Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
I'll let y'all into another secret at no additional charge: nail and hammer, with medium sized nut for anvil, work well for breaking and re-assembling chains. On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Grant Petersen wrote: > "The hard, cheap, Indian threading way, using Vise Grips for the lockring > and a nail and hammer for the cup" is one of the most fantastic > descriptions of anything I've ever read. Good point about Ashtabula cranks. > A guy came by the other day with one of those, and of course it was on a > ten-year old hundred-dollar (today's dollars) bike, but it was pared down > to nothing, not an unnecessary molecule of metal on it, and ... I though > wow, kind of neat. Bigger and more bearings inside would be good, but has > anybody ever ridden one of these guys to destruction? > No need to start a kickstarter campaign to bring back the bad-ol' > Ashtabula, but ... they are no laughing stocks. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Well, it seems I am prescient or something. Now if they could make something like that out of cold forged aluminum, I'd be more interested. Look claims 320 grams sans rings and doubtless bolts; what about the bearings -- included in that claimed 320 grams? What would 2 rings and hardware add? Frankly, this design, with appropriately wide bb shell, seems to make more sense than external bearings in a smaller shell. Meanwhile, of course, the old square taper system works at least as well as the Ashtabula without many of the drawbacks -- weight, limitations on crank arm design, use of cartridge bearing assemblies, and so forth. But Ashtabulas, with all their drawbacks, certainly have a history of shrugging off decades of neglect and working well. Segway (tm): what, in all y'all's opinion, is the very best design for a bb bearing assembly? Me, I really think that some sort of refinement of the Ashtabula makes most sense. Note that I've struggled with cheap, Indian made cottered cranksets, and I've used Raleigh cottered systems, too, which are hugely better. But certainly the cotter system was well left behind by the "cotterless" system, as they used to call square taper setups until at least the '60s. Patrick "bottom bracket = that short, thick frame tube; spindle = the crank axle; bb bearing assembly = the bearings and such" Moore -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
On Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 12:23:33 PM UTC-7, Brewster Fong wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 7:52:55 AM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote: >> >> >> My vote for the best value-for-money crank/bb bearing assembly type is >> the Ashtabula; I wonder if these could be refined and lightened? Carbon >> fiber? But, in any event, they seem indestructible, even after riding >> through streams and watching muddy water flow out upon emerging. >> > > Patrick, > > Where have you been?! Yes, Look has its one-piece, carbon fiber (what > else?!) Ashtabula-type crank on the market since about 2011: > > Zed 2 crankset: > > > http://branfordbike.com/images/library/features/look_zed2crank_small_11_f.jpg > > > http://www.bikerumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Praxis-Works-OEM-Chainrings-Look-Crankset-2.jpg > > Zed 3 crankset: > > > http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/560x374/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/z/3/z3_03.jpg > > > http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/560x374/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/z/3/z3_02.jpg > > > I think you have to find a Look dealer to get more info. > > I did find Glory Cycles has the Zed 2 for $1250: > > http://glorycycles.com/look-zed-2-crankset/ > > So it's not cheap! > > Good Luck! > > Patrick, never mind! It appears the Look Zed cranksets are only compatible with frames that have a 65mm bottom bracket shell?! It is my understand that even Look only offers one frame that fits this crank?! http://www.lookcycle.com/en/us/route/velos/695-light-bike.html But I did find one shop that has this frameset and crankset "on sale" for $4550! https://www.racycles.com/road/look/look-695-aerolight-premium-ipack-3051 Calfee is the only other builder I found who offers a frame for this crank, but is a package deal, but it is only for its Manta Pro frameset module that retails for $6095, and includes; Chris King Inset 7, Enve/Whisky fork, Look ZED2 crankset and Praxis Works chainrings. That's a lot of moneyGood Luck! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
On Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 7:52:55 AM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote: > > > My vote for the best value-for-money crank/bb bearing assembly type is the > Ashtabula; I wonder if these could be refined and lightened? Carbon fiber? > But, in any event, they seem indestructible, even after riding through > streams and watching muddy water flow out upon emerging. > Patrick, Where have you been?! Yes, Look has its one-piece, carbon fiber (what else?!) Ashtabula-type crank on the market since about 2011: Zed 2 crankset: http://branfordbike.com/images/library/features/look_zed2crank_small_11_f.jpg http://www.bikerumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Praxis-Works-OEM-Chainrings-Look-Crankset-2.jpg Zed 3 crankset: http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/560x374/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/z/3/z3_03.jpg http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/560x374/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/z/3/z3_02.jpg I think you have to find a Look dealer to get more info. I did find Glory Cycles has the Zed 2 for $1250: http://glorycycles.com/look-zed-2-crankset/ So it's not cheap! Good Luck! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
