[Curb Hucker]

My machinist friend is looking into making aftermarket axles for Chris King hubs. 12,14, and 15mm axles for 135mm hubs along with a 10mm threaded thru-axle with stainless hardware for standard dropout bikes. And he is also looking into making 12,14, and 15mm axle kits for Kings 140 and 160 tandem hubs while at the same time bumping them up to 145mm and 165mm spacings to fit the majority of DH bikes. The axles would be made of stainless or 7075AL hes still deciding, and would be percision CNC machined and CNC ground where the needle bearing interface is. The axle kits would be of OEM spec and would require no modifications to the hub, and would be adjustable with cone wrenches. These axles would also not void warranty because if you manage to break something on the hub, you could just pop the origional axle back in when you send it in.

Just wondering if this would be something anyone would be interested in, a bit of marketing research on the

 

[Zark]

I think I'll wait for CK to do it right.

 

[Zaskar Rider]

These axles would also not void warranty because if you manage to break something on the hub, you could just pop the origional axle back in when you send it in.

Hmm lemme think... Modifying a part and using it for something other than its intended use, breaking it, putting the old parts back in and sending it in to get a new one on someone elses dime. No thanks I'm not going to screw a respectable company like King. :nuts:

 

[buildyourown]

They already make a 10mm bolt on with stainless "funn" bolts
You could probably sell some if the quality were up to par of the original.
As a machinist / tool maker. I don't think you need to OD grind them if they are done on a decent CNC lathe.

 

[DßR]

IIRC there's something wierd about the 160 hubs - I don't think that spacing includes enough of a freehub width to accommodate a 9sp cassette. This may be something I'm way off base on, but I recall looking at one in their catalog and it looked like it could only hold a couple of cogs..... I dunno.

 

[Jm_]

along with a 10mm threaded thru-axle with stainless hardware for standard dropout bikes. QUOTE]

These are called BMX axles, they can fit in your shimano and other hubs. I work on em daily

 

[Curb Hucker]

They already make a 10mm bolt on with stainless "funn" bolts
You could probably sell some if the quality were up to par of the original.
As a machinist / tool maker. I don't think you need to OD grind them if they are done on a decent CNC lathe.

the part of the stock axle where it contacts the needle bearings is OD ground

 

[Tarpon]

You can accomplish a lot of what you are describing with the CK HD axle. It uses the funn bolts (M12x1.0 thread with 10mm neck) for standard dropouts. You can run a 10mm thru axle (needs a little shimming on the OD) without modification, I'm using the Saint derailleur and bolt with one now in a 14mm droput. A decent machinist could make new bolts for 12 to 14mm dropouts and it would not compromise the axle. CK could easily tweak the HD axle for these different applications but does not seem to want to.

 

[Espen]

A bad idea, for several reasons!

- You will never match the CK quality. CK will defenately avoid all warranty if these axles where used.

- The OD is ofcource like a mirror, its hard, and made out of a pretty special material. Stainless and hard enought to stand the wear of the needle bearings. (and they exist in 3 different editions)

The 160mm CK hubs got tha same hubshell as the 135mm hub. (no dishless here)

More than 12mm TA is impossible.

Why make a 10mm TA when CK makes the superlightweight and suerstrong Funbolt kit??

Good luck.

e

 

[dropmachine]

Didn't you modify an existing King axle to work with 12mm? I'd be more comfortable with something like that.

Actually, I am gonna steal that idea for sure.

YOINK!

 

[Espen]

The funbolt axle can be modified to accept a 12mm TA. This is a wery small and safe mod. The Funboltaxle got a better bearingadjustment too.


E

 

[Fulton]

I'm not saying this is a good/bad idea, but I just happened to have a king rear axle laying around...........

The hub could easily accept a 15mm axle.

The 160 tandem hub uses the single speed hub sheel, meaning it's much wider, and would build a dishless wheel. from the king website:
"The 160mm tandem rear hub uses our SingleSpeed Rear hubshell. The 160mm rear also builds a very strong, symetrical rear wheel"

 

[Curb Hucker]

A bad idea, for several reasons!

