# Advice on Chris King or Industry Nine Hubs for a Clyde Wheel Build



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

I'm down to 250lbs and I mostly ride rough rooty XC trails(you have rock gardens, we have root gardens) and I'm fairly rough to my bike, especially my hubs. I currently have Hope Pro Evo II's and they are great hubs, but the POE (24 I think) is getting to me and I am going to build a new wheel. I am looking at the Industry Nine Classic hub because of the 120 POE, but if other clydes are not having good results with I9 then I'll get the Chris King. I haven't found much about I9 from a Clydes point of view.

*
Some notes on my build and info I've gotten so far. *


The Industry Nine Classic hub takes normal J spokes, just like the Chris King, so thats not a issue for this build.
I'm lacing it up to Stans Flow.
I kinda don't like the service intervals on CK, and just replacing a bearing set when they go bad on the I9 sounds good to me. I really don't want to re-pack bearings and it rains alot here. Seems I can be lazier with the I9 hubs.
The CK hub tool is also drawing me away from CK ($140 ). With the I9 I can use my current tools, but the .5mm on the prawl springs just seems like I'll round a bolt and then just cry. 
I kinda like prawl systems in general, but the CK ring drive has shown it will always work and is a nice piece of engineering (and as an engineer I like it) 
 If CK had a higher POE I would probably go for it, but since my only complaint with the Hopes is the POE and I notice it alot when I ride, so the 120 POE on the I9 sounds good.
 I do like the CK sound better than the I9, but I can live with the I9 sound.

*I know you love your [Hadley / DT Swiss / Other Hub] * but I'm really only looking between CK and I9. If you have happened to ride both and can give a bit of perceptive on how the hubs engage, it would be nice to read a comparison. I know Chris King has alot of love, especially for this sub-forum, but I'm torn on which way to go. I think I'm going I9 unless its just getting bad reports from my fellow clydes.


----------



## mtnbiker72 (Jan 22, 2007)

Well the I9 uses a pawl system where only 3 pawls engage at a time (has 6 pawls but they are offset with a 60 poe ratchet). The King ring drive engages all 72 teeth at one time, so which one do you think will be stronger? The cartridge bearings in the I9 are not stainless either...you'd think you'd get that for the price but you do not. The King bearings are stainless so they will last. 

Something to think about.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

I'm not worried about the 3 prawl vs 72 teeth engagement, unless you can actually feel the difference( I haven't ridden any, thats why I'm here, not many riders with high-end parts to try around here). They are rated a 700 ft/lb and 800 ft/lb failure rates so not a huge difference compared to my power output, and I've been riding 3 and 4 prawl systems with no problems.

Although the fact that I9 is not stainless steel bearing is definitely a mark against them.


----------



## sir_crackien (Feb 3, 2008)

stainless bearings are not a huge deal as they should be in grease AT ALL TIMES! hopes are not stainless bearings but they hold up just fine as do many others. Also they whole king and 72 point of contact thing while true doesn't really mean all that much as each of the "paw teeth" in the king hub are TINY, while this probably does add up to more contact area than a standard paw+ratchet setup i doubt it add much strength as the toothed ring is a much smaller diameter then the ratchet in most modern hubs.

I vote i9's for you, I seriously considered them as well with my last wheel build, ended up on Hadleys (personal favorite hub)


----------



## mtnbiker72 (Jan 22, 2007)

sir_crackien said:


> stainless bearings are not a huge deal as they should be in grease AT ALL TIMES! hopes are not stainless bearings but they hold up just fine as do many others. Also they whole king and 72 point of contact thing while true doesn't really mean all that much as each of the "paw teeth" in the king hub are TINY, while this probably does add up to more contact area than a standard paw+ratchet setup i doubt it add much strength as the toothed ring is a much smaller diameter then the ratchet in most modern hubs.
> 
> I vote i9's for you, I seriously considered them as well with my last wheel build, ended up on Hadleys (personal favorite hub)


1. Hope has gone to stainless steel bearings on their Evo hubs, I wonder why...and it does matter in wet environments because grease can and will wash out during a ride and bearings will rust before you get to cleaning and regressing them. Cartridge bearings are not waterproof.

2. You have 100% contact on the ring drive...both surfaces in full contact. Are you seriously trying to argue that 3 pawls have more contact than that...really

I9's are not mentioned in the Clydesdales forums for a reason, they aren't Clyde hubs. Hopes hold up because they have 4 pawls and larger ratchet teeth so they have more contact area than I9's. DT Swiss are mentioned because like King, they have 100% contact with their star ratchet. The only reason either a DT or King freehub system would fail is lack of maintenance.

Here is some additional information and why the King system really is the strongest

How Things Work: The Freehub Body - Dirt


----------



## macming (Oct 31, 2004)

I have a few sets of CK wheels and I9 wheels (I know I'm spoiled). If I were going to build a new set today, it'd be a set of Kings. The engagement difference isn't noticeable. I've had both sets apart, and the CKs are better engineered. The ring drive is much nicer than a pawl setup, and CKs have better bearings that I can feel (longevity anyways).


----------



## Dawgprimo (Mar 7, 2004)

The maintenance on the CK are not as bad as they say.
You can take a hub apart without the special CK tool (Which is very sexy in a engineering way, just to let you know!!) and re-grease.
You only need the special CK tool when you want to totally take apart the hub.

I have 3 sets of king's and would not hesitate for another........

Good luck!
k


----------



## Qfactor03 (Dec 8, 2005)

My experience with Kings has been outstanding. I go 265 and I'm still running the same Chris King hub set I purchased almost 12 years ago. I've had teh bearings replaced once in that entire time and they're still going string. The maintenance on the rear really is simple. The basic lube maintenance involves popping the cassette body off and cleaning the ring drive with a small brush, hold the ring drive open slightly and run a ring of CK RingDrive lube around the entire area and pop the cassette body back on. I had a set of I9s for a couple of years. They were enduro hubs built on 29" Flows. The engagement was good (not as quick as Kings) but I had durability issues with the drive system. The hub started making a lot of noise, so I tore the hub down to find that a pawl had turned sideways, caught the grease washer (a large flat washer that separates the inside of the hub from the drive system) and basically chewed everything up. I sent the hub to I9 and they updated the hub with a latest gen cassette body and internals. I'm not sure if this resolved any of the problems I experienced as I sold the wheel set without riding them again. I9s customer service is top notch btw. The hub was out of warranty, but they did the rebuild at no charge and paid shipping back to me. The I9s build a very stiff wheel, which I'm not entirely sure is a good thing for a clyde. I little give and flex seems to allow the wheel to survive longer without so much stress through the flanges, spokes and rims.

I would go Kings as the ring drive is crazy strong and engagement is very quick. The I9s definitely have a bling factor but I think the King just builds up a better all 'round wheel for a clyde.

Hopes are loud, but they are half the price of both I9s and Kings. You'll loose the quick engagement, but you will gain an easily serviced hub that is quite durable. I've been beating a Hope SS hub to death on rigid single speed for about four years and haven't even replaced pawls or bearings yet.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

I've had my share of hubs over the years, though not a set of I9's.

The final verdict to me, is that Hadley are just a tad better than all the others. 
Part of the reason, is due to the use of needle rollers in the freehub, which is hard to beat.

CK sure makes fine hubs, but just the fact that you have to buy special CK bearings for replacement, is enough to put me off. The bearings in the Hadley's, are all standard industrial bearings, which comes in just about any design you could think of, so you can tailor your bearing setup to the conditions you ride under. 
Stainless steel bearings, are not bound to be a benefit, as they are quite a bit weaker than good steel bearings. I would claim that it is of much higher importance, to have hubs with good external seals. Again Hadley excels in this regard, as they use standard industrial seals, that are cheap and available, so changing seals in due time, is a matter of a few $, and like 15 minutes of work, with no special tools required.

As the CK hubs are all made up of goofy special parts, for no good reason, and require special expensive tools, I looked for a different solution, with the same or better overall quality. The only brand that offers that as far as I know, is Hadley.


Magura


----------



## Qfactor03 (Dec 8, 2005)

I will second this point. The CK specific bearings are crazy expensive. I've always wanted to try Hadleys, but my Kings are still going string. Once they give up the ghost, I'd like to try out Hadley.



Mr.Magura said:


> I've had my share of hubs over the years, though not a set of I9's.
> 
> The final verdict to me, is that Hadley are just a tad better than all the others.
> Part of the reason, is due to the use of needle rollers in the freehub, which is hard to beat.
> ...


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

Qfactor03 said:


> The engagement was good (not as quick as Kings)


This is what I'm looking for. Although that sounds odd that you say the industry nines seem slower. But good to see a comparison on the two.

I like my hope, I had a bad bearing from the start and they sent me a replacement for free and I put it in and no problems besides that. They run great and low maintenance, but I notice the engagement points.

I have alot of twisty single track with alot of roots and I am constantly start and stop pedaling between roots. (Maybe related to a BMX style pedaling) So I notice the initial slack in the pedal until the hub engages. So thats why I'm looking at the i9 over the CK because 120 vs 76. or 3 vs 5 degrees between engagement.