How cool, Tange cup and cone BB's !I do rather miss them . I always found them no brainers to work on, thanks to Eugene Sloane's New Complete Book of Bicycling ! I bought it new as a teen and learned everything about how to do all my own mechanic works from it. Taking the bike to the shop seemed just too drawn out . Why would I want to wait to do this or that on my bike when it's right here in front of me ? Doh ! It was only later when worked in a bike shop assembling and repairing bikes did I discover they made really really cool tools for jobs like bottom bracket shells and cups and installing headsets that back then prolly were not for sale to the public or easily obtained. They had a full Campy shop tool kit . . . . wow! I was like a kid in a candy store, so much fun !! Ahahahaahahahahahaha . On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 4:38:27 PM UTC-4, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: > > > > The Tange BB's will be available in a range of dimensions, Eleven caged > balls, not nine. Hard and smooth, best finish. Some details still being > worked on, and we're not the drivers of this project, but have had some > input. There is no ETA on 'em. Strike 2.8! > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
"The hard, cheap, Indian threading way, using Vise Grips for the lockring and a nail and hammer for the cup" is one of the most fantastic descriptions of anything I've ever read. Good point about Ashtabula cranks. A guy came by the other day with one of those, and of course it was on a ten-year old hundred-dollar (today's dollars) bike, but it was pared down to nothing, not an unnecessary molecule of metal on it, and ... I though wow, kind of neat. Bigger and more bearings inside would be good, but has anybody ever ridden one of these guys to destruction? No need to start a kickstarter campaign to bring back the bad-ol' Ashtabula, but ... they are no laughing stocks. On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Patrick Moore wrote: > I learned to adjust left-side cups the hard way, cheap, Indian threading, > using Vise Grips for the lockring and a nail and hammer for the cup. But I > did get them adjusted. > > Interesting, at least the older British Racing Tricycles use leftside bb > cups and lockrings at each inside end to adjust bearing play on the axle > stubs. That's awkward, because you can't get in front of the assembly > face-on, as you can with a bottom bracket. > > As for longevity: I hear that Campy and perhaps old Dura Ace cup and cone > bb assemblies last as long as anything else out there? I do know that I've > ridden at least 2 Phils in heavy rain and grit and, in one case, even > submerged one in 2' of water, with no problems. But I too would probably > choose a SKS for really heavy duty use. > > My vote for the best value-for-money crank/bb bearing assembly type is the > Ashtabula; I wonder if these could be refined and lightened? Carbon fiber? > But, in any event, they seem indestructible, even after riding through > streams and watching muddy water flow out upon emerging. > > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Grant Petersen > wrote: > >> >> >> The final adjustment takes some skill and time and experience and feel, >> which is why nobody uses these as original equiment anymore. It cannot be >> done with power tools, and you don't want a first-timer adjusting your bb. >> Any conscientious individual can do it just fine, but it'll take many tries >> and retries to nail the adjustment, because as you tighten the lockring >> against the shell, it has the effect of pulling out (loosening) the >> adjustment. So, you get what seems like a perfect adjustment, then you go >> to lock it in and it loosens, and it loosens because the adjustable cup >> gets pulled outward, away from the bearings. >> >> The skill and feel come in by knowing how too-tight to make it to account >> for the loosening, and different bottom brackets and frames will require >> different amounts. You sometimes try to hold the adjustable cup's >> adjustment with the pin tool as you lock it there with the lockring, but >> sometimes tightening the lockring makes the adjustable cup move, anyway. >> It's the opposite of Plug-n-Play, but the thing is, it is NOT THAT HARD as >> long as you don't require perfection on your first-thru-fourth tries. As a >> home mechanic, you need to buy some tools. The fixed cup should be put in >> with a shop tool, and new bike shops might not even have those anymore. The >> cheap tools are the lockring tool and pin tool, and in the old days you >> could get them both for $30 combined, but I don't know what it is these >> days, and a normal bike shop won't stock them. >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
I learned to adjust left-side cups the hard way, cheap, Indian threading, using Vise Grips for the lockring and a nail and hammer for the cup. But I did get them adjusted. Interesting, at least the older British Racing Tricycles use leftside bb cups and lockrings at each inside end to adjust bearing play on the axle stubs. That's awkward, because you can't get in front of the assembly face-on, as you can with a bottom bracket. As for longevity: I hear that Campy and perhaps old Dura Ace cup and cone bb assemblies last as long as anything else out there? I do know that I've ridden at least 2 Phils in heavy rain and grit and, in one case, even submerged one in 2' of water, with no problems. But I too would probably choose a SKS for really heavy duty use. My vote for the best value-for-money crank/bb bearing assembly type is the Ashtabula; I wonder if these could be refined and lightened? Carbon fiber? But, in any event, they seem indestructible, even after