- You will never match the CK quality. CK will defenately avoid all warranty if these axles where used.

you'd be surprised

- The OD is ofcource like a mirror, its hard, and made out of a pretty special material. Stainless and hard enought to stand the wear of the needle bearings. (and they exist in 3 different editions)

A well skilled machinist can handle this

The 160mm CK hubs got tha same hubshell as the 135mm hub. (no dishless here)

I looked into this and fulton has the right info

More than 12mm TA is impossible.

up to 19.5mm would be possible

Why make a 10mm TA when CK makes the superlightweight and suerstrong Funbolt kit??

Thats what this post is for

Good luck.

e

 

[Tarpon]

Seems to me what people really need to do if they want more options like these from CK is to put pressure on the company to offer them. As previously mentioned, most of this is easily done and there is a market out there for at least some of them. If CK can offer a special version of the 20mm front hub for the Maverick fork they ought to be able to make some of these 135mm axle options. And what about a 12x150mm rear hub?

Anyway, send emails requesting these products to CK and maybe even generate some polls or threads that you can forward links to showing that the demand is out there.

 

[sikocycles]

i would try it

 

[Kornphlake]

I'd want a high quality, hardened, stainless steel, not just some scrap you have lying around. I don't have a King hub though so my opinion isn't really that important. Generally I think you pay too much for a king hub to have to go to the trouble of buying an aftermarket kit to make it fit your frame. At the prices they charge CK should be a lot more accomodating.

 

[buildyourown]

Seems to me what people really need to do if they want more options like these from CK is to put pressure on the company to offer them. As previously mentioned, most of this is easily done and there is a market out there for at least some of them. If CK can offer a special version of the 20mm front hub for the Maverick fork they ought to be able to make some of these 135mm axle options. And what about a 12x150mm rear hub?

Anyway, send emails requesting these products to CK and maybe even generate some polls or threads that you can forward links to showing that the demand is out there.

I'm pretty sure people have been asking for years. That's why VV thinks there is a market. CK has been "working" on a BB for years. They would sell like hotcakes if they ever released it. CK is weird about stuff like that.

 

[azonicbruce]

I'm pretty sure people have been asking for years. That's why VV thinks there is a market. CK has been "working" on a BB for years. They would sell like hotcakes if they ever released it. CK is weird about stuff like that.

Same with a 1.5 headset. I called them about it and they said they plan on it but just aren't ready production-wise to make it feasible right now.

I can totally understand why they wouldn't from a business standpoint. The place I work promises the world but then underdelivers. Not only is our quality suffering but delivery times are horrendous. All of this because we take on such a huge work load.

Chris King doesn't want to tarnish their reputation so they only take on the project they can handle and still deliver on quality and keep their reputation.

That's my guess.

 

[Kornphlake]

I've been saying CK is wierd about stuff for a long time. I admire the quality of their products but it seems like they're in their own world when it comes to new product development and pricing. Supposedly there was supposed to be a CK bottom brakcet like 3 years ago, a 1.5 headset was supposed to be available last summer (at least according to eMTy BeeR). I wonder how a mag lite can be sold for under $20 but a CK headset costs $100 surely bearings don't cost that much, if they do CK needs to look into ways to use quality off the shelf bearings.

 

[buildyourown]

I've been saying CK is wierd about stuff for a long time. I admire the quality of their products but it seems like they're in their own world when it comes to new product development and pricing. Supposedly there was supposed to be a CK bottom brakcet like 3 years ago, a 1.5 headset was supposed to be available last summer (at least according to eMTy BeeR). I wonder how a mag lite can be sold for under $20 but a CK headset costs $100 surely bearings don't cost that much, if they do CK needs to look into ways to use quality off the shelf bearings.

CK machines and grinds all there bearings in-house. If you have ever owned and abused a CK headset, you'll understand that it is worth it. $130 retail really isn't that bad when you look at all the work that goes into them. If that same part went on an airplane, it would cost $800.

 

[azonicbruce]

I've been saying CK is wierd about stuff for a long time. I admire the quality of their products but it seems like they're in their own world when it comes to new product development and pricing. Supposedly there was supposed to be a CK bottom brakcet like 3 years ago, a 1.5 headset was supposed to be available last summer (at least according to eMTy BeeR). I wonder how a mag lite can be sold for under $20 but a CK headset costs $100 surely bearings don't cost that much, if they do CK needs to look into ways to use quality off the shelf bearings.

I think that has to do more with market economics. They charge $100 'cause they CAN, and people buy them. Even at that price they still are flying out the door. If they lowered their price then even more people would want to buy them and they'd get even MORE bogged down and have even LESS time to work on other projects like a BB and 1.5 headset.

