I am wondering about the bottom brackets and the headsets on the new Madones. I know the headset is integrated (which it seems like most companies are getting away from). On the spec sheet it says it is a Cane Creek headset with sealed cartridge bearings. Does anyone see any potential problems with this? Why would Trek do this, as in, what are the benefits?
Also, I believe I have read something about a significantly wider bottom bracket area. What does this mean? Will it still use a regular bottom bracket?
Last, anyone have any ideas on frameset prices? It looks like both the 5.2 and 6.9 will be available as framesets, which are Trek’s Black and Red carbon. Complete bikes in the regular Madone model are $3,679 and $7,699 any idea what this will cost as framesets?
trekbikes.com has a lot of good information about the frames… Prices on FS are on there.
Why do you say that a lot of companies are getting away from integrated H.S.'s? Quite the opposite. Trek was one of the last to change over to an integrated headset… this provides a lighter, stiffer, easier to maintain headset system.
The bottom bracket is also integrated, in much the same fashion as the headset. No threads, no BB cups. Bearings just “press” into BB shell. Again, this is a lighter, stiffer, easier system.
I have ridden the new Madone (both a 5.2 and 5.5) quite a bit and can say “WOW!” Not what I expected from Trek at all! Much better, in fact. The Madone has to be one of the stiffest, most responsive frames I have ever ridden, yet still retains a very high level of comfort and compliance. Sounds crazy, but its true!
I can’t find frameset prices online but will look around.
So about the bottom bracket, it’s integrated meaning built into the frame? So does it work with any cranks? If I buy a gruppo I won’t need the BB that comes with it?
The 5.2 is 2500 and the 6.9 is 5000. You won’t need the BB cups, but you will need the bearings. I am not entirely sure how it works, but I think they are pushed into the frame like the headset bearings.
No, the BB isn’t built into the frame, they have eliminated the need for all but the bearings. Any crank will work, but you will have to get the appropriate bearings from Trek (they are all available now.) If you buy a gruppo, take the BB and sell it on Ebay, you won’t need it.
If, and when, you order the frame, tell the dealer what crank you plan on using (shimano, campy, fsa, etc.) and have them also order a BB bearing set.
This is a road bike, not a Tri/TT bike. Why do aerodynamics matter??
Aerodynamics don’t matter to me, that was another poster who said that.
Really, for me it is coming down to the R3 vs. the Madone 5.2. If the Black carbon was good enough for Contador to win the Tour on, I don’t think I’ll be needing to pay the premium for the red.
Just all this integrated and proprietary stuff makes me a little nervous.
What makes you nervous about it? It can’t be any worse than having threads in the frame…
I think Cervelo makes great products, but Trek is the only company out there (save for Calfee) that will repair a damaged carbon frame. That should help any worries about the integrated BB.
Cannondale, Klein, Specialized, and other’s have used integrated BB’s with great success. Trek just took it up a level.
Take a look at the headtube on any frame with an integrated headset. That is exactly what the BB is like on the Trek. If it works for the headset, why not the BB?
Not that Chris King might be biased at all given the fact that he makes a good part of his living selling headsets. As with anything, good design and implementation on the details will be just as important as the big question of integrated vs. non-integrated.
Good lord, that .pdf gave me a headache. I need to print it out a read it, slowly and over time. Maybe later in the day too, when I’m more awake.
Not knowing too much about headsets, it seems to me like they make a good argument against integrated headsets. It also seems like headsets are their business, so they’re likely to be maybe just a little biased. If everyone goes to integrated, they’re going to be in trouble.
I have not read the Chris King write-up for a while, but I think the main argument is that the frame wears out because of the way the edges of the internal cups hit the bearings. I don’t think this is an issue on the new Madone because the have a new moulding technique that enables them to make cups that are matched to bearings they have spec’d and to make the bearings parallel to each other.
On the bottom bracket they have done this in a manner that puts the bearings out where the outer edge is on external cup bottom brackets currently on the market. The crank does not know the difference because the spacing is the same, but the bottom bracket area is stiffer because the external bottom bracket cups contributed much less to the lateral stiffness of the frame.
I built up a new Madone recently, swapping parts over from my old Madone. The new BB is cool - you just slap some grease on the bearings, pop them in to the frame, and mount the cranks as normal. The fork is proprietary and was already on the frame, so I didn’t go through the effort of dismantling just to see the bearings but I can say they are very smooth. You have to be careful not to put to much pre-load on the headset because it can take a lot of preload without binding. Wouldn’t affect the ride much but can wear the bearings quicker, so you just tighten it incrementally until the play is gone.
I have a crappy picture on my phone that I won’t subject to the ST ridicule. Some day I will actually take a few minutes to learn how to post pictures here.
first of all - the previous attempts at integrated BB’s from klein, fat city, etc were not successful, they were disasters.
the issue with the madone is this: how long will the frame, which is now the BB cup, last over time ?? how long till it becomes sufficiently munged up, worn, scarred, frennelled ( sp ) ( ovalized ), opened up around the edges, chipped, etc etc until it is no longer a quiet and secure place to mount the bearing ??
nobody knows. i know what trek sez, but have you ever seen CF chip products or wear - particularly when subjected to gritty, grinding and repetitive forces and elements such as you see down around the BB ?? i sure have.
and, i have replaced many a BB in my day, and at times it is a lot more than the bearings which are grunged and worn beyond hope. a worn cup is quite common. in the case of the new madone, once that happens the frame is no longer usable. in a conventional frame, that vital and prone-to-wear part is refreshed with a new one every time you change the BB.
seems like a substantial risk, for a next to nothing gain to me. you save all of what - 50 grams - but you risk your frame becoming unusable junk for something as simple as a dirty BB or three.
again, this basic concept has been tried before - it sucked then. not that much has changed.
What was disasterous about the Klein, Fat City, etc press in BB? Other than the hassle of changing them out? This problem is largely fixed with Treks design, no press needed. It possible that they didn’t design well enough that the HS?BB will go before the useful life of the frame but I see see as many vitage Klein, Fat City bikes at races now as I do bikes of that vintage with normal BB.
I can see the concern and if I was buying a bike for a lifetime investment I’d likely look to tried and true technology, but if I was looking for cutting edge, no holds barred technolgy the Trek wouldn’t bother me if I liked the stiffness weight etc.