riding through streams and watching muddy water flow out upon emerging. On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Grant Petersen wrote: > > > The final adjustment takes some skill and time and experience and feel, > which is why nobody uses these as original equiment anymore. It cannot be > done with power tools, and you don't want a first-timer adjusting your bb. > Any conscientious individual can do it just fine, but it'll take many tries > and retries to nail the adjustment, because as you tighten the lockring > against the shell, it has the effect of pulling out (loosening) the > adjustment. So, you get what seems like a perfect adjustment, then you go > to lock it in and it loosens, and it loosens because the adjustable cup > gets pulled outward, away from the bearings. > > The skill and feel come in by knowing how too-tight to make it to account > for the loosening, and different bottom brackets and frames will require > different amounts. You sometimes try to hold the adjustable cup's > adjustment with the pin tool as you lock it there with the lockring, but > sometimes tightening the lockring makes the adjustable cup move, anyway. > It's the opposite of Plug-n-Play, but the thing is, it is NOT THAT HARD as > long as you don't require perfection on your first-thru-fourth tries. As a > home mechanic, you need to buy some tools. The fixed cup should be put in > with a shop tool, and new bike shops might not even have those anymore. The > cheap tools are the lockring tool and pin tool, and in the old days you > could get them both for $30 combined, but I don't know what it is these > days, and a normal bike shop won't stock them. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Ah...whoops. Yup, sometimes things get lost in translation. Gotcha... ;-) On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Brian Campbell wrote: > I think you missed my winky eye emoticon. It was a joke about your Phil > Wood experience...ahh the interweb > > On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 2:00:07 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: >> >> Nope. You must've missed my comment. Phil wood bearings are for sunny >> California. My Phil BB and hub bearings never last more than a winter. They >> are not suitable for cold and wet climates. And don't get me started on >> their free hubs hah >> >> On May 2, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Brian Campbell wrote: >> >> Phil Wood! ;-) >> >> On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 1:27:48 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: >>> >>> Haha! I'm terribly curious how you'll determine who qualifies as a >>> "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with this kind >>> of BB." >>> >>> You know, up till this moment I had zero interest in cup and cone bb's, >>> and never would imagine considering going back to one. maybe that's because >>> I'm not aware of a quality option out there. But given the fact that my >>> environment destroys bearings in every BB I've tried, including Phil Wood, >>> within a season, maybe a cup and cone would be exactly what I need. >>> Self-serviceable with nothing but a couple special wrenches and a tube of >>> grease. Hmmm >>> >>> Say Grant - who will be manufacturing these BB's? >>> >>> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 8:32:07 PM UTC-5, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: BB spindle length: It's always safe and usually best to use the bb the crank maker recommends, or (more to the point) a dimensional equivalent. I'm not going to address taper here, just quick notes about length. It comes down to chainline, which has nothing to do with the chain. Almost everything anybody could possibly say about CL has already been said by Sheldon on his site, but I don't remember whether he addressed derailers there, so I will fast here. Chainline is how far out from the center of the seat tube the middle ring on a triple sits, or the midpoint between two rings on a double sits. There are two common chainlines, I mean three: 43 or 43.5mm (I forget)--for road doubles 47.5mm -- for road triples and hybrid-like bikes. 50.5 or 51(I forget) -- for mtn bikes "For" means "typical," not "the only way." But what it means is that mtn bike front derailers can reach farther out and can't drag in as close as road front derailers. Example: If you put a Sugino or Silver crank on a 110mm bb spindle, the chainline will be 47.5, and an XT or any other mtn front derailer will be able to shift to the big ring, but not to the small one. To fix that, you put a 113mm bb spindle, which changes the CL from 47.5 to 50.5, and it all works. There is no perfect correlation bwt Q-Factor and CL. In general, mtn cranks are for bow-legged cowboys and they have high Q's, but it's easy to design and make great mtn cranks with mtn bike CLs and low-Q's (under 163?). The mtn crank makers don't generally do that, though, because then their cranks won't fit onto lots of expensive and prestigious bikes that have chainstays that stick out too far in the wrong spots and so require higher Q-Factors. This doesn't address durability, but it's rare to hear of $40 bb's crapping out. Not unheard of, but it's not unheard of at any price, either. We are going to stock an ol' cup-and-cone style BB in ass't lengths sometime this year. It will cost more and we'll refuse to sell it to -- how do I best say this? -- a "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with this kind of BB." We certainly won't quit selling the $40 Shimano bbs, which are so good. What we will do, when it all happens, is extol the theoretical virtues of the old kind...which, given the reliabiliy of the new kind, are undeniable, but may not matter. G On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: > > Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you > gain? Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, > does it roll smoother, faster, etc)? > > I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and > headset. About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple > (with a 107 or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying > to > figure out if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or > something similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and > some mud. And support the occasional overnighter. > -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://grou