 

[Kornphlake]

Yeah but airplanes aren't sold in quantites that CK headsets are and they have to pay a premium price for an approved contractor. CK has been in the business long enough that they should have been able to figure out a way to make those bearings a little cheaper, or find somebody who will do it for them so they can free up their resources to focus on new product development that everybody is asking for.

 

[buildyourown]

Yeah but airplanes aren't sold in quantites that CK headsets are and they have to pay a premium price for an approved contractor. CK has been in the business long enough that they should have been able to figure out a way to make those bearings a little cheaper, or find somebody who will do it for them so they can free up their resources to focus on new product development that everybody is asking for.

I've made lots of parts for airplanes in my garage and I was never certified. (makes you want to fly, doesn't it?)
I think it's more of a CK business model. The guy is a little cooky, and it shows sometimes. He could use off the shelf bearings and he could outsource them. But he doesn't want to. Why else would he move his factory twice in 5 years? It's a strange way to do business, but it seems to be working and I'm not going to complain as long as my headsets keep working.

 

[Kornphlake]

Well saying a guy is cocky isn't very nice so I was trying to pick some real business related issues but the bottom line is Mr. King has a little too much faith in his own facility and lacks respect for anybody else. I'm not saying that outsourcing everything is the best way to run a business, I think we could save ourselves a lot of headaches if we stopped outsourcing as much, but bearings for example are pretty stupid simple parts, cheap ones sell for a few pennies, quality ones sell for less than $20. I guess it's just a different business philosophy than I have but I'd think outsourcing bearings or sending the aluminum cups out to a good job shop would cut costs alot. Really who knows, I don't think Mag Lite outsources any of their metal parts yet they're able to hit a pretty good price point, perhaps CK is making 1000% profit on headsets and has an extremely streamlined in house manufacturing process. New product development wouldn't suggest that though.

 

[Dusty Bottoms]

here ya go....

http://marketplace.consumerreview.com/cgi-bin/classifieds/classifieds.pl?db=MtbReview&website=MtbReview&language=&session_key=41262e3a3029bbf8&search_and_display_db_button=on&db_id=76083&results_format=long&query=retrieval&exact_match=on

 

[dan-o]

My guess on King's reluctance to outsource is their manufacturing ethics (recycling, minimal waste etc as outlined on their site) in addition to quality control and protecting the jobs of the employees. The current set up keeps his workers employed, his conscience in check and quality high. The recent relocations were done to reduce overhead and lower cost of living for the employees.

 

[buildyourown]

Well saying a guy is cocky isn't very nice

I didn't mean cocky, I meant cooky. As in a strange way to run a business. He is putting other things ahead of money and sales numbers. Which is a good thing if you can stay in business.

 

[Jm_]

CK machines and grinds all there bearings in-house. If you have ever owned and abused a CK headset, you'll understand that it is worth it. $130 retail really isn't that bad when you look at all the work that goes into them. If that same part went on an airplane, it would cost $800.

As someone in the aviation industry, I can say that line of reasoning is BS. Quality bearings cost a few dollars (as opposed to a few cents for non-quality bearings).

If CKs bearings were really that far and beyond everything else, they'd be making bearings for turbine engines, where if you didn't have to replace them for 10 years you'd be able to bank money...

BTW, there's nothing special about CK headsets, they are good, but because they are good CK charges as much as people will pay, not as much as they are "worth". I've had a cane creek headset for over 5 years. I put bearings in it a few months ago just because I felt it was time, total cost, for headset is about 40 bucks, bearings were less than 8 bucks. If I get 5 years on these bearings too, I'll have a total outlay of 48 bucks. Not bad. For the cost of a CK, I can buy 1 of these headsets every 3.33 years anyhow.

If put in properly, any headset should last a LONG LONG time. I work on bikes in a bike shop and I work on POS bikes all day long, and they are definitely more than 10 years old. Some could use bearings, but a lot of the bikes don't need bearings, and only need occasional regreasing. The headset simply doesn't see a crazy amount of force like the bottom bracket.

There is nothing in the CK headset that makes them worth $120, CK has no "holy grail" of aerospace technology. They make a good product, have a good warrenty, and charge as much as the market will bear. I'd say they are making gobs of proffit on them, based on how many people have $650 of CK parts on their frames...