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

Theres a good difference between 24 and 48pt of engagement. Theres not much difference between 48 and 72.. and 72 to 120 is just kinda getting ridiculous. 72pt is really instant engagement. Id take the engagement issue off the table.. i9 doesnt have a real advantage there.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

One Pivot said:


> Theres a good difference between 24 and 48pt of engagement. Theres not much difference between 48 and 72.. and 72 to 120 is just kinda getting ridiculous. 72pt is really instant engagement. Id take the engagement issue off the table.. i9 doesnt have a real advantage there.


That is a good point.

I have a 108 POE trial hub and a 72 POE Hadley. 
The biggest difference is the noise. 
The 108 POE sounds like a mad cat, the Hadley is just loud enough to hear the engagement happening, but not enough to be annoying.
Both feels like instant engagement.

Magura


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

One Pivot said:


> Theres a good difference between 24 and 48pt of engagement. Theres not much difference between 48 and 72.. and 72 to 120 is just kinda getting ridiculous. 72pt is really instant engagement. Id take the engagement issue off the table.. i9 doesnt have a real advantage there.


I just wanted to be clear of the purpose of why I'm switching. I have seen plenty of posts of how people can't tell the difference between the engagement between Hopes and CK. I notice it, so thats why I'm stressing it so much. I don't want to buy the CK and then wish I had more.


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

mtnbiker72 said:


> 1. Hope has gone to stainless steel bearings on their Evo hubs, I wonder why...and it does matter in wet environments because grease can and will wash out during a ride and bearings will rust before you get to cleaning and regressing them. Cartridge bearings are not waterproof.
> 
> 2. You have 100% contact on the ring drive...both surfaces in full contact. Are you seriously trying to argue that 3 pawls have more contact than that...really
> 
> ...


+1 and I'll add that if you ride in places where water crossings become deep during certain times of the year, have no fear. King's have held up quite well for me even when the entire cassette gets dunked.


----------



## kingair (Jun 2, 2008)

Mr.Magura said:


> The final verdict to me, is that Hadley are just a tad better than all the others.
> Part of the reason, is due to the use of needle rollers in the freehub, which is hard to beat.
> 
> Magura


CK uses needle roller bearings in the freehub fyi.


----------



## Fletch F. Fletch (Feb 15, 2005)

*Kings for Clydes*

I look at hub durability from a few angles and being a clyde you need to understand where the positive feedback is coming from and what aspect of durability is being addressed. Hadleys are wicked strong in terms of axle strength, bearing loads and the type of stresses imparted from DH/FR riding. But if you're looking for a hub that will be able to withstand high torque that clydes put on hubs when grinding up long, steep climbs (22T ring/36T cassette climbs), you need to consider the strength of the ratchet mechanism. I don't think there is ANY pawl system, regardless of the number of pawls, that can hold up to clyde torque over time. The material on the pawls is just too delicate and it will fail under load and over time, especially as contiminates make their way into the internals. The Chris King ring drive has constant/360 degree engagement. But even then, you have to upgrade to the stainless steel driveshell. The aluminum stock driveshell won't withstand the forces (I am a mechanical engineer and discussed this topic at length with the engineers at King). Get the King and make sure you get the SS driveshell. Another feature that will help is a thru axle (i.e. 142 new or 150 DH). But if you don't have a frame that will accept either (135 standard), get the hub w/ the fun bolts rather than the quick release. This will keep the rear end stiff to resist torsional forces from pedaling.


----------



## manpurse (Feb 6, 2011)

Another vote for King, they are very strong. They are popular with trials riders because of the strength and durability and engagement.


----------



## mrmas (Jan 18, 2010)

I think you should get something quiter. You already sound like a hacked off weed eater on the trails  You should sell me that Hope to help finance this new one....nothing is as bad as that X-9, I roll on. I will talk to you about it this afternoon at the trailhead.


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

After listening to a friend of mine tell me about the 'fun' he had getting his I9 hubs to function properly I'd pass. Fwiw, their customer service was 100% spot on. I've got two sets of Kings and haven't had any issues!


----------



## Yogii (Jun 5, 2008)

32 spoke minimum, 36 spokes even better. Can't really go wrong with either hub...


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

paulrb02 said:


> I just wanted to be clear of the purpose of why I'm switching. I have seen plenty of posts of how people can't tell the difference between the engagement between Hopes and CK. I notice it, so thats why I'm stressing it so much. I don't want to buy the CK and then wish I had more.


Ive never heard someone say they cant notice the difference between hope and CK. The difference is pretty huge. Many people have spoken out about the _value_ of that difference when riding, but thats a different issue. kings have instant engagement for whats really applicable.

You definitely wont be left wanting more with 72pt. King has sold a million hubs.. sure theres a few random issues that people have, but theres really not many. I9's are fairly new, and finding people who have had issues with them isnt hard.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I've never tried a higher end hub, but I can't say that I have ever felt the need or want for better engagement than I get with my Hopes. Maybe ignorance is bliss, but the $$$ to performance ratio for the Hopes is spot on for me. If I get in a position to be able to blow the extra cash, I wouldn't mind trying a higher end hub. If not, I'm perfectly happy as is.


----------



## Yogii (Jun 5, 2008)

WOW!! You must be sensitive.........if 72 point King is not enough you have only two choices-



> Stealth MTB Rear Hub | True Precision Components


 or

ride a fixie! Full time engagement ALL the time.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

paulrb02 said:


> I have seen plenty of posts of how people can't tell the difference between the engagement between Hopes and CK. I notice it, so thats why I'm stressing it so much. I don't want to buy the CK and then wish I had more.


While I can't offer anything on I9, I do have a set of King SS hubs. I've also got a couple sets of DT Swiss hubs with the upgraded, quicker engaging ratchets. I ride tight, twisty, climby technical singletrack all the time. When I rode the standard DT's, they were unacceptable. I immediately bought the 36 tooth ratchets. With the 36T ratchets, I can notice a difference between the DT's and the Kings... but that's because the kings are twice as fast at 5°. I find that the DTs are a great racing hub as they're light, durable and the engagement is reasonable. The Kings are my workhorse hubs.

To me, the Kings feel instantaneous. I think that if you went with Kings, then you would not be wishing you had _quicker_ engagement. I second the comments that the I9's will not be noticeably faster. You're talking 5° with the Kings, compared to 3° with the I9's.

The Kings are very durable, however you do need to service them quite frequently. If you need to buy any of the replacement parts, they're all expensive and proprietary. The maintenance and cost of repair is a huge turn off for me. The fact that I need to adjust the preload frequently is also a huge turnoff for me. Most of my hubs, I _never _need to adjust the preload... I need to adjust the Kings every third ride or so.

I won't buy another set of Kings. They've left a bad taste in my mouth with regard to maintenance and service intervals. The fact that their customer service is very hit or miss, is a deal breaker in my opinion.


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

Fletch F. Fletch said:


> I look at hub durability from a few angles and being a clyde you need to understand where the positive feedback is coming from and what aspect of durability is being addressed. Hadleys are wicked strong in terms of axle strength, bearing loads and the type of stresses imparted from DH/FR riding. But if you're looking for a hub that will be able to withstand high torque that clydes put on hubs when grinding up long, steep climbs (22T ring/36T cassette climbs), you need to consider the strength of the ratchet mechanism. I don't think there is ANY pawl system, regardless of the number of pawls, that can hold up to clyde torque over time. <snip>


One other approach to consider is 94/58 cranks. I had 22T ring / 36T cog setup on CK ISO rear hub that came on a used 29er I bought a couple yeas ago. Over time, the bunching on the aluminum drive shell became significant enough to cause issues where I'd get 1/4 to 1/2 crank rotation slip in a couple of my middle cogs. Tried everything imaginable including new cassette and chain with no luck.

CK eventually replaced the drive shell... I lobbied hard for stainless and they were insistent that Aluminum would be more than adequate. I switched up my drive train to 20/32/38 T rings / and XTR 12-34 T cassette. Less dinging of the drive shell now and all is well. Some of which can be attributed to the higher quality cassette I imagine...


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

If high POE is a requirement, why not Profile?
http://www.profileracing.com/estore/product.php?productId=408


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

For what it's worth I have both a set of Kings and I9's both laced to Stans Flow rims.

Both hub sets are awesome but each have their own pros/cons. The Kings are bombproof, but have a bit more drag front and rear. The I9s spin more freely and are easy to tear down, but haven't been around as long, and most people haven't ridden them, so they come with a lot of e-speculation baggage.

In my opinion, if you're going to go the I9 route, go whole hog on an Enduro set (or at your weight even I9's DH aluminum spokes). The wheels are stiffer and accelerate quicker than anything else I've ridden.

If you are set on traditional steel spokes, then the King's (or previously suggested Profile's) are probably your best bet.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Guess the thing is, are they clyde proven? I've not heard of anyone (clydes) that have used them to this point. Doesn't look like there is a steel freebody option that I can see either and that's definitely a recommended clyde upgrade. I do know they make good stuff though, so I'd certainly be interested to find out, that would be another option to throw in the hat.