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
I think you missed my winky eye emoticon. It was a joke about your Phil Wood experience...ahh the interweb On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 2:00:07 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: > > Nope. You must've missed my comment. Phil wood bearings are for sunny > California. My Phil BB and hub bearings never last more than a winter. They > are not suitable for cold and wet climates. And don't get me started on > their free hubs hah > > On May 2, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Brian Campbell > wrote: > > Phil Wood! ;-) > > On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 1:27:48 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: >> >> Haha! I'm terribly curious how you'll determine who qualifies as a >> "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with this kind >> of BB." >> >> You know, up till this moment I had zero interest in cup and cone bb's, >> and never would imagine considering going back to one. maybe that's because >> I'm not aware of a quality option out there. But given the fact that my >> environment destroys bearings in every BB I've tried, including Phil Wood, >> within a season, maybe a cup and cone would be exactly what I need. >> Self-serviceable with nothing but a couple special wrenches and a tube of >> grease. Hmmm >> >> Say Grant - who will be manufacturing these BB's? >> >> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 8:32:07 PM UTC-5, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: >>> >>> BB spindle length: >>> >>> It's always safe and usually best to use the bb the crank maker >>> recommends, or (more to the point) a dimensional equivalent. I'm not going >>> to address taper here, just quick notes about length. It comes down to >>> chainline, which has nothing to do with the chain. Almost everything >>> anybody could possibly say about CL has already been said by Sheldon on his >>> site, but I don't remember whether he addressed derailers there, so I will >>> fast here. Chainline is how far out from the center of the seat tube the >>> middle ring on a triple sits, or the midpoint between two rings on a double >>> sits. >>> >>> There are two common chainlines, I mean three: >>> >>> 43 or 43.5mm (I forget)--for road doubles >>> 47.5mm -- for road triples and hybrid-like bikes. >>> 50.5 or 51(I forget) -- for mtn bikes >>> >>> "For" means "typical," not "the only way." >>> But what it means is that mtn bike front derailers can reach farther out >>> and can't drag in as close as road front derailers. >>> >>> Example: If you put a Sugino or Silver crank on a 110mm bb spindle, the >>> chainline will be 47.5, and an XT or any other mtn front derailer will be >>> able to shift to the big ring, but not to the small one. To fix that, you >>> put a 113mm bb spindle, which changes the CL from 47.5 to 50.5, and it all >>> works. >>> >>> There is no perfect correlation bwt Q-Factor and CL. In general, mtn >>> cranks are for bow-legged cowboys and they have high Q's, but it's easy to >>> design and make great mtn cranks with mtn bike CLs and low-Q's (under >>> 163?). The mtn crank makers don't generally do that, though, because then >>> their cranks won't fit onto lots of expensive and prestigious bikes that >>> have chainstays that stick out too far in the wrong spots and so require >>> higher Q-Factors. >>> >>> This doesn't address durability, but it's rare to hear of $40 bb's >>> crapping out. Not unheard of, but it's not unheard of at any price, either. >>> We are going to stock an ol' cup-and-cone style BB in ass't lengths >>> sometime this year. It will cost more and we'll refuse to sell it to -- how >>> do I best say this? -- a "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no >>> experience with this kind of BB." We certainly won't quit selling the $40 >>> Shimano bbs, which are so good. What we will do, when it all happens, is >>> extol the theoretical virtues of the old kind...which, given the reliabiliy >>> of the new kind, are undeniable, but may not matter. >>> G >>> >>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does it roll smoother, faster, etc)? I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And support the occasional overnighter. >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Very cool! Yup, that explanation mirrors my personal experience. Couple of tries till it feels bang-on with the lock ring. Just like adjusting hub cones, or cage-bearing headsets. That BB looks pretty nice. I'm definitely up for trying one of these again. On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Grant Petersen wrote: > Here's one, and forgive my continued warning. I promise you this is not > good old fashioned reverse psychology. > > This style emerged because it's simple and it works. It got extinguished > in the late '80s or early '90s NOT because after a hundred or more years > some smart modern mechanic found a flaw that all before him or her had > overlooked, but because they're a minor pita to learn how to adjust. > There's the theory of adjustment, which is simple and is this: > > The fixed cup on the