works okay doesn't mean it's necessarily as good, okay? Bikes have worked fine for years without new innovations and new designs, but the new stuff works better and pushes the sport forward. There is no significant disadvantage to going to 1.5 headtubes

Sure, Chris King doesn't make a 1.5 headset.....it sucks having to use thoose reducers.

 

[binary visions]

Sure, Chris King doesn't make a 1.5 headset.....it sucks having to use thoose reducers.

 

[OGRipper]

OG...on thei application, 99% of people are going to run a king steel set or equivalent @ 225g, the bearing assembly used with the 'zero stack' is max 50g (2 bearings, compression ring, crown race). That leaves 175g for the e13's, most likely fairly close. If you are truely anal, there is room on the e13's to be driled out..

As for the stem...stem has nothing to do with it..DH forks run a 1 1/8 steer tube

I agree the horse is dead, and good point about the stem - I wasn't thinking right. But I don't agree that 99% will run a steel headset - most racers I know will run a regular king. After all these are racers begging for lighter bikes. Anyway...

 

[1soulrider]

This is getting silly...

The bike will have a 1 1/8 headtube, deal with it.
I personally think it's the right way to go, but acknowledge that everyone might not agree.

It sounds like the bike will be polished and annoed pewter gray. Should look slick, although I like the look of beadblasted & annoed frames a little better.

 

[Fury]

I've been running the FSA headsets on my DHR's for 3 years now - orbit extreme pro reducing headsets and then an E13 FSA combo on my 06. I was planning on using an FSA Orbit Extreme Pro 1 1/8" Deep Cup headset on the 07 - claimed weight is 125 grams.

http://www.fullspeedahead.com/fly.aspx?layout=product&taxid=411&pid=243

If I run a King steelset thats 223 grams (and a lot more $$). Is the regular King 1 1/8" headset not enough for DH anymore?

 

[davep]

This is getting silly...

The bike will have a 1 1/8 headtube, deal with it.
I personally think it's the right way to go, but acknowledge that everyone might not agree.

It sounds like the bike will be polished and annoed pewter gray. Should look slick, although I like the look of beadblasted & annoed frames a little better.

If that is the way it is going to be, then that is the way it will be, i will stop stating my point, but i will not buy a frame that raises my front end .7 inches. Hopefully I can keep my 05 rocking until there is a viable gearbox bike on the market..maybe i should start saving for a Lahar..mmmm.

 

[xy9ine]

maybe i should start saving for a Lahar..mmmm.

which eliminates the need for headsets altogether (and bb's) by using burly bearings pressed directly into the frame. deleting the redundant interface (a bearing pressed into a cup assembly which is in turn pressed into the frame) makes alot of sense, really.

 

[ChrisKring]

The 1.5" steerer is required to run a singlecrown that can handle the insane moment at the lower race. It also helps with giving more space to weld the tope tube and down tube to. I haven't seen a headtube ripped off a bike in quite a few years so it seems like the biggest reason is to run a singlecrown.

Brapp, off to wash my 250SXF that sucks since it has a 1" steerer.

 

[davep]

The 1.5" steerer is required to run a singlecrown that can handle the insane moment at the lower race. It also helps with giving more space to weld the tope tube and down tube to. I haven't seen a headtube ripped off a bike in quite a few years so it seems like the biggest reason is to run a singlecrown.

Brapp, off to wash my 250SXF that sucks since it has a 1" steerer.

You could actually read the thread cool guy. No one is arguing the durability issue..

 

[binary visions]

Next time you call me ignorant and tell me to shove stuff up my butt, at least bitch slap me and call me your little woman so I can feel loved!

Well happy birthday, bitch.

 

[bizutch]

Well happy birthday, bitch.

thank you...chocolate cake will die tonight!

 

[Jeremy R]

thank you...chocolate cake will die tonight!

Happy Birthday Strom!

 

[bizutch]

Happy Birthday Strom!

SNL Strom Thurmond: "Do you find that they like the more...hardcore pornography?"