 

[Kornphlake]

learn how to read you freaking moron (or something like that)

yeah I guess in the end he's making money, his products are high quality and seem to be selling well at the given price so he's doing something right, although maybe he's not doing everything as well as he could for his bottom line. I must be mildly dislexic when it comes to differentiating between the words cocky and cooky, sorry to mis-quote you.

 

[Kornphlake]

As someone in the aviation industry, I can say that line of reasoning is BS. Quality bearings cost a few dollars (as opposed to a few cents for non-quality bearings).

If CKs bearings were really that far and beyond everything else, they'd be making bearings for turbine engines, where if you didn't have to replace them for 10 years you'd be able to bank money...

BTW, there's nothing special about CK headsets, they are good, but because they are good CK charges as much as people will pay, not as much as they are "worth". I've had a cane creek headset for over 5 years. I put bearings in it a few months ago just because I felt it was time, total cost, for headset is about 40 bucks, bearings were less than 8 bucks. If I get 5 years on these bearings too, I'll have a total outlay of 48 bucks. Not bad. For the cost of a CK, I can buy 1 of these headsets every 3.33 years anyhow.

If put in properly, any headset should last a LONG LONG time. I work on bikes in a bike shop and I work on POS bikes all day long, and they are definitely more than 10 years old. Some could use bearings, but a lot of the bikes don't need bearings, and only need occasional regreasing. The headset simply doesn't see a crazy amount of force like the bottom bracket.

There is nothing in the CK headset that makes them worth $120, CK has no "holy grail" of aerospace technology. They make a good product, have a good warrenty, and charge as much as the market will bear. I'd say they are making gobs of proffit on them, based on how many people have $650 of CK parts on their frames...

Right on JM, I don't personally feel that a CK headset is worth retail price, they're great headsets but they're not lightyears ahead of any other headset. Bearings are bearings, I wish MTBR and Pinkbike would quit giving CK all kinds of hype for having some space age technology that nobody else can get, that's just not true, if Kaman or SKF wanted to make headset bearings for a relatively miniscule market they could make bearings just as good or better than what CK is making. I'd personally rather see FSA or Cane Creek or some other innovative company come out with a new headset standard that uses cups that will accept an industrial standard bearing (like you'd find on a washing machine or a power drill for example) that can be bought from a bearing distributor for a couple bucks. I wouldn't even mind if we all went back to loose balls if the cups and races were actually hardened steel.

 

[250ox]

Sounds dope Cane he do it for A Cannondale Fire Hub Like the one that comes on the chase ???

 

[Prechrysler]

They're so expensive so people will buy them. They are highly coveted because they are so expensive. It is a marketing ploy that is used constantly. Why buy a rediculously overpriced CK fragrance when you can buy it's designer impostor counterpart for a fraction of the cost. They smell the same, why pay the larger price? Because, people are shallow, and companies play on that to sell their product for much more than it is worth.

 

[azonicbruce]

They're so expensive so people will buy them. They are highly coveted because they are so expensive. It is a marketing ploy that is used constantly. Why buy a rediculously overpriced CK fragrance when you can buy it's designer impostor counterpart for a fraction of the cost. They smell the same, why pay the larger price? Because, people are shallow, and companies play on that to sell their product for much more than it is worth.

OK, I think we're seeing both extremes here. "Chris King's are the end all of quality products" and "Chris King's bearings aren't that good and its all a marketing ploy"

As has been mentioned before, if you've actually OWNED a Chris King, you know that you DON'T ever regret paying what you did for it. I've had DiaCompe, FSA, and other "Sealed" type bearing headsets, and they were nothing but a pain; always had to maintain them. When I got my Chris King, I NEVER, ever, ever had to touch it or even think about it...

So, I didn't buy one just because "ooh they're so expesive" but because I bought it, it worked better than I expected, and so I'm a happy customer.

Now, are there any other headset out these days that would be just as good? Probably, but I still don't regret paying $100. In my mind, it was worth it. Perhaps I'll try another brand and be just as pleased. Until then I think Chris King makes awesome products.

Another example of this type of company is Thomson.

 

[Espen]

Chris King makes great products period! High quality, good looking, low maintainance, long lasting, lightweight items. They are proud of their products and company, with a good reason!