drive side goes in with a shop tool, and crank it > hard. > Grease the cup and/or the ringed bearings, then place them > balls-facing-outward in the cup. > While your fingers or brush is greasy, you might as well grease the > adjustable/non-drive side cup and bearings, too. While you're at it, get > grease on the cones (bearing surfaces) of the spindle, and heck, great the > belly of the spindle, too. Why not? > Insert the plastic accordion sleeve, which strictly isn't necessary. It's > there to isolate the assembly from water that might leak in from above. But > many cool guys ditch the plastic. > Then insert the spindle with the correct (usually long) side sticking out > the fixed cup. > With the bearings greased and facing outward (from the bike's point of > view, so INTO the left cup), grease the threads on the adjustable/left side > cup and screw it in. You'll need a "pin tool" to complete this job. > Some threads will be sticking out. Put the notched lock ring on those > threads. > > The final adjustment takes some skill and time and experience and feel, > which is why nobody uses these as original equiment anymore. It cannot be > done with power tools, and you don't want a first-timer adjusting your bb. > Any conscientious individual can do it just fine, but it'll take many tries > and retries to nail the adjustment, because as you tighten the lockring > against the shell, it has the effect of pulling out (loosening) the > adjustment. So, you get what seems like a perfect adjustment, then you go > to lock it in and it loosens, and it loosens because the adjustable cup > gets pulled outward, away from the bearings. > > The skill and feel come in by knowing how too-tight to make it to account > for the loosening, and different bottom brackets and frames will require > different amounts. You sometimes try to hold the adjustable cup's > adjustment with the pin tool as you lock it there with the lockring, but > sometimes tightening the lockring makes the adjustable cup move, anyway. > It's the opposite of Plug-n-Play, but the thing is, it is NOT THAT HARD as > long as you don't require perfection on your first-thru-fourth tries. As a > home mechanic, you need to buy some tools. The fixed cup should be put in > with a shop tool, and new bike shops might not even have those anymore. The > cheap tools are the lockring tool and pin tool, and in the old days you > could get them both for $30 combined, but I don't know what it is these > days, and a normal bike shop won't stock them. > > The Tange BB's will be available in a range of dimensions, Eleven caged > balls, not nine. Hard and smooth, best finish. Some details still being > worked on, and we're not the drivers of this project, but have had some > input. There is no ETA on 'em. Strike 2.8! > > > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Mark Reimer > wrote: > >> Nope. You must've missed my comment. Phil wood bearings are for sunny >> California. My Phil BB and hub bearings never last more than a winter. They >> are not suitable for cold and wet climates. And don't get me started on >> their free hubs hah >> >> On May 2, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Brian Campbell >> wrote: >> >> Phil Wood! ;-) >> >> On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 1:27:48 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: >>> >>> Haha! I'm terribly curious how you'll determine who qualifies as a >>> "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with this kind >>> of BB." >>> >>> You know, up till this moment I had zero interest in cup and cone bb's, >>> and never would imagine considering going back to one. maybe that's because >>> I'm not aware of a quality option out there. But given the fact that my >>> environment destroys bearings in every BB I've tried, including Phil Wood, >>> within a season, maybe a cup and cone would be exactly what I need. >>> Self-serviceable with nothing but a couple special wrenches and a tube of >>> grease. Hmmm >>> >>> Say Grant - who will be manufacturing these BB's? >>> >>> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 8:32:07 PM UTC-5, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: BB spindle length: It's always safe and usually best to use the bb the crank maker recommends, or (more to the poin
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Here's one, and forgive my continued warning. I promise you this is not good old fashioned reverse psychology. This style emerged because it's simple and it works. It got extinguished in the late '80s or early '90s NOT because after a hundred or more years some smart modern mechanic found a flaw that all before him or her had overlooked, but because they're a minor pita to learn how to adjust. There's the theory of adjustment, which is simple and is this: The fixed cup on the drive side goes in with a shop tool, and crank it hard. Grease the cup and/or the ringed bearings, then place them balls-facing-outward in the cup. While your fingers or brush is greasy, you might as well grease the adjustable/non-drive side cup and bearings, too. While you're at it, get grease on the cones (bearing surfaces) of the spindle, and heck, great the belly of the spindle, too. Why not? Insert the plastic accordion sleeve, which strictly isn't necessary. It's there to isolate the assembly from water that might leak in from above. But many cool guys ditch the plastic. Then insert the spindle with the correct (usually long) side sticking out the fixed cup. With the bearings greased and facing outward (from the bike's point of view, so INTO the left cup), grease the threads on the adjustable/left side cup and screw it in. You'll need a "pin tool" to complete this job. Some threads will be sticking out. Put the notched lock ring on those threads. The final adjustment