# PVD ...preview



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

I'm about to build an amazing mountain bike. Hopefully something on a whole other level. I've changed a lot of how I design bikes since my last geared mtb trailbike and I've been dying to ride with the updates.

What's been slowing me down? The tapered head tube. Now I move forward.










https://www.peterverdone.com/?p=327


----------



## Smokebikes (Feb 2, 2008)

That is cool! NEVER a dull moment with you.........I look forward to all the details. Thanks for sharing. :thumbsup:


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Pete, you'll have to excuse me because I'm in a bit of a mood at the moment, but honestly, what is the point of all of this?

It's great that you know what a G-Code is and have access to CNC equipment, but how is this helping the framebuilding community? How is it elevating US framebuilding, or adding anything to anyone except yourself?

I mean, I almost never promote my own prototype bikes because, well, I don't care who thinks I'm clever, but everything you do seems to have no end aside from that.

In the past there were guys with access to equipment that made bike parts that had vague notions of egalitarianism, community, and economics, but your work has none of this. Even Walt has ponied up for 44mm headtubes that have benefitted us all. Mark at Paragon makes things like sliding dropouts and direct mount front derailleur mounts that have kept us at the forefront.

You have all these resources that you utilise for what on the surface at least seems purely for your own ego.

Is that really enough for you? Are you happy with doing fluff bikes that impliment current standards not catered for by the current machine shops just so you can post on forums "look how clever I am"?

Tell us there's more of a point to it than just _you._

Apologies in advance if I seem a little......harsh.


----------



## Smokebikes (Feb 2, 2008)

Pete (aka PVD) is a "bad ass", he knows his craft and is willing to share his knowledge and experience in an open forum, that is good for anybody willing to read it (and understand it)...........so hell yeah, it may be about his "ego", but who among us doesn't do that in some way? I enjoy and value most of PVD's contributions and at times just pass em up when they aren't my cup of tea..........besides, the dude rides all the stuff he builds! So, I for one want to see more...........:thumbsup:


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

Thylacine said:


> Apologies in advance if I seem a little......harsh.


1. This part was made entirely on a manual lathe. I'm a machinist so I can make whatever I need on whatever I have available. It just takes a lot longer. I don't have a CNC lathe available to me now. Once this prototype part goes through the entire build process then I'll have some more made for me on a fancy machine.

2. I swore a long time ago not to try to make bike building a business. That rarely works out well financially. This is my hobby. I do it for fun, craft, and challenge.

3. I like showing off my work and sharing. I'm proud of what I do and some other seem to get value out of it. This is the perfect forum for that. I can't go down to the coffee shop and have anyone there even know what I'm talking about.

4. Most importantly, and this is a huge part of the 'PVD' internet persona, I learned back in2000 when I was designing the skate trucks that internet forums were very valuable tools for design and engineering. Sure, it's not good if you have patentable or highly competitive markets, but for hobbyists and crafters it can work awsome. Example. PVD posts some thing up. Everyone hates PVD so they pile on and try to knock it down with everything they have. 99.9% of these people are complete morons. 0.01% say something that even without direction helps me see a problem in the design that I hadn't though of. That's an incredible tool. Call it peer review but it works. It's saved my a$$ on many occations.


----------



## smudge (Jan 12, 2004)

I'm humbled that you're sharing your vast knowledge and abilities with the 99.9%


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Quick warning*

Any further posts that are just personal attacks will be deleted. That's not something I like to do, but I will do it. If you can't make your post relevant to framebuilding in at least a tangential way, I really don't see why you're posting here.

Everyone grow up. Seriously.

-Walt


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

[testingwalt]Pete - Trim your fingernails for ****'s sake![/testingwalt]


----------



## Linnaeus (May 17, 2009)

pvd said:


> 3. I like showing off my work and sharing. I'm proud of what I do and some other seem to get value out of it. This is the perfect forum for that. I can't go down to the coffee shop and have anyone there even know what I'm talking about.


I like seeing Pete's work. Yea, he can be opinionated at times, but as I've said before, his contributions outweigh any of that. At the very least I get to see new or alternative ways to design aspects of the bicycle. Pete isn't asking us newb questions like what welder to buy, or if he can MIG weld a disc mount onto his late 90's Trek 8000 Al frame. He shows us nicely constructed and finished end products that the dude actually uses.

As someone who makes mostly one-offs on my own manual machines, I appreciate seeing a nicely made item that was done manually. Yes, "anyone" can do it, but it still takes a keen eye to knock one out that looks good on the first couple of attempts. And this headtube is a nice item. I think there's still a lot of unrealized potential with the tapered steerer for steel frames an custom/hobby builders, and Pete has shown us a nice example of one way to do it. I give it a big thumbs up. Half of what Warwick does is either complain or reply to other posts in a snide fashion.

Can't wait to see the finished product, Pete!

Addendum: I also like that for the most part, Pete is really good about disseminating relevant information on his wiki. It's a great resource. He will post dimensions, geo, relevant links, etc. All really good stuff.


----------



## Clockwork Bikes (Jun 17, 2006)

I like to show off a little when I'm proud of something, too. I also enjoy other people showing off their work. Though I will never insult somebody's work. I suspect PVD would be receiving no criticism for showing off his work if he did not diminish others' work with insults. All of PVD's insults could be replaced with a respectful and probing question that would raise the same issue.

-Joel


----------



## herbn (Sep 17, 2005)

the outside is the easy part, and kind of pretty,cuts could be a little smoother, but nice enough. How is the inside? you machine parallel tapers? how thin? Oversized like that out of steel ,if you didn't get it realy thin,it's gonna make an awesome counter weight that should do a good job keeping you from looping out on steep hillclimbs,maybe it lets you shorten the front end of the bike


----------



## tamen00 (Mar 10, 2004)

yeah thats a nice looking headtube - a little rough but I'm sure you will clean it up before it's used. What is the weight and length?


----------



## Smokebikes (Feb 2, 2008)

Is the new build going to be FS or rigid?


----------



## MrCookie (Apr 24, 2005)

Nice job on that.
I might have opted to braze on the reinforcement rings because cleaning up the tapers can be a pain in the butt, but then again, there is already a significant amount of time in the main taper.

As for the finish, it's actually pretty darn good. When you consider that a frame will get painted, etc, none of those marks will even show up. It doesn't need a mirror finish to get the job done. Compare the depth of those grooves to a BB shell from Nova, you will not get a reflection from a thumb like above.


----------



## HomeGrownSS (Jan 18, 2006)

looks cool! i think if you used a round nose turning tool bit to fillet the reinforcing rings it would- 
a) look better 
b) theoretically eliminate stress risers, but in practice doesnt really matter.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

I agree that the finish could be better. You have to remember that 4130 is not the most forgiving material for fine machining without flood coolant. Also, there really isn't much a better finish will provide other than satisfaction. The part will look perfect with paint on it.

Yes the taper is parallel on the inside. the wall thickness is approximately 0.045" along the length of the tube.

Also, the rings at the end are to make a proper transition to the headset. This peice doesn't need reinforcement. Purely for astetics. I'm going to try to blend the lower ring a little bit since I think it's a little clunky.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Walt said:


> Any further posts that are just personal attacks will be deleted. That's not something I like to do, but I will do it. If you can't make your post relevant to framebuilding in at least a tangential way, I really don't see why you're posting here.
> 
> Everyone grow up. Seriously.
> 
> -Walt


What personal attack? I was being cordial, and asking legitimate questions, _completely_ about framebuilding, Walt.

I mean, I could walk into any machine shop (that would have me) and make a headtube like that, so I think my questions are valid ones. I don't think anything Pete does has anything to do with framebuilding.

Telling someone they have an ego is hardly a personal attack, either.

Also Pete, I think you calling this 'peer review' is a bit rich. Can you actually point to a post on any forum anywhere where someone has said "You forgot about this part" or "This could've been done better" where you've actually taken that advise? I remember the part where someone said "Your welding could be better" and you didn't take that very well.

The other issue I have is that....aren't you really beyond this? Isn't this a bit petty and beyond you, especially if you can "machine anything you want with whatever you want"? You can clearly make frames based on implementing the most modern standards with a fair amount of ease, so I don't see the point of that, either.

I also don't buy the "There's no money in this" argument, but maybe that's something you can ask Mark at Paragon about. He seems to have been around for some time and seems to be doing alright.

And finally, you're arguing the "Sharing the craft" argument. I don't see anything instructional here, or in anything you've shown. You're not commercialising this part, I'm sure you're not open sourcing the design or G-Codes....so where exactly is the 'instruction'?

If your argument is "The implementation of modern standards" I could look at almost any _production_ frame to see 'what is possible'. Integrated bottom brackets? Check. Tapered headtubes? Check. Direct mount front derailleurs? Check. What, you mean I can do all these things in other materials including steel!?! Holy crap, seriously?! Everyone knows this already.

I think you're a talented guy and I like what you're doing, but I just don't see any benefit for anyone aside from yourself and people who can't do basic work like this and think it's something akin to pulling Excalibur out of a stone.

This isn't a personal attack in the slightest. All I'm asking is "where is this egalitarianism?" because I'm not seeing any from you.

Plus, I want to pressure you _to actually be_ egalitarian because I think it would actually benefit the framebuilding community at large, just the way Mark at Paragon has supported something else other than his ego for the past 25 years.

This is my call to you, to do something bigger than "Look how clever I am".

Something to think about before Walt deletes it?


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

Yeah Pete you selfish bastard, STOP HAVING FUN MAKING STUFF AND START NAVAL GAZING!

News flash folks... *nothing* posted to this forum, FF, or VS is revolutionary or game changing. And that's fine.

-Schmitty-


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Walt, we need a Stickie that's something like "Friday Night Lights" or "Self-Aggrandising Saturdays" like Velocipede has. Comment free, gallery style.


----------



## j-ro (Feb 21, 2009)

Thylacine said:


> Walt, we need a Stickie that's something like "Friday Night Lights" or "Self-Aggrandising Saturdays" like Velocipede has. Comment free, gallery style.


 This is a good idea, short explanation with your pics. If you see something you like, you can start a new comments thread. It will allow one to perfect thier underhanded compliment or overhanded insult or just ask questions. How bout' it Walt?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Yours wasn't deleted.*

Warwick, I only deleted your duplicate post. Your post (one copy of it) is still there, and I have no problem with your question/content.

-Walt



Thylacine said:


> What personal attack? I was being cordial, and asking legitimate questions, _completely_ about framebuilding, Walt.
> 
> I mean, I could walk into any machine shop (that would have me) and make a headtube like that, so I think my questions are valid ones. I don't think anything Pete does has anything to do with framebuilding.
> 
> ...


----------



## crux (Jan 10, 2004)

PVD,

Sweet to see you got the thing fabricated. Looks like it should work well. 

For the lower rim is the plan to angle it or do a thin slice with a parting tool? Either way think it would look nice.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Nice try!*

...but that's constructive criticism. He's like Howard freakin' Hughes with those claws, and it's much easier to weld if you don't have to wear XXXL gloves...

-W



DWF said:


> [testingwalt]Pete - Trim your fingernails for ****'s sake![/testingwalt]


----------



## j-ro (Feb 21, 2009)

Walt said:


> Warwick, I only deleted your duplicate post. Your post (one copy of it) is still there, and I have no problem with your question/content.
> 
> -Walt


Hey Walt, I'm getting email notifications for this thread but I dont see my post where I was in agreement with the idea of a FNL type sticky, was there something in the verbiage that didn't please you? there was no attack there. whats up?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Sorry...*

I deleted that whole subthread because it seemed like it was started as an attack only. Maybe I overreacted - my apologies if y'all were trying to be constructive.

Edit: restored those 2 posts. Let's discuss it in a new topic, though.

I think the idea itself is pretty good - post it as a new topic and we'll discuss it there.

-Walt



j-ro said:


> Hey Walt, I'm getting email notifications for this thread but I dont see my post where I was in agreement with the idea of a FNL type sticky, was there something in the verbiage that didn't please you? there was no attack there. whats up?


----------



## bobbotron (Nov 28, 2007)

That's neat, I wish I could machine things. It would be cool if the taper could follow a sin wave (as opposed to a straight line.)


----------



## felixv (Jun 11, 2010)

Hey

I got a question, did you (pvd) make the HT from a massive piece of steel or was it just a thick tube.
And how long does it takes to machine it on a manual lath.

Felix


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

If you guys seriously want tapered head tubes in 4130, I can get them done. It's just not a big deal. Just tell me the lengths you want & quantities you're looking for as I will do them on a pre-order basis only. If there's a really enough interest (say 100-pieces), I'll gin up a drawing and get 'em knocked out. I can tell you they won't be especially cheap (atsa' lotta' chips!) and the won't be as light as a drawn & swaged tube that True Temper or somebody like that should be offering.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

If you want I can share a refined print for this part and material source for the thick wall 4130.

I'm pretty sure I've got the design dialed. Solidworks is telling me the refined design should weigh 176.77 grams for 135mm.

I'd love to be able to buy them from you.


----------



## herbn (Sep 17, 2005)

probabely 2.25 tubing .25 wall thickness, that isn't a standard size in my aircraft spruce cataloge. it's probabely standard somewhere. I think he left it a little thick at the bottom for final reaming after it's welded.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Hah!*

Let the cat-herding begin.

TT will make this, you guys. Don's got a point. It's not even very hard for them to do, honestly. But I'm set for now with my non-tapering head tubes, and busy with other stuff, so someone else is going to have to step up this time if you want it to happen. I'm guessing nobody will, because it's a lot of thankless work... but I'd love to be surprised.

-Walt



DWF said:


> If you guys seriously want tapered head tubes in 4130, I can get them done. It's just not a big deal. Just tell me the lengths you want & quantities you're looking for as I will do them on a pre-order basis only. If there's a really enough interest (say 100-pieces), I'll gin up a drawing and get 'em knocked out. I can tell you they won't be especially cheap (atsa' lotta' chips!) and the won't be as light as a drawn & swaged tube that True Temper or somebody like that should be offering.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

herbn said:


> that isn't a standard size in my aircraft spruce cataloge.


There are other suppliers for heavy cro-mo out there. Aircraft spruce just carries the common small stuff.

This is made from 2.375" OD x 0.375" Wall.


----------



## jncarpenter (Dec 20, 2003)

I honestly like the look of the wider tubes you did Walt...at least on a steel frame with larger diameter tubes. I think it looks perfectly proportional on mine.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

pvd said:


> There are other suppliers for heavy cro-mo out there. Aircraft spruce just carries the common small stuff.
> 
> This is made from 2.375" OD x 0.375" Wall.


Just working off PVD's numbers, the way to do it is to make it out of 2.25" OD with a .219 wall or 2.125" with a .156 wall. Those are both stock 4130 sizes and means you don't have to turn the ID for the upper length section. The 2.125 makes the most sense to use from efficiency of materials standpoint with just a change in the reinforcement detail.

The cost is in the material (which I have to buy in bulk) and then the setup. One length, plenty long enough for all normal purposes and no reinforcement detail at the top. Just chop it where you need it to get to the length you need.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Pete's is actually wider*

Pete isn't using the 44mm standard (46.5mm OD), so his is actually a bit bigger the whole way up, I think. I agree in general. Tapering steerer - cool. Tapering head tube - probably not necessary. I like being able to get a nice low upper stack height too for the long travel bikes, if I need to keep the bars down.

-W



jncarpenter said:


> I honestly like the look of the wider tubes you did Walt...at least on a steel frame with larger diameter tubes. I think it looks perfectly proportional on mine.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

DWF said:


> One length, plenty long enough for all normal purposes and no reinforcement detail at the top. Just chop it where you need it to get to the length you need.


The problem is with the headsets. If you are just cutting to length then the ZS headset on the top will hang over the head tube and it looks really ugly. You could probably loose the lower ring but it probably won't look right. This is exactly why it took me so long to start making chips on this. It's pretty tough to do it without specific sizes machined from a single tube.


----------



## Blaster1200 (Feb 20, 2004)

pvd said:


> The problem is with the headsets. If you are just cutting to length then the ZS headset on the top will hang over the head tube and it looks really ugly. You could probably loose the lower ring but it probably won't look right. This is exactly why it took me so long to start making chips on this. It's pretty tough to do it without specific sizes machined from a single tube.


Agreed. I've seen a lot of the headset edges hanging over, and it looks wrong. I think the rings are a nice asthetic touch in addition to being functional (reduce heat warpage?).


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

I would think that if TT made them, they would have to do it without the rings and then the rings would have to be added after the fact. Not that big of a problem IMO


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Share the rest of the bikes details yet?

An aggressive 29er to take advantage of the new 140mm Reba with taper steer? Nice slack angles able to rail the DH?

A full suspension bike?

Who really gives a flying hoot if PVD builds for ego? His bikes are always unique. If you don't like reading some ego post for PVD then don't click on the thread.


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

Looks good to me, Pete. I'll take two in 135mm length if you and Don get something worked out.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

DWF said:


> If you guys seriously want tapered head tubes in 4130, I can get them done. It's just not a big deal. Just tell me the lengths you want & quantities you're looking for as I will do them on a pre-order basis only. If there's a really enough interest (say 100-pieces), I'll gin up a drawing and get 'em knocked out. I can tell you they won't be especially cheap (atsa' lotta' chips!) and the won't be as light as a drawn & swaged tube that True Temper or somebody like that should be offering.


You can't use this for road bikes so therefore it sucks kangaroo balls.

Don, if you're going to go to all the trouble, why not make the most of every available market and just machine up the truncated cone / tapered portion?

That way, people can not only put the taper where they want, but the part can also then be used on road bikes.

Weld/braze a section of standard existing head tube material in the bottom, and another in the top.

Voila.

All bases covered.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

And good onya Pete for actually taking my comments onboard and in the spirit they were intended.

:thumbsup: 

I'd probably buy you a beer if you keep this up.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

Thylacine said:


> You can't use this for road bikes so therefore it sucks kangaroo balls.
> 
> Don, if you're going to go to all the trouble, why not make the most of every available market and just machine up the truncated cone / tapered portion?
> 
> ...


That's not a bad idea Warwick, but before I'd do it, I'd have to run the numbers on having a but joint on the head tube that doesn't get reinforced by the tube itself. I've seen head tubes that cracked right around the circumference between TT & DT.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

pvd said:


> The problem is with the headsets. If you are just cutting to length then the ZS headset on the top will hang over the head tube and it looks really ugly. You could probably loose the lower ring but it probably won't look right. This is exactly why it took me so long to start making chips on this. It's pretty tough to do it without specific sizes machined from a single tube.


That's a solid point, but a ring for the top is easy to add. One size that gets chopped is cheaper than a bunch of stock sizes that don't move and I like the idea of a builder being able to adapt the HT to his design rather than adapt his design to the HT.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Cool.

Thing is for me, is that I think if it's possible it's silly not to be able to have something that works for both road and mountain bikes.

1-1/2" > 1-1/8" is just as big in road circles, and I think it would be nice as an option for everyone, not just the All-Mountain crowd who aren't as 'spendy' anyway.

Maybe a design can be formulated where the circumferencial weld on the headtube is reinforced/overlapped by the downtube - similar to how the Paragon seat tube collar is overlapped by the top tube?


----------



## blackgt (May 27, 2010)

The headtube looks nice. 

I would buy a few of those if you decide to offer them for sale.

So what will be revolutionary about this new bike? I'm intrigued.

Jeremy


----------



## kroe (Mar 30, 2009)

I am not a frame builder, so maybe I am not entitled to an opinion... but why can't PVD build things for fun and show them off? What obligation does he have to use his skills to improve the commercial viability of boutique builders?

Sharing what he is doing certainly enriches the ecosystem more than not being here. Would you prefer he was off building model airplanes for fun instead and not contributing at all?

Mtbr as a whole is a place where people show their take on what a mountain bike should be. We argue over brand preferences, materials, geometry, etc. Almost everyone is here only to share ideas and put the product of their efforts out there to see what the community thinks. 

Maybe the frame forum is different, and has a defined purpose to advance the business of niche builders?

I appreciate any information that anyone on here shares at no cost. The more the merrier. If you don't like creation for the sake of it just don't read the threadt.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Nobody is saying that he can't, and I don't abide the "if you don't like it don't read it" attitude. I'm sure that was popular in certain parts of Europe in 1938, and why frat boy circus clown Bush Jnr got anywhere near the Whitehouse.

Are you happy with people just showing off, and punching way below their weight? Is that enough for you, just eternally grateful you get to see someone do something clearly well below their abilities and resources, that mainstream companies have implemented in their production bikes for a few years now? Does that excite you, is that the height of "enriching the ecosystem" for you?

Pete constantly uses rhetoric like "taking it to the next level"......what f*cking level? How can he constantly use phrases like that and then espouse how easy it is, and that the other 99% are 'idiots'? It's hypocritical and condescending.

His obligation is to himself and the respect of his peers. If everything he does is one giant wank and has no end aside from that, then, yeah, I do think someone should call him out on that.

But hey, if you don't like reading that, then don't read it, right?


----------



## Andy FitzGibbon (Jul 7, 2007)

Showing off your work is totally acceptable in a forum like this, but constantly doing so in a self-aggrandizing or condescending manner rubs some people the wrong way.


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

talk about proving Godwin's law.... I'm going to say in a million years I wouldn't have guessed that a hand-turned head tube led to the rise of Hitler. 

I suspect Pete doesn't care one way or another, but I like to see what he's up to.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

I'm quite 'tongue-in-cheek' in reality.


----------



## Cracked Headtube (Apr 16, 2006)

PVD, any updates on this HT? or did I miss it?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

I'm actually more interested in if Donvil has any updates.


----------