----------



## clydecrash (Apr 1, 2005)

paulrb02, Why do you not want to consider Hadley? I usually recommend Hadley rear hubs--biggest bang for the buck. I use Hadley, King, and True Precision rear hubs. Hadleys are very well made and they come with titanium freehubs (you have to pay more for the King steel drive shells). If there is a difference in engagement, I cannot tell between the 72p Hadley and the King on the trail.

But if money is no object, then King is it for me. I mainly use Kings, have the hub tools, and have opened up both Hadley and King. The King guts, including bearings, are superior to Hadley. With the necessary maintenance for both, I expect my Kings to last longer between parts changes than my Hadleys. But I expect both to be useable for many years.

No experience with I9s (other than reading reviews and discussions).


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

clydecrash said:


> paulrb02, Why do you not want to consider Hadley? I usually recommend Hadley rear hubs--biggest bang for the buck. I use Hadley, King, and True Precision rear hubs. Hadleys are very well made and they come with titanium freehubs (you have to pay more for the King steel drive shells). If there is a difference in engagement, I cannot tell between the 72p Hadley and the King on the trail.
> 
> But if money is no object, then King is it for me. I mainly use Kings, have the hub tools, and have opened up both Hadley and King. The King guts, including bearings, are superior to Hadley. With the necessary maintenance for both, I expect my Kings to last longer between parts changes than my Hadleys. But I expect both to be useable for many years.
> 
> No experience with I9s (other than reading reviews and discussions).


Just curious to hear your opinion.

What makes you say the internals of CK is superior to Hadley?

Magura


----------



## clydecrash (Apr 1, 2005)

Mr.Magura said:


> Just curious to hear your opinion.
> 
> What makes you say the internals of CK is superior to Hadley?
> 
> Magura


After overhauling both hubs (a few times for Hadley, many times for King), and replacing some bearings in the Hadleys (because they wear out), it just seems to me that King parts are more precise--they just fit together better. I mention King bearings because, if they are maintained properly, they may never wear out for the life of the hub. This does not mean parts will not be replaced sometimes. I had to replace a bearing in one hub but that was because of mechanic error (me). I had to replace the two drive parts in another hub because of mechanic error (shop--at which point I decided to purchase the King tools).

Hadley internals are very good. They obviously are well made, but they seem like a basic hub in many ways--just better manufactured than many others. Parts mesh well, but do not seem as "precise". The bearings you can put in Hadleys can be very high quality, but there isn't any way to maintain them (at least the ones I replaced), so they will need replacing eventually (not that big a deal though).

Again, I usually recommend Hadley rear hubs as the best for the money. Are Kings, considering I think they are better, worth the extra $$? Hmm, maybe.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

edubfromktown said:


> Over time, the bunching on the aluminum drive shell became significant enough to cause issues where I'd get 1/4 to 1/2 crank rotation slip in a couple of my middle cogs.


I have a Sram XX cassette and I haven't had any problems with it chewing up my drive shell. My old ones were torn up, but since I've been on the XX (about 8 months now) my drive shell looks brand new.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

clydecrash said:


> paulrb02, Why do you not want to consider Hadley?


I did consider it. I made a choice of not going with it. Mostly the drive uses oil and the seals aren't that great on the hub, which makes for less drag. But I have sand around here and week seals and alot of regular maintenance is not for me.


----------



## sir_crackien (Feb 3, 2008)

Paul the reason I don't like king's is because of the maintenance required. From bearing adjustments to overhauls it seems like you are always working on them.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

sir_crackien said:


> Paul the reason I don't like king's is because of the maintenance required. From bearing adjustments to overhauls it seems like you are always working on them.


Yeah I read alot of people talking about the same thing. I decided to go with the i9. I figured out the math on how far my pedal would move with the i9 and CK and tested it out with my current setup, and I think I'll feel it. Just gotta wait for it to ship now.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

paulrb02 said:


> I figured out the math on how far my pedal would move with the i9 and CK and tested it out with my current setup, and I think I'll feel it. Just gotta wait for it to ship now.


I'd love to hear the results of a trail test comparison to see if you can actually notice a difference out on the trails. I'd bet that you will not. What I'm getting at is that I don't think engagement should carry as much weight in your hub selection process as it appears to be. Especially when you're talking about king vs. I9.

With my limited math skills, I did the calculations too. The difference I came up is with a shade over 6mm of movement over the arc of your pedal stroke with 175mm crank arms (Add a quarter mm if you have 180's). That's not a lot of movement. I'd argue that your foot is already moving and compressing that much under load inside your shoe... not to mention the flex of your shoe, insole compression, play between your pedal/cleat interface, spoke windup, tire deflection, etc.

I love quick engagement... but I think that there are more important things to think about when you're looking at these (or other boutique hubs with high engagement).

At the end of the day, I truly don't believe that you'll be disappointed with either of these hubs as far as engagement goes.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

paulrb02 said:


> I just wanted to be clear of the purpose of why I'm switching. I have seen plenty of posts of how people can't tell the difference between the engagement between Hopes and CK. I notice it, so thats why I'm stressing it so much. I don't want to buy the CK and then wish I had more.


Just saw this... I don't believe that one could _not _feel the difference between Hope and King engagement. My 240s are 36 point and I can notice the difference between those and my Kings. For sure.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

BShow said:


> Just saw this... I don't believe that one could _not _feel the difference between Hope and King engagement. My 240s are 36 point and I can notice the difference between those and my Kings. For sure.


But my question is whether that difference is worth a couple hundred dollars? I ride Hopes. I've never ridden Kings or DT Swiss or any of the other highend hubs. I don't know what faster engagement feels like. I do know and have posted before, I've never been in a situation where I wished I had faster engagement. Maybe if I'd have experienced it then I'd understand the desire to have that but at this point, I'm happy having perfectly suitable and easily maintained hubs at a fraction of the cost.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

Nubster said:


> But my question is whether that difference is worth a couple hundred dollars? I ride Hopes. I've never ridden Kings or DT Swiss or any of the other highend hubs. I don't know what faster engagement feels like. I do know and have posted before, I've never been in a situation where I wished I had faster engagement. Maybe if I'd have experienced it then I'd understand the desire to have that but at this point, I'm happy having perfectly suitable and easily maintained hubs at a fraction of the cost.


When I rode years ago, I was in a similar boat... I'd think, "how much better can it be?" I used shimano hubs for a decade or so starting in the mid 90's. They worked fine. When I started getting more serious in the mid-late 2000's, I started sourcing better hubs and wheels. I think first, I bought some american classics, then maybe some mavics, and there were others, but none with a particularly quick engagement. They all worked too. At some point, I bought a set of Kings for my dedicated singlespeed. The difference with engagement between the kings and _all _the other various other wheels I had been riding was astounding. I rode that SS 95% of the time, and any time that I jumped on another bike with slow engagement, it was instantly apparent and it was totally unacceptable to me.

A lot of my riding is tight, twisty and technical. This type of riding is where quick engagement shines. When I got on the bikes with slower engagement, I felt out of control on trails that I'd ridden three times a week for years. I couldn't put the power down as quickly as I wanted to and I could hear the clunk of my drivetrain engaging on the exit of nearly every corner, every technical trail feature, every logover. While I could still ride everything, and ride it well, the sluggish feel and drivetrain clunk was unnerving and frustrating. It's apparent that it was simply not as quick as it could (or should?) be.

I hung up all the slower hubs and/or sold those wheels. I bought another set of geared Kings shortly thereafter, so that at least my two go to bikes were quick engagement. That's when I found out the downsides of the Kings. The short service intervals, poor performance if they were over due, spotty (at best) customer service and super expensive proprietary parts (on a ~$500 hub, no less). Once I reached my King breaking point, I started seeking other options. I was looking for light, durable, serviceable and a big requirement was reasonable engagement - price was not an object. That search led me to the DT Swiss hubs and I couldn't be happier with them.

The DT's (with the upgraded ratchets) have slightly faster engagement than Hopes I think, but they are noticeably slower than the Kings. I feel that they're a great mix of everything that *I need* in a racing hub. Everybody is differnet though and that's the benefit of having threads like this... you can get information from various sources to help with ideas on what might work well for you individually. Help you weigh your options. etc.

I think that the Hope hubs provide good value package. They're reasonably light, reasonably durable, reasonably quick engagement and best of all, they're cheaper than most of the nicer hubs out there. That's tough to beat for a lot of people. Only you can decided if it's worth it to sacrifice something from that package to gain some engagement speed. There is no perfect hub, only what is best for your set of parameters or requirements.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Sounds like I should NOT try faster engaging hubs...lol...I won't miss won't I don't know...haha...seriously though, that's a huge reason why I scoff at the idea of CK's...everyone wants to worship them like they are the second coming or something, but once you get to the nitty gritty, they don't seem to be all they are cracked up to be. Yeah, perhaps during the time that they are inbetween maintenance intervals they are the best hubs on the trail, but like you said, I don't have the desire to tear down my hubs numerous times per riding season. I guess it's a balance of price, performance, and maintenance that needs to be found. For now I'm happy, as I get more serious, who knows, I may expand my search for my holy grail of mountain bike hubs.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

Nubster said:


> But my question is whether that difference is worth a couple hundred dollars? I ride Hopes. I've never ridden Kings or DT Swiss or any of the other highend hubs. I don't know what faster engagement feels like. I do know and have posted before, I've never been in a situation where I wished I had faster engagement. Maybe if I'd have experienced it then I'd understand the desire to have that but at this point, I'm happy having perfectly suitable and easily maintained hubs at a fraction of the cost.


Also, and just FYI, the standard DT Swiss ratchets have _slower _engagement than your Hopes. The standard DT Swiss ratchets are 18poe whereas the upgraded ratchets are 36poe. I think the Hope Pro 2's are 24poe. You're much less apt to notice a difference from 24 to 36, but if you jump from 24 or 36 up to 72poe, the difference will definitely be noticeable.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Yeah, I was interested in the Profile Racing stuff too, they claim 204 POE but it's basically the same system as Hope only Profile uses 6 pawls instead of 4. Not sure if it's staggered engagement or all at the same time. I sent them an email with some questions but no response in several days, so not sure. I'd be interested in knowing how Profile would stack up in the clyde world. I9 says 120 point, 3 degree engagement, 6 pawl mechanism but they are up there in CK prices.


----------



## freighttrain48 (Apr 30, 2012)

can anyone go into detail about servicing the CK hubs? I just smoked an slx hub and I am sick of braking cheap hubs its always the same way climbing. is the CK the best clyde hub for climbing ?


----------



## sundowner (Mar 13, 2007)

freighttrain48 said:


> can anyone go into detail about servicing the CK hubs? I just smoked an slx hub and I am sick of braking cheap hubs its always the same way climbing. is the CK the best clyde hub for climbing ?


There not hard to work on, the hub pulls apart easy and the CK tool is only needed if you are going to take the bearing out or replaces the driveshell, you don't needed for a lube job.They do need to be lube once or twice a year depending on your riding conditions and the grease and lube you used, I used Phil Wood Grease for the bearings and Phil Tenecious oil for the ring drive with no issues and my rear hub is over eight years old.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

freighttrain48 said:


> can anyone go into detail about servicing the CK hubs? I just smoked an slx hub and I am sick of braking cheap hubs its always the same way climbing. is the CK the best clyde hub for climbing ?


This shows the some good steps: Movies | Chris King Precision Components


----------



## Yogii (Jun 5, 2008)

The Hadley rear hubs is considered VERY bomb-proof. Maybe even more so that the King...YMMV.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

I'm about 240 these days and put my bikes through absolute hell. Just coming off 5 trouble free and awesome years on Hadleys with the ti body and super easy serviceability. Lifetime warranty. I'm a huge fan of King but would get Hadleys again in a second...

Just also ordered my first set of i9s enduros. See how they hold up...


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I just wish Hadley had a website with more info on their hubs. I am interested in them for my next wheel build. I'm still torn. Pretty sure that CK is out, just costs too much money for me at the moment. Hopes, I know how they work and they work well. The price is hard to beat. The Hadleys, I am interested in trying something with better engagement so 72 vs 24 is very tempting and the Hadleys are not that much more than Hopes. I am also very interested in the Profile hubs, but profile not getting back to me is a turn off and the price is getting up there with CK. That's a lot of scratch for an unproven clyde hub and a company that doesn't seem to want to communicate with customers. I'd say the choice is clear, but still need to research a little.

Does anyone else feel that for price to performance, Hadley >Hope? This is for a SS rear wheel in case that matters.

Also, for those that have bought Hadley hubs, where did you order them from?


----------



## clydecrash (Apr 1, 2005)

As far as where to find new Hadley, Balle Racing may have the best stock, but I have seen them at Universal, Treefort, and Bike Bling.

But I have never bought a new Hadley hub. They have all been from e-bay. If you are mechanically inclined, then it is a good way to go (along with MTBR classifieds). Hadley is such a high quality hub that the most I ever had to do with a used hub is replace the main body bearings. That hub was very inexpensive, so it was still a deal considering I did the labor myself. It is ebay, so you cannot be in a hurry, and you are always taking a chance. I think there are some well-priced complete Hadley wheel sets on ebay now.

It is also a good way to purchase a used King hub, though, generally, they seem to be closer to the new price as compared with Hadley. But I have seen some very good King deals.


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

I am a clyde (but question how many *clydes* are providing input in this thread) and have been researching the king vs. world topic with an open mind. I think my two most important factors are the ability to hold my torque, and durability.

Chris King has proven to provide a hub that can handle the torque, and take the abuse. I have read coutless reports of people using King hubs over and over again for different wheel builds. I know they are spendy, but I am willing to spend a little more now if I know I can depend on them for years to come.


----------



## Adim_X (Mar 3, 2010)

Nubster, buy a hope ss specific rear hub. It has 48 poe. Wiggle usually has best prices. Thats what I am using. So far so good. I.think price was real close to 2 bills.
Forget wiggle, they only have geared hubs. Just use google there is deals to new had.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Oh....didn't realize the Hope SS hub had more POE. That's great to know :thumbsup:

I see ChainReaction has them for $200 plus shipping. Haven't really looked anywhere else yet.


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

They offset the SS pawls to double engagement.. technically its not as strong. No one seems to be having issues with them though. 

I like hopes zero adjustment layout. I dont get why so many hubs have preload for cartridge bearings. It always seems to cause more issues than it solves.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

One Pivot said:


> They offset the SS pawls to double engagement.. technically its not as strong. No one seems to be having issues with them though.
> 
> I like hopes zero adjustment layout. I dont get why so many hubs have preload for cartridge bearings. It always seems to cause more issues than it solves.


Now ain't that the truth :thumbsup:

Blown Hope freehubs are few and far between, regardless of the way they are made.

Regarding adjustable preload for cartridge bearings, again you could hardly be more right.

In my book, any hub that uses spooky special bearings, is a no-go. 
Good industrial cartridge bearings, are fairly cheap and readily available, just about anywhere on the planet. A CK bearing, well not so much.

Magura


----------



## shopcat_cycles (Dec 28, 2007)

Mr.Magura said:


> In my book, any hub that uses spooky special bearings, is a no-go.
> Good industrial cartridge bearings, are fairly cheap and readily available, just about anywhere on the planet. A CK bearing, well not so much.
> 
> Magura


I think I would take the bearings that are made in-house, specifically for their product. It doesn't get more precise than that.

Seeing as they last so long(one of my CK hubsets is from 2005 with original bearings), I'm not sure that you would need to have them readily available. Even if you did burn up CK bearings, they are very easy to get directly through CK...just a quick phone call(of course, I'm in the States, so YMMV).

FWIW...I'm quite happy with my Hope SS hubs as well.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

ncfisherman said:


> I think I would take the bearings that are made in-house, specifically for their product. It doesn't get more precise than that.
> 
> Seeing as they last so long(one of my CK hubsets is from 2005 with original bearings), I'm not sure that you would need to have them readily available. Even if you did burn up CK bearings, they are very easy to get directly through CK...just a quick phone call(of course, I'm in the States, so YMMV).
> 
> FWIW...I'm quite happy with my Hope SS hubs as well.


CK does not make the bearings "in house" as far as I know. To set up a bearing production for that few bearings, would prove to be cost prohibitive.

That you can adjust the "preload" of the bearings, does not mean they are running proper after "adjusting". It just means that you can remove play in the bearings. 
Once a bearing is worn, no amount of adjustment can make them run as they should under load.
Think about it, if it was possible to do so, I would expect this fantastic "feature" to have found its way to the general industry.

When a bearing wears, the races wears out of tolerance, thus rendering them sub optimal under load. Spinning well under no load, does not mean that the bearing performs as it should under load.

Just the fact that people expect they can adjust the bearing, to the right properties, by "feel", ought to make anybody with a bit of knowledge about bearings cringe. 
To do this right, takes equipment that most people don't have access to, and have no idea how to use if they had.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but to claim that bearings that are worn down, and just tensioned in an attempt to get rid of the consequences of the wear, is rendering the bearings lifespan many times longer than of an industrial standard bearing, is just plain wrong.

If it works well enough for peoples expectations to be fulfilled, is a different matter, but from a technical standpoint, the bearings life is at its end, when the race and / or the balls, are no longer within tolerance due to wear.

In a high load application, where you can measure the properties of the bearing, this would be easily proven. On a bike, this would require a test stand, a vibration meter, and a thermometer. Trouble is that those instruments a fairly expensive. 
It could be very interesting though, if we could make somebody like Bike Magazine make such a test. They frequently have made relatively scientific tests in the past.

Magura 

EDIT: Some time ago I had the pleasure of playing a bit around with this:

Portable Vibration Testers and Analyzers, Fluke 810 Hand Held Vibration Testers, Vibration Meter

Just to see how bad a bearing could be in operation, but still seem fine when inspecting it by feel and visually, was quite an eye opener.


----------



## macming (Oct 31, 2004)

Mr.Magura said:


> CK does not make the bearings "in house" as far as I know. To set up a bearing production for that few bearings, would prove to be cost prohibitive.


AFAIK, CK makes their bearings in house. They started in the medical equipment field in the 70s, and the basis of their business was based on the fact they produced high quality bearings in house.

Again, it's AFAIK


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

macming said:


> AFAIK, CK makes their bearings in house. They started in the medical equipment field in the 70s, and the basis of their business was based on the fact they produced high quality bearings in house.
> 
> Again, it's AFAIK


You seem to have more insight on the topic :thumbsup:

Any chance you could point to a link?

I actually made a search on it prior to my last post, but found nothing but the usual marketing BS.

Cheers

Magura


----------



## macming (Oct 31, 2004)

Mr.Magura said:


> You seem to have more insight on the topic :thumbsup:
> 
> Any chance you could point to a link?
> 
> ...


This pinkbike article talks a lot about how CK runs their business, and it mentions a few things about their bearings. Enjoy!

Chris King's Noble Vision: Products Near Perfection and Earth-Friendly Manufacturing - Pinkbike



> Follow a Chris King Hub From Bar Stock to Final Assembly
> 
> We followed the life-cycle of a Chris King hub from its origin from a length of aluminum bar, through final assembly at the factory. The process moves along with quiet surety and there are quality-control checks at every step along the way. Entire batches of finished parts have been rejected in the past simply because the color of the anodizing was not a correct match. Over the top? Perhaps, but CK has never wavered from his best-or-nothing approach to manufacturing. As a result, King makes almost every part of his hubs and headsets in house - even some of the bearing assemblies.


----------



## ken50397 (Mar 23, 2004)

*The great pawl debate.*

POE does not make a difference when you haven't experienced better. Ignorance truly is bliss in this category. Several years back when I upped my hubs to a higher 36 poe hope hubs, I was very impressed. Going to the king after multiple failures with the Hopes was very nice. I didn't realize how nice until I switched bikes with my brother for a ride and realized that i was missing logs and rooty sections because of small resets on my pedals weren't taking. 72 to 120? I don't know. The pawl system is what would really keep me away from the I9's.

I do have a lot of experience in destroying hub freehubs. I have taken apart many to discover the failure i was having. When all the pawls engage simulteneously, all is bliss. Even when two engaged, i was fine putting the power down with no failures. It was when only one pawl engaged. No, this shouldn't happen, but it did. Every one of my failures had had one two shaved off and the rsulting peice would lodge in the mechanism and bind up from freehub, so I now had no option but to continuously pedal my fat ass ten miles out of the woods. You mentioned maintenance is not one of your strong suits, then think about all but one tooth engages because of a extra grease or dirts that got there on your sandy rides. If this is not the type of failure you have, than maybe the inferior design will work just fine for you.

I have had this happen about twenty times over with many different pawl hubs, until I purchased the King heavy duty ss body with the fun bolts. Maintenance is very acceptable. I have now logged thousands of rocky, rooted miles on the hubs with only routine maintenance. i went throug about twenty different hubs in eight years, and have only had my Kings for the last eight.

i sold my last pair of hopes to my brother, who is about one hundred pound lighter and he has never had a problem. I can see the engagement issues he doesn't even know he has. It doesn't stop him though.

I love hearing the buzz of quality and confidence of knowing that i am not going to have a locked freehub miles into the woods. Are they expensive? Sure, initially, but not when you factor in failures and down time. I am due for a new bike. There is just one component i will take from my old one. I can not say enough about the Kings.
My Kings are one the things i just won't ride without. I need my shoes, my helmet, my water and my Kings. If i don't have one of those, i really risk getting hurt.
Ken


----------



## ken50397 (Mar 23, 2004)

Just go to chrisking.com and click on hubs. they tell you right there that they make their own bearings.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

macming said:


> This pinkbike article talks a lot about how CK runs their business, and it mentions a few things about their bearings. Enjoy!
> 
> Chris King's Noble Vision: Products Near Perfection and Earth-Friendly Manufacturing - Pinkbike


Thanks for the link, I read through it, but found no mention of them making the bearings themselves in house. 
From what I can tell, they buy the balls and races, and simply assembles the parts, no?

Magura


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

ken50397 said:


> Just go to chrisking.com and click on hubs. they tell you right there that they make their own bearings.


I just can't seem to find where they write that?

I see that they assemble the bearings, but that's pretty far from manufacturing them.

Magura


----------



## ken50397 (Mar 23, 2004)

Chris King Hubs | Chris King Precision Components

On tablet and copy and paste not working how i want. Second pragraph under the picture.

Ken


----------



## ken50397 (Mar 23, 2004)

Oops, first paragraph.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

ken50397 said:


> Chris King Hubs | Chris King Precision Components
> 
> On tablet and copy and paste not working how i want. Second pragraph under the picture.
> 
> Ken


Thanks, but they ought to write "assemble" instead of "make" I guess.....

All the places I have seen stuff about CK, I see them talk about how much they pay for the balls for their bearings, not how good they are at making them 

I found a factory tour at Youtube some time ago, I did not see any of the equipment for making bearings. In fact I have not seen as much as a single oven for hardening, let alone precision grinding production lines.

I'll post the link if I manage to dig it up.

Magura


----------



## macming (Oct 31, 2004)

Mr.Magura said:


> Thanks for the link, I read through it, but found no mention of them making the bearings themselves in house.
> From what I can tell, they buy the balls and races, and simply assembles the parts, no?
> 
> Magura


I guess this part alludes to the bearing manufacturing process, but you might be right. Who knows? Either way, I've had better luck with all my CK bearings than my I9 bearings.

"As a result, King makes almost every part of his hubs and headsets in house - even some of the bearing assemblies."


----------



## macming (Oct 31, 2004)

Oh, right from this paragraph as the poster above mentioned:

"We make our own bearings in-house, each hand-checked for precision and built with a robust sealing system. "


----------



## steadite (Jan 13, 2007)

I interpret "make our own bearings" as they assemble bearings using balls purchased from a ball-manufacturing specialist. There are only a few places in the world that actually make bearing balls (especially Si3N4 ones!) and I personally doubt CK does.

It does not diminish for me the desirability of CK stuff.

Also, I haven't yet checked his profile, but based on his extreme concern over bearing race tolerances and preloads, I'm going to assume Magura is German?? (just joking)


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

steadite said:


> I interpret "make our own bearings" as they assemble bearings using balls purchased from a ball-manufacturing specialist. There are only a few places in the world that actually make bearing balls (especially Si3N4 ones!) and I personally doubt CK does.
> 
> It does not diminish for me the desirability of CK stuff.
> 
> Also, I haven't yet checked his profile, but based on his extreme concern over bearing race tolerances and preloads, I'm going to assume Magura is German?? (just joking)


Exactly my point. One would see CK bearings all over the industrial sector, if they actually made bearings. A bearing production line, is not the size of a candy store 

To be honest, I am half German, but around here I claim to be a Dane, something that happened some 70 years ago around here, made it a bit less desirable to claim German heritage in my childhood. 

The point of getting to the bottom of stuff like bearings, is in my opinion, mostly a matter of doing things the best way possible, preferably without paying through the nose due to some clever marketing department.

Loads of people claim that they can feel an obvious reduction of drag, when running hybrid bearings (ceramic balls, steel races, usually referred to as ceramic bearings), but hardly anybody seems to take interest in that a worn hybrid bearing, is way worse, perhaps even noticeably, than just about any run of the mill Chinese bearing.

Considering the environment the bearings on our bikes is exposed to, cheap, available, and easily replaceable bearings ought to get a lot more attention IMHO.

Magura


----------



## steadite (Jan 13, 2007)

Mr.Magura said:


> I am half German, but around here I claim to be a Dane


Ha...same for me, at least a few generations ago.


----------



## freighttrain48 (Apr 30, 2012)

ken50397 said:


> POE does not make a difference when you haven't experienced better. Ignorance truly is bliss in this category. Several years back when I upped my hubs to a higher 36 poe hope hubs, I was very impressed. Going to the king after multiple failures with the Hopes was very nice. I didn't realize how nice until I switched bikes with my brother for a ride and realized that i was missing logs and rooty sections because of small resets on my pedals weren't taking. 72 to 120? I don't know. The pawl system is what would really keep me away from the I9's.
> 
> I do have a lot of experience in destroying hub freehubs. I have taken apart many to discover the failure i was having. When all the pawls engage simulteneously, all is bliss. Even when two engaged, i was fine putting the power down with no failures. It was when only one pawl engaged. No, this shouldn't happen, but it did. Every one of my failures had had one two shaved off and the rsulting peice would lodge in the mechanism and bind up from freehub, so I now had no option but to continuously pedal my fat ass ten miles out of the woods. You mentioned maintenance is not one of your strong suits, then think about all but one tooth engages because of a extra grease or dirts that got there on your sandy rides. If this is not the type of failure you have, than maybe the inferior design will work just fine for you.
> 
> ...


Exactly why I ordered a chris king with the steel free hub body. I have been biking two months and have broken three free hub bodies cant wait to get it!


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Well...as much as I hate to admit it...today was my first time out on the trail with my new SS and I discovered that the POE on my Hope sucks. Not sure if it's the SS or that maybe it was on my mind so I was paying more attention to it, but I could definitely tell and it was quite annoying. So...now I need to research to first, see if the Hope SS hubs are much better or just slightly or decide what other hub will work best for me if not the Hope. I'll probably still run a Hope up front, no reason not to really, but in the rear, I now understand all the talk about POE, at least on the SS.


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

Are you running a standard 24pt hope hub? 

All my bikes have 48pt hubs and they feel instant to me. My 18 and 24pt hubs felt significantly sloppier. IMO, its instant enough that I wouldnt pay more for more POE, I basically cant feel any slop in the hub.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Yeah, just the standard Hope Pro 2 with the 24 POE. It's the rear wheel from my geared bike with a Surly conversion kit and cog on it. I plan to have a dedicated rear wheel built soonish though.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Well, got a killer deal on a Chris King. Despite not wanting to go that route, the deal was too good to pass up so I guess soon enough I'll get to see what they are all about.


----------



## 4nbstd (Apr 12, 2012)

Nubster said:


> Well, got a killer deal on a Chris King. Despite not wanting to go that route, the deal was too good to pass up so I guess soon enough I'll get to see what they are all about.


Same here, I just ordered me a CK hub too. Unfortunately, the SS hub will not be available for another couple weeks, but hopefully I can stomp on them by August.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Yeah, got my SS CK used. Hope it's all it's cracked up to be and not too much headache to maintain. If so, no doubt I can resell for what I paid.


----------



## Diesel8810 (May 17, 2012)

*Great advice all around...*

I used this thread for help with my decision making process and it was a big help... I am 6' and an athletic 235lbs... I ride aggressive and am fairly rough on stuff but I am pretty agile too...

I went with CK ISO Hubs, DT comps, DT Black Brass Nips, and Flow EX's...

My concerns were Durability, Engagement, Bling,and then weight.. In that order...

Here they are.. Can't wait to stomp on these tomorrow Morning..

Thanks again for all the info:thumbsup:


----------



## ehigh (Apr 19, 2011)

Between I9 and CK, you may as well flip a coin.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

About 3-4 weeks on my I9 enduros. Did a fairly agreesive race yesterday and a larger rock ricochet into the spokes and 1 is clearly bent, two are lightly bent, and the true is totally F'd. Also the hubs are making a really weird sound. Pulled it apart and 1 of the 6 pawls (I will say -- pretty bad ass that I9 has 6 pawls) was stuck. Unfreed and lubed up but I am still getting a ZZZ ZZZ _ZZZZZ_ sound, someone called it "lumpy" which I think is a fair assessment...

In short, we'll see how these hold up. The flow rims are completely awesome. Can't believe how will they perform tubeless in particular. the i9s look good but not convinced they are even remotely clydeproof yet unfortunately...


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

About Hadley not having a web site. Could not agree more. I was on hadleys since 2008 and they were awesome and completely indestructible. I wish there were more folks aware of them and speaking of them beyond these boards...


----------



## cunningstunts (Sep 1, 2011)

fascinating thread guys, just appreciating the input of hard and big riders. i'm looking to upgrade the rear hub, and probably wheel (hell if i'm going that far...) and this is most helpful. i know one true clyde who manages a bike shop and is a long time racer at one time, high level. his priorities are durability then weight and he seems to favour DT over any, and i think thats where weight comes in. he thinks their build quality and design is the closest to bomb proof, and he has a history of breaking hubs, especially when he went exclusively to 29ers. i want high engagement and durability/simplicity, so for me it's looking DT Swiss 240's (i'm a clyde lite) or these Hadley's that seem impressive if a bit heavy. toss up at this level i reckon.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Yeah, again, doubt you can go wrong with most of the hubs mentioned on here. Hopes are proven, Chris King proven, Hadley semi-proven, I9 semi-proven, DT Swiss semi-proven. Comes down to features and price. I'm a Hope fan. Best value IMO. I did recently get a CK though for my SS, so once I get my wheel built, I'll see if I become a fan or not.


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

Finally got my ISO Kings and 36 hole Flow EX's laced up by LBS. So far so good, except for I smoked my BB for the second time in 100ish miles!! FFFFFFFFF. I cannot seem to keep this rig on the trails and off the work stand. 

I am thinking CK Ceramic BB, but idk about that price with the injector tool and install tool .


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I'd just get an external cup setup that can be rebuilt and get some quality stainless bearings for it when the time comes. From what I read, ceramic is not worth the price.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

BOTTOM BRACKET BEARINGS AND ADAPTERS FROM REAL WORLD CYCLING


----------



## Metamorphic (Apr 29, 2011)

I've got about 40 miles in on my CK ISO rear. The bearing adjustment is a no brainer. Not as loud as I thought it would be. I also thought the high-engagement would be more noticeable.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

Nubster said:


> I'd just get an external cup setup that can be rebuilt and get some quality stainless bearings for it when the time comes. From what I read, ceramic is not worth the price.


Actually non-stainless bearings are quite a bit stronger. 
Considering how quick he blows bearings, it is obviously not a corrosion issue, so might as well get cheaper and stronger bearings.

Magura


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

I already have the External BB. Its a SRAM GXP which I have no problem destroying. Mr. Margura, are you saying to ceramic or stainless? I'm confusededed.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

jonshonda said:


> I already have the External BB. Its a SRAM GXP which I have no problem destroying. Mr. Margura, are you saying to ceramic or stainless? I'm confusededed.


I'm saying that a plain old fashioned steel bearing, is about the strongest solution you can have.

Ceramic does little to nothing for the strength, stainless steel is weaker than a standard bearing.

Magura


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

Stainless is *usually* a higher grade bearing... not because its stainless, they just seem to come in higher grades.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

OP here.

I went with the I9 Classic, and wow can I tell a difference. I went with the I9 over the CK because I wanted a high engagement. I built the wheel myself with flows. I thought it would be more noticeable going slow, but it isn't. Where I have noticed it is when I'm taking corners really fast. Stop and then starting pedaling again in tight turns is amazing.


One of the locals here let me ride his bike with a chris king hub so I got to do a comparison, and I wanted to give an update. I can notice the difference between the 2 on engagement. Its not much, but if I would have bought the CK I would have been mad with myself. Also I like the i9 sound better, so thats a plus.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I really need to get my wheel built. I'll be going from a Hope geared hub to the CK SS. I know the difference will be great...I can tell just by playing with the CK. I would have went for a new Hope SS hub but I got the CK for $200 used excellent condition, so I couldn't pass up that deal.


----------



## clydecrash (Apr 1, 2005)

Nubster! I am confused! I came back to review this thread, and you bought a King hub?

Please let us know how you like it on the trail. Maybe even a pic.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

One Pivot said:


> Stainless is *usually* a higher grade bearing... not because its stainless, they just seem to come in higher grades.


A higher grade bearing (bearing grade defines the specific tolerance), does not make any difference for a bicycle, as all tolerances are out the window in the first place, due to the tolerances employed by the hub manufacturers and/or temperature changes.

High grade bearings, are interesting for stuff that either runs high speed, or high precision/low vibration requirements.

Magura


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

clydecrash said:


> Nubster! I am confused! I came back to review this thread, and you bought a King hub?
> 
> Please let us know how you like it on the trail. Maybe even a pic.


haha...yeah, I know...I was just getting ready to order a Hope SS and the deal came along that I couldn't pass up. Figured might as well try it and see what the hype is all about. I'll definitely post up thoughts once I get the wheel build and some time on it.


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

Mr.Magura said:


> A higher grade bearing (bearing grade defines the specific tolerance), does not make any difference for a bicycle, as all tolerances are out the window in the first place, due to the tolerances employed by the hub manufacturers and/or temperature changes.
> 
> High grade bearings, are interesting for stuff that either runs high speed, or high precision/low vibration requirements.
> 
> Magura


Once you get into half way decent stuff, sure.. not a lot of difference. Some low grade cartridge bearings do roll pretty poorly. Decent bearings are pretty affordable these days, I wouldnt install junk bearings on a bike.


----------



## cunningstunts (Sep 1, 2011)

for this guy, everything seems to point to Hadley, especially for clydes. i've ordered one, my first top shelf hub, a review will be forthcoming once i've been riding it for a while...


----------



## manpurse (Feb 6, 2011)

As a long time trials bike rider, I can say that Chris King is the standard rear hub for a trials bike (unless you opt for a trials specific front freewheel). It has the precision for rear wheel hops across hand railings that are inches wide, yet can handle an incredible amount of torque for 6 foot+ gaps and the strength for 6 foot drops. No pawl system, a ring drive that engages all 72 engagement points simultaneously. Not as much engagment as I9's 120 point, but the I9 only uses nine contact points vs 72 for the King. 

The other hubs mentioned are good too though and you can't really go wrong with any of them, but my choice would be CK.


----------



## Trail_Blazer (May 30, 2012)

I know this thread is old but I wanted to add to it because the OP and other posters said they had not had a chance to try the hubs so I wanted to share my tryouts with them.

Spec sheets and the real world do not always match your expectations.

It was great to get a feel for the difference in the amount of POE on the hubs, and the sounds they make.

So, today I had a chance to test ride some different custom wheel builds specifically to decide how much POE.
I narrowed the decision to two hubs that I liked most.

*
Overall Best of the Group:*

Hadley Racing DH Rear Hub with 72 POE
Industry Nine Classic Rear Hub with 120 POE
*
Others Hubs Tested:*
DTSwiss 240 with 36 tooth upgrade to POE
Chris King 72 POE
Hadley 72 POE
Shimano SLX 
Cannondale C3

*Ride Notes:*
I could definitely tell a big difference with different numbers of POE 8,32,72,120.
The 72 was the sweet spot until I tried the 120, wow truly instant engagement.
It's hard to time the diff from 72-120 they both grab so fast, but you can feel a tiny difference in peddle to wheel movement.
*The 72 would be perfectly acceptable and exceed my expectations.*
*I was definitely not satisfied with 32 POE*, but I will recognize it's a giant leap up from 8.

*Other Thoughts:*
All the talk about the hassle or no hassle changing and cleaning bearings...
The i9 and Hadley have easy swap cartridge bearings, then there's no more fuss when it's time to swap.
It's also easy to keep an extra cartridge bearing in your tool box just in case.

*Opinion/Conclusion:*
The i9 with 120 POE has me convinced to want more POE, after riding them side by side with the competition.
But if the price was right on the Hadley, I could be swayed to it over the i9.
The Hadley was excellent and it also takes cartridge bearings so it is still in the race.
Also, depending on if one of the two has an axle size upgrade that will fit my bike,
that could have some say in my end decision.

The CK extra high price and high maint schedule (even if not exaggerated) is a major turn off to me plus their tool is very very expensive additionally.

[ Edited to confirm the Hadley does take cartridge bearings ]


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

schristie11 said:


> The Hadley was excellent and if it took a cartridge bearing I would like it more.


» Hadley Rear Hub Service - Sick Lines - mountain bike reviews, news, videos | Your comprehensive downhill and freeride mountain bike resource

They do.

Nice writeup :thumbsup:

Magura


----------



## WarPigs (Dec 21, 2005)

How can I tell visually that the Hadley's freebody is titanium?


----------



## 4nbstd (Apr 12, 2012)

WarPigs said:


> How can I tell visually that the Hadley's freebody is titanium?


It's shiny.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

4nbstd said:


> It's shiny.


.....and titanium colored 

Magura


----------



## WarPigs (Dec 21, 2005)

unfortunately, I am colour blind.


----------



## Mr.Magura (Aug 11, 2010)

WarPigs said:


> unfortunately, I am colour blind.


Same here 

The color difference is though not that hard to see, as titanium is silvery metal, and the steel version is black (at least on mine and on the Hadleys I've seen so far).

Magura


----------



## WarPigs (Dec 21, 2005)

Thanks Magura, I was just afraid seller tried to pull a fast one on me. Not much pictures to refer to, on the net. I didn't know the steel version was black.


----------



## Trail_Blazer (May 30, 2012)

Good info, I was also trying to identify the "steel" version.


----------



## 29erBob (Dec 17, 2009)

This is an old thread but I'll throw my $.02 in anyway,.

I ride Hope's and love them. I'm 250 lbs and ride pretty hard. The hubs have yet to fail me. My rear is a 36 hole w/ 2mm spokes and a flow rim,.. great stuff and holds up really nice.


----------



## paulrb02 (Aug 3, 2009)

Wanted to check back in with a report on hubs.

I had a Hope Pro 2 Evo (142x12) and it was a great hub, but I wanted more engagement points. I ended up getting an i9 hub with 120 POI. Since then I have tried a friends Chris King Hub (72 POI) also and I could tell a difference with engagement, but I didn't do much riding on it, so I won't comment of performance. I am glad I got i9 over CK, just because I wanted high engagement, and if I got CK I would have noticed the engagement and been pissed that I didn't go higher. I notice the engagement on the i9 too, but I know its the highest I can afford for now.


Now for the performance review. I love the i9 in twisty fast single track. I will have to stop pedaling and rise one pedal to make the turns, and getting back to pedaling is quick and a huge improvemnt over the Hope. This is the main reason I got it and it works great for my local trails.

Now the negative. I have to move one gear easier than I normally did on technical sections, I've gotten use to it so I can switch before I need it. With the hope hub I started pedaling, then the chain would tension, then I had a bit of rotation until the gear would engage. This put my feet in a good bit of motion before it engaged, kinda like priming the wheel, so I had a good bit of force going when it engaged. The engagement is so quick on the i9 and I need an easier gear to be able to get the wheel spinning through the same sections.

As far as reliability I won't know until I have to repair something.


----------



## Yogii (Jun 5, 2008)

Sounds like fewer engagement points make you faster! Thanks for pointing out the down side of too many engagement points.


----------



## WarPigs (Dec 21, 2005)

How about going SS with high POE?


----------



## weaverwins (Dec 28, 2008)

paulrb02 said:


> I don't want to buy the CK and then wish I had more.


Then buy stealths


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

Yogii said:


> Sounds like fewer engagement points make you faster! Thanks for pointing out the down side of too many engagement points.


Thats a very weird perspective and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who agreed with needing lower gearing with more engagement. Theres no "priming" going on, and 72 vs 120pt is absolutely splitting hairs!

Only real downside is noise, but not everyone thinks its a downside (I dig a loud hub!).


----------



## stumpynerd (Oct 8, 2012)

I'm 6ft3" and weigh 200lbs (without pack stuffed with tools & water) and im running American Classic MTB 26er rims. I paid around 700 for the set, and ride mostly rocky technical type trails and haven't had any issues with them. I had them for about 2 years and they are still true. I just recently had to tighten the rear hub a bit but that was piece of cake. Not sure how the AC compare to I9's but for the price, easy service, and durability I would go with the ACs if anyone is going to purchase a wheelset.


----------



## Cincinnati Kid (Jan 24, 2008)

I have a set of I9 wheels on my Yeti and am about 30# heavier than you. 

NO ISSUES. Very strong free hub assembly. 

I usually ride Ringle hubs..I love my I9's. I am riding their Enduro build with their spokes. 

Also spoke count smoke count...I ride a set of Ringle Charger Pros on my 29er SS and those 28 spoke wheels have lasted for 2 years with no thing more than getting re-tensioned once.


----------



## Diesel8810 (May 17, 2012)

*Welp.... Update..*



Diesel8810 said:


> I used this thread for help with my decision making process and it was a big help... I am 6' and an athletic 235lbs... I ride aggressive and am fairly rough on stuff but I am pretty agile too...
> 
> I went with CK ISO Hubs, DT comps, DT Black Brass Nips, and Flow EX's...
> 
> ...


So I have managed to do some sort of damage to the 4 Month old Rear Hub... I was out on a night ride last night and noticed that it was slipping when I would coast a bit then get back on the pedals it would just slip forward..

I was out riding with my Buddy that owns my LBS and he did a quick trail side diagnosis and said that I probably stripped the ring drive in the aluminum freehub... He said he only seen this happen a few other times with bigger and or stronger guys.. He said although I am "only" 235lbs that I have a lot of power and must have shredded something inside... Wonderful...

He said regardless of the amount of damage he will be using a Steel FreeHub Body in the replacement hub or to replace the Aluminum one if that is the only part damaged,,, and no they were not loose..I check them after every ride and have had him make adjustments when I feel any play at all... They were broken in properly..

Once we open it up tomorrow I'll post up some pics of the carnage...


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

Diesel8810 said:


> So I have managed to do some sort of damage to the 4 Month old Rear Hub... I was out on a night ride last night and noticed that it was slipping when I would coast a bit then get back on the pedals it would just slip forward..
> 
> I was out riding with my Buddy that owns my LBS and he did a quick trail side diagnosis and said that I probably stripped the ring drive in the aluminum freehub... He said he only seen this happen a few other times with bigger and or stronger guys.. He said although I am "only" 235lbs that I have a lot of power and must have shredded something inside... Wonderful...
> 
> ...


I highly doubt that you destroyed anything in there. I think the issue is probably that you need to service the hub. Clean it out and re-lube it. This is just one of the issues that I've experienced with my Kings. They are finicky and require maintenance, but they're pretty robust. You're not _that _big of a guy.

If you actually "stripped the ring drive" then you need to have the shop get on the horn about a warranty service, because that's ridiculous.


----------



## clydecrash (Apr 1, 2005)

BShow said:


> I highly doubt that you destroyed anything in there. I think the issue is probably that you need to service the hub. Clean it out and re-lube it. This is just one of the issues that I've experienced with my Kings. They are finicky and require maintenance, but they're pretty robust. You're not _that _big of a guy.
> 
> If you actually "stripped the ring drive" then you need to have the shop get on the horn about a warranty service, because that's ridiculous.


I agree--clean/adjust or, if not fix, contact King. I had to replace the ring drive on a King hub a few years ago, but that was on a 8 or 9 year old hub. And I have always been over 250lbs.


----------



## Diesel8810 (May 17, 2012)

BShow said:


> I highly doubt that you destroyed anything in there. I think the issue is probably that you need to service the hub. Clean it out and re-lube it. This is just one of the issues that I've experienced with my Kings. They are finicky and require maintenance, but they're pretty robust. You're not _that _big of a guy.
> 
> If you actually "stripped the ring drive" then you need to have the shop get on the horn about a warranty service, because that's ridiculous.





clydecrash said:


> I agree--clean/adjust or, if not fix, contact King. I had to replace the ring drive on a King hub a few years ago, but that was on a 8 or 9 year old hub. And I have always been over 250lbs.


Thanks for the wishful thinking and I agree.. The initial step is to pull it apart and see what going on inside.. maybe (Hopefully) it just needs a service.... as I never expected to have an issue and otherwise wouldn't have spent that kind of money..

I know I am not "that big of a guy" as I am reminded every time I post in the Clyde forum.. But I also broke a 1 Month old Salsa el Mariachi Ti frame (That several guys in the Clyde Forum said "your barely a Clyde you will have no issue with one"... ) So It may be a combination of factors (weight, strength, aggressive riding style) that makes me rough on stuff..

Trust me I never expected to have any issue with a King rear hub and never had any issues with my old DT/Hugi hubs... I am just going on the initial diagnosis from a very good mechanic that has a lot of history with King hubs and has known me and what I do to bike parts for over 15 Years..

I'll give an update with pics as soon as we open it up...


----------



## freighttrain48 (Apr 30, 2012)

I hope your hub is ok, I weigh 275 and run Kings on my road and mtn bikes( Both with steel free hub bodies) King told me they are rated up to 800 foot lbs of torque.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

Diesel8810 said:


> I know I am not "that big of a guy" as I am reminded every time I post in the Clyde forum.. But I also broke a 1 Month old Salsa el Mariachi Ti frame (That several guys in the Clyde Forum said "your barely a Clyde you will have no issue with one"... ) So It may be a combination of factors (weight, strength, aggressive riding style) that makes me rough on stuff..
> 
> Trust me I never expected to have any issue with a King rear hub and never had any issues with my old DT/Hugi hubs... I am just going on the initial diagnosis from a very good mechanic that has a lot of history with King hubs and has known me and what I do to bike parts for over 15 Years..
> 
> I'll give an update with pics as soon as we open it up...


Looking forward to hearing what's up in there.

For what it's worth, I've had this exact same issue on two different King hubs that I've owned. My friend has had this exact same issue on at least two different, maybe three different hubs. It's the main reason that we won't buy kings anymore. We've had our hubs serviced and the same issue resurfaces - sometimes its a couple months, sometimes its a couple rides. It typically starts out as a feeling of "skipping a tooth" and gets progressively worse from there. I have seen my friend's hub do this while I was following him and he's gone from 1 o'clock to 6 o'clock before the hub catches. You never know when it's going to do it... you just hope for the best when you attack that punchy climb. It really sucks.

We've had the hubs rebuilt with all new internals - out of pocket, i might add - and still had the same issues. CK customer service scoffed at the shop when they tried to get warranty replacement parts. They claim the hub just needs serviced. Which is BS. a couple times they've been rebuilt and had issues appear within the week.

I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but I suspect that this will be a continuing issue for you. Best of luck.


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

freighttrain48 said:


> I hope your hub is ok, I weigh 275 and run Kings on my road and mtn bikes( Both with steel free hub bodies) King told me they are rated up to 800 foot lbs of torque.


If it's what I think it is, its the dirt and old lube that are gumming things up and not allowing the ring drive to function properly.


----------



## Diesel8810 (May 17, 2012)

*Results are in:*

Okay... So here is what he found.. When he opened things up he found that the hub was almost dry (lube-wise) and there was a also a bit of moisture. Kinda odd as I don't submerge my bike and clean it very carefully..... So,the freehub body itself was scored on the edge of the ring drive assuming to the point where it would stop the spring from engaging the teeth when pedaling (These are my words and interpretation of what he explained).. Here's the picture of the damage and as you can see the scoring on the right of the ring drive...

So a good clean, lube, and Stainless Steel FreeHub Body later I'm back up and running... And yep, a call and email is in to King and as you all have alluded my LBS owner/buddy said they aren't very helpful on warranty claims...


----------



## cunningstunts (Sep 1, 2011)

to the guy who could actually demo high end hubs.... holy ****, nice! i want to have your LBS, that's bloody awesome! i figure any really killer high end spec stuff is never demo'able, you have to research or try it on a friends bike. i finally got my Hadley hub built into a wheel, and it's just amazing. feels so solid and the engagement is perfect, just what i was hoping for. my bike ain't light, but with the addition of of a c-guide, it's tip top, purring like a cat, and all i hear is the tires, and the sound of that hub. beautiful. now i know what it's all about, this hub will move with me from bike to bike.


----------



## cihlenfeldt (Feb 17, 2009)

Again, "old" thread - but I'll throw in my $0.02

I'm around 350 geared up at my heaviest. 

I grenaded some Hope II's after a year. But, I fixed them and they're just a good as the day I bought them.

I was able to score a pair of I9's for under $500. So I bit. I love them. The instant engagement has ruined me. The wheels are stiff as a board (confidence inspiring stiffness into turns). And they're strong and easy to service. 

I have no experience with King's.

And for those that harp on King's strength - I9's have been tested to over 800 ft/lbs of torque. That's a Cumming's Diesel y'all.


----------



## freighttrain48 (Apr 30, 2012)

cihlenfeldt said:


> I was able to score a pair of I9's for under $500. So I bit. I love them. The instant engagement has ruined me. The wheels are stiff as a board (confidence inspiring stiffness into turns). And they're strong and easy to service.
> 
> I have no experience with King's.
> 
> And for those that harp on King's strength - I9's have been tested to over 800 ft/lbs of torque. That's a Cumming's Diesel y'all.


Paid $320 for my King Classic and its also rated to 800ftlbs, and more importantly I have not grenaded it like all the other hubs I have owned. Going on over 500 miles of good old new england tech and some steep granny climbs


----------



## t0pcat (May 7, 2012)

I've got an I 9 laced to a flow ex with about 200 miles on it so far and think its wonderful! 120 poe is instant engagement! Nothing odd about it yet just had to adj the brg end play a bit after i got it.


----------



## KTMwoodsrider (Dec 1, 2012)

CK makes two different SS Hubs. What is the difference, if any? One is $420 and the other is $389.
Anybody running CK or hadley ss with dtswiss xr400 rims. This is the direction, I am thinking? Opinions?


----------



## 4nbstd (Apr 12, 2012)

KTMwoodsrider said:


> CK makes two different SS Hubs. What is the difference, if any? One is $420 and the other is $389.


I read somewhere that it's freehub body material, stainless steel and... aluminum(?).


----------



## shizzon (Aug 1, 2010)

I have not ridden Kings, But have put approximately 3 years on an I9 Enduro hubset (standard flanged) laced to mavic 721's. I also have 4 months on a new set of I9 Enduro wheels (black-I edition) with DH spokes and ceramic freehub bearing.

I come in at 250-260 without gear and have an aggressive riding style, though I would say i'm fairly smooth. My history with wheels is laden with broken hubs, taco'd wheels, snapped axles, cracked rims, all the good stuff. I have never had an issue with the pawls/drive system on either of these hubs (both I9 Enduro), though as a shop guy I tend to service my equipment fairly often. I have had to replace the bearings in my original I9 Hubs twice in the three years that I have had them, but my ride see's a lot of wet ridding, so i'm not too surprised.

Now, though i have relatively few rides on the new I9 enduro's that I purchased for my Ibis HD build, I am very impressed with the feel of these wheels, the increased stiffness is very apparent. After going through the spoke re-tension procedure the Enduro rims have stayed in perfect true and tension even with some pretty bad hits. Also, the Ceramic bearing upgrade for the freehub seemed to reduce the initial chain push that I experienced with the older hubs with the standard freehub bearing during break in. Another thing I appreciate is the ease of servicing the I9 hub internals, no specialty tool required and dead simple.


----------



## fatguy1 (Feb 11, 2010)

HADLEY!!!! i have broke them all!! got me some hadleys and i cant break them even if i tried. even use them on my SS and you can count on the stress level on them is for real.


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

For the money nothing beats Hadley, the Ti hub shell looks new after 2 years of hard riding. Supper easy to service and I love their Teflon oil, i use the oil also in my new I9 torch wheelset. If people are looking for hubs that don't need alot of fussing with-Hadley are the hubs. They are now made lighter than before, the new 14.0, 14.1 2014 hubs.
The reason we all buy I9 is the instant engagement, it is addicting !!


----------