takes some skill and time and experience and feel, which is why nobody uses these as original equiment anymore. It cannot be done with power tools, and you don't want a first-timer adjusting your bb. Any conscientious individual can do it just fine, but it'll take many tries and retries to nail the adjustment, because as you tighten the lockring against the shell, it has the effect of pulling out (loosening) the adjustment. So, you get what seems like a perfect adjustment, then you go to lock it in and it loosens, and it loosens because the adjustable cup gets pulled outward, away from the bearings. The skill and feel come in by knowing how too-tight to make it to account for the loosening, and different bottom brackets and frames will require different amounts. You sometimes try to hold the adjustable cup's adjustment with the pin tool as you lock it there with the lockring, but sometimes tightening the lockring makes the adjustable cup move, anyway. It's the opposite of Plug-n-Play, but the thing is, it is NOT THAT HARD as long as you don't require perfection on your first-thru-fourth tries. As a home mechanic, you need to buy some tools. The fixed cup should be put in with a shop tool, and new bike shops might not even have those anymore. The cheap tools are the lockring tool and pin tool, and in the old days you could get them both for $30 combined, but I don't know what it is these days, and a normal bike shop won't stock them. The Tange BB's will be available in a range of dimensions, Eleven caged balls, not nine. Hard and smooth, best finish. Some details still being worked on, and we're not the drivers of this project, but have had some input. There is no ETA on 'em. Strike 2.8! On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Mark Reimer wrote: > Nope. You must've missed my comment. Phil wood bearings are for sunny > California. My Phil BB and hub bearings never last more than a winter. They > are not suitable for cold and wet climates. And don't get me started on > their free hubs hah > > On May 2, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Brian Campbell > wrote: > > Phil Wood! ;-) > > On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 1:27:48 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: >> >> Haha! I'm terribly curious how you'll determine who qualifies as a >> "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with this kind >> of BB." >> >> You know, up till this moment I had zero interest in cup and cone bb's, >> and never would imagine considering going back to one. maybe that's because >> I'm not aware of a quality option out there. But given the fact that my >> environment destroys bearings in every BB I've tried, including Phil Wood, >> within a season, maybe a cup and cone would be exactly what I need. >> Self-serviceable with nothing but a couple special wrenches and a tube of >> grease. Hmmm >> >> Say Grant - who will be manufacturing these BB's? >> >> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 8:32:07 PM UTC-5, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: >>> >>> BB spindle length: >>> >>> It's always safe and usually best to use the bb the crank maker >>> recommends, or (more to the point) a dimensional equivalent. I'm not going >>> to address taper here, just quick notes about length. It comes down to >>> chainline, which has nothing to do with the chain. Almost everything >>> anybody could possibly say about CL has already been said by Sheldon on his >>> site, but I don't remember whether he addressed derailers there, so I will >>> fast here. Chainline is how far out from the center of the seat tube the >>> middle ring on a triple si
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Mark, it was a messy ride in a really fun way. The boardwalk is 1600' across a marsh. The family of mallards that had nested there were all up on the boardwalk. I asked if the water was too wet for them, but they didn't answer. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Man. I gotta get one of those SKF's soon. That sounds perfect. On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Ron Mc wrote: > Saturday morning I rode 40 mi after a big rain rain - we had 5" the night > before. There were pretty good clay washes that splashed on the bike, but > also rode through standing water at one end of a boardwalk and running > water under some of the road overpasses. Just hosed it down when I got > home, and don't worry about the SKF BB. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Saturday morning I rode 40 mi after a big rain rain - we had 5" the night before. There were pretty good clay washes that splashed on the bike, but also rode through standing water at one end of a boardwalk and running water under some of the road overpasses. Just hosed it down when I got home, and don't worry about the SKF BB. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Nope. You must've missed my comment. Phil wood bearings are for sunny California. My Phil BB and hub bearings never last more than a winter. They are not suitable for cold and wet climates. And don't get me started on their free hubs hah > On May 2, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Brian Campbell wrote: > > Phil Wood! ;-) > >> On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 1:27:48 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: >> Haha! I'm terribly curious how you'll determine who qualifies as a "newbie >> with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with this kind of BB." >> >> You know, up till this moment I had zero interest in cup and cone bb's, and >> never would imagine considering going back to one. maybe that's because I'm >> not aware of a quality option out there. But given the fact that my >> environment destroys bearings in every BB I've