They take care about their impoyees, they care about the trails and the whole enviorement, they are not in this biz just to earn fast money.
On a 4k bike, 100$ is nothing.
There should be more companies like CK.

Back to the axles. I did'nt ment to be an AH.

You guys are right about the 160mm hub.

If you want a one piece axle with the "funbolt preloadring" (wich is the best solution imo) and you want some material in the wall, 15mm would be max. Thats enough anyway.

If you guys manage to make a 100% solution, it would be great, of cource!!


E

 

[buildyourown]

As someone in the aviation industry, I can say that line of reasoning is BS. Quality bearings cost a few dollars (as opposed to a few cents for non-quality bearings).


...

In my experience as an aerospace machinist, if you designed an assembly with the tolerances and QC of a CK headset, and put it on an airplane, it would cost a lot more than $100. Don't you think that if CK could get a comparable bearing for $2, they would.

 

[Dingus McGee]

My guess on King's reluctance to outsource is their manufacturing ethics (recycling, minimal waste etc as outlined on their site) in addition to quality control and protecting the jobs of the employees. The current set up keeps his workers employed, his conscience in check and quality high. The recent relocations were done to reduce overhead and lower cost of living for the employees.

Yep, that and the fact that California is not good for doing business -AND-
doing much metalwork ESPECIALLY anodizing practically requires an act of congress (Esp in Santa Barbara from what CK told me). Chris started his company by dumpster-diving super-high precision medical equipment
bearings and developing a love for them (again, that's what he said).
He does not love the mighty dollar enough to compromise (my opinion there).

Still, I would also support a small aftermarket niche product as described.
I love small batch indy stuff. Now, what can I do for my Hope Bulb rear (bolt-on 12mm?)

 

[OGRipper]

One of the justifications for King doing things in-house is his responsible environmental philosophy. There was an article in Bike mag a little while back showing how King's company has taken a number of steps to reduce hazardous waste and other harmful byproducts generated in the manufacturing processes. The decision to do a lot of it in-house is based on the fact that most of the companies that sell components off the shelf are much less environmentally responsible. That article was a real eye opener for me.

The fact that not one person mentioned it yet shows they are not doing it for purposes of marketing. They don't brag about it but there's no question it increases the cost of the products. And it also justifies having all the control that comes with doing things in-house.

But yeah they definitely should listen and make 12mm rear hubs with different spacing options.

 

[SpasticJack]

In addition to their bearings being pretty damn smooth, they are also USER-SERVICEABLE. This is as much a part of their philosophy as the Puck machine. One might be able to find COTS bearings that would do the job but I doubt you'd be able to flush, regrease and then seal them back up good as new in a matter of minutes. If you liked the article in BIKE, check the Puck article on their website.

http://www.chrisking.com/pucks/index.html

I have a Fun bolt/HD axle and if the need ever pops up, would probably have it drilled to accept a 12mm axle.

The last I heard about the BB, they aren't going to do anything with it until the BB shell standard changes to something bigger.

 

[buildyourown]

OG, that is what I was referring to when I mentioned that CK has a different business model than most companies. I also said it is a goo thing if he can make it work. However, I think does some weird things too. The whole puck machine is completely unneeded. All machine shops recycle because it is cheaper than landfilling them. We get paid for the chips from the recycler. Why is pressing them into a puck any better? That's what I meant by CK being goofy sometimes. Good business ethics, but somewhat goofy.

 

[Prechrysler]

OK, I think we're seeing both extremes here. "Chris King's are the end all of quality products" and "Chris King's bearings aren't that good and its all a marketing ploy"

As has been mentioned before, if you've actually OWNED a Chris King, you know that you DON'T ever regret paying what you did for it. I've had DiaCompe, FSA, and other "Sealed" type bearing headsets, and they were nothing but a pain; always had to maintain them. When I got my Chris King, I NEVER, ever, ever had to touch it or even think about it...

So, I didn't buy one just because "ooh they're so expesive" but because I bought it, it worked better than I expected, and so I'm a happy customer.

Now, are there any other headset out these days that would be just as good? Probably, but I still don't regret paying $100. In my mind, it was worth it. Perhaps I'll try another brand and be just as pleased. Until then I think Chris King makes awesome products.

Another example of this type of company is Thomson.

I never once said that they weren't of high quality, nor was I talking down their product. I'm just saying that the price has alot to do with the attraction.