tried, including Phil Wood, >> within a season, maybe a cup and cone would be exactly what I need. >> Self-serviceable with nothing but a couple special wrenches and a tube of >> grease. Hmmm >> >> Say Grant - who will be manufacturing these BB's? >> >>> On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 8:32:07 PM UTC-5, Grant @ Rivendell wrote: >>> BB spindle length: >>> >>> It's always safe and usually best to use the bb the crank maker recommends, >>> or (more to the point) a dimensional equivalent. I'm not going to address >>> taper here, just quick notes about length. It comes down to chainline, >>> which has nothing to do with the chain. Almost everything anybody could >>> possibly say about CL has already been said by Sheldon on his site, but I >>> don't remember whether he addressed derailers there, so I will fast here. >>> Chainline is how far out from the center of the seat tube the middle ring >>> on a triple sits, or the midpoint between two rings on a double sits. >>> >>> There are two common chainlines, I mean three: >>> >>> 43 or 43.5mm (I forget)--for road doubles >>> 47.5mm -- for road triples and hybrid-like bikes. >>> 50.5 or 51(I forget) -- for mtn bikes >>> >>> "For" means "typical," not "the only way." >>> But what it means is that mtn bike front derailers can reach farther out >>> and can't drag in as close as road front derailers. >>> >>> Example: If you put a Sugino or Silver crank on a 110mm bb spindle, the >>> chainline will be 47.5, and an XT or any other mtn front derailer will be >>> able to shift to the big ring, but not to the small one. To fix that, you >>> put a 113mm bb spindle, which changes the CL from 47.5 to 50.5, and it all >>> works. >>> >>> There is no perfect correlation bwt Q-Factor and CL. In general, mtn cranks >>> are for bow-legged cowboys and they have high Q's, but it's easy to design >>> and make great mtn cranks with mtn bike CLs and low-Q's (under 163?). The >>> mtn crank makers don't generally do that, though, because then their cranks >>> won't fit onto lots of expensive and prestigious bikes that have chainstays >>> that stick out too far in the wrong spots and so require higher Q-Factors. >>> >>> This doesn't address durability, but it's rare to hear of $40 bb's crapping >>> out. Not unheard of, but it's not unheard of at any price, either. We are >>> going to stock an ol' cup-and-cone style BB in ass't lengths sometime this >>> year. It will cost more and we'll refuse to sell it to -- how do I best say >>> this? -- a "newbie with romantic/retro sensibilities but no experience with >>> this kind of BB." We certainly won't quit selling the $40 Shimano bbs, >>> which are so good. What we will do, when it all happens, is extol the >>> theoretical virtues of the old kind...which, given the reliabiliy of the >>> new kind, are undeniable, but may not matter. >>> G >>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does it roll smoother, faster, etc)? I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And support the occasional overnighter. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google > Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
My Atlantis arrived with a Tange 113mm BB. On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Philip Kim wrote: > i've gotten a hillborne & chev. both had tange BB's. > > > On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 5:20:47 PM UTC-4, Gum N Nuts wrote: >> >> What does Riv use for stock bottom brackets? I'm curious because I've had >> two different ones - one from a fully built-by-riv cheviot and one from a >> hillborne frameset - completely eat it. The one on the cheviot lasted about >> two hundred miles, maybe a thousand on the hillborne. No weird weather, >> sometimes loaded for camping but otherwise pretty normal riding. Replaced >> with $25 shimanos both times and no further worry after several thousand >> more miles on each. >> >> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: >>> >>> Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? >>> Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does >>> it roll smoother, faster, etc)? >>> >>> I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. >>> About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 >>> or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out >>> if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something >>> similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And >>> support the occasional overnighter. >>> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
http://www.velominati.com/tradition/royce/ Royce bottom bracket On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: > FWIW, when I first bought a Phil bb for my '99 gofast fixed gear, I called > Phil and asked if the ti spindle would hold up to grunting up hills in a > 75" gear. The rep on the phone said, "Oh yes, you don't have to worry, we > have track sprinters use them." So far, so good. > > FWIW and YMMV and so forth. If I were to buy another bb, at least for any > other bike than the lightweight gofast, I'd at least seriously consider a > SKF bb -- what's not to like apart from 100 grams?i But there have been > plenty of ti square taper bbs on the market, of which I've owned at least 4 > or 5 different models, and at least 7 different instances overall, and I > don't recall hearing stories about breakage. > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Jan Heine wrote: > >> The old cup-and-cone bottom brackets were great when I was a student with >> more time than money. Back then, I enjoyed working on bottom brackets. But >> it never made sense from a monetary perspective. Even at $ 7 an hour, >> overhauling my BB twice a year was $ 14 in time alone. If the BB lasts 10 >> years, I've spent $ 140 of my time. And the cup-and-cone BB wasn't cheap - >> I recall a Campy BB costing (back then) $ 80. In today's dollars, that >> would be more than an SKF BB. >> >> These days, I am terribly busy, and I prefer riding my bike over working >> on it. That is why money spent on components that I never have to think >> about is money well spent. All too often does it happen on Bicycle >> Quarterly test bikes that the night before a big ride, I discover a problem >> and have to scramble to fix it. And these are new bikes! >> >> As to BB weight, there isn't much you can do. Yes, you can replace the >> spindle with titanium, but remember that titanium is much less strong than >> steel. And when BB spindles were originally designed, the engineers who >> designed them weren't stupid. They made them as big as they need to be, >> using very strong CrMo steel. Even a stainless spindle will be less strong. >> Replacing a CrMo part with an identically dimensioned titanium part invites >> trouble. >> >> You could design a BB with a titanium spindle, but you'd have to start >> from scratch. You'd make the bottom bracket shell of the bike bigger to >> make room for the bigger spindle. You'd make the crank bigger, too, so the >> bigger spindle fits. The end result probably would be heavier than what you >> started with. >> >> There is a way around this, by using a lighter material for the cranks, >> too. That is why carbon cranks make sense only with modern BBs and vice >> versa. (The original Campy carbon cranks with a square taper were heavier >> than our René Herse aluminum cranks!) The carbon cranks actually aren't >> lighter than aluminum ones, but the BB is lighter, so overall, you save >> weight. However, much of the savings come from the tiny bearings, which you >> need to replace annually on most models. >> >> I am a lightweight rider, and I don't tend to break components, so I >> sometimes am tempted by a titanium spindle. Then I think of the >> consequences if it breaks (almost certain to crash), and I realize that >> it's not worth the risk. >> >> It's interesting to note that none of the titanium BBs are made by >> companies who have their components fatigue-tested to the universally >> accepted industry standards. >> >> Disclosure: Compass Bicycles Ltd. sell SKF bottom brackets. >> >> Jan Heine >> Compass Bicycles Ltd. >> www.compasscycle.com >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. > By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. > Other professional writing services. > http://www.resumespecialties.com/ > www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/ > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Vereinigte Staaten > ** > ** > *The point which is the pivot of the norm is the motionless center of a > circumference on the contours of which all conditions, distinctions, and > individualities revolve. *Chuang Tzu > > *Stat crux dum volvitur orbis.* *(The cross stands motionless while the > world revolves.) *Carthusian motto > > *It is *we *who change; *He* remains the same.* Eckhart > > *Kinei hos eromenon.* (*It moves [all things] as the beloved.) *Aristotle > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
FWIW, when I first bought a Phil bb for my '99 gofast fixed gear, I called Phil and asked if the ti spindle would hold up to grunting up hills in a 75" gear. The rep on the phone said, "Oh yes, you don't have to worry, we have track sprinters use them." So far, so good. FWIW and YMMV and so forth. If I were to buy another bb, at least for any other bike than the lightweight gofast, I'd at least seriously consider a SKF bb -- what's not to like apart from 100 grams?i But there have been plenty of ti square taper bbs on the market, of which I've owned at least 4 or 5 different models, and at least 7 different instances overall, and I don't recall hearing stories about breakage. On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Jan Heine wrote: > The old cup-and-cone bottom brackets were great when I was a student with > more time than money. Back then, I enjoyed working on bottom brackets. But > it never made sense from a monetary perspective. Even at $ 7 an hour, > overhauling my BB twice a year was $ 14 in time alone. If the BB lasts 10 > years, I've spent $ 140 of my time. And the cup-and-cone BB wasn't cheap - > I recall a Campy BB costing (back then) $ 80. In today's dollars, that > would be more than an SKF BB. > > These days, I am terribly busy, and I prefer riding my bike over working > on it. That is why money spent on components that I never have to think > about is money well spent. All too often does it happen on Bicycle > Quarterly test bikes that the night before a big ride, I discover a problem > and have to scramble to fix it. And these are new bikes! > > As to BB weight, there isn't much you can do. Yes, you can replace the > spindle with titanium, but remember that titanium is much less strong than > steel. And when BB spindles were originally designed, the engineers who > designed them weren't stupid. They made them as big as they need to be, > using very strong CrMo steel. Even a stainless spindle will be less strong. > Replacing a CrMo part with an identically dimensioned titanium part invites > trouble. > > You could design a BB with a titanium spindle, but you'd have to start > from scratch. You'd make the bottom bracket shell of the bike bigger to > make room for the bigger spindle. You'd make the crank bigger, too, so the > bigger spindle fits. The end result probably would be heavier than what you > started with. > > There is a way around this, by using a lighter material for the cranks, > too. That is why carbon cranks make sense only with modern BBs and vice > versa. (The original Campy carbon cranks with a square taper were heavier > than our René Herse aluminum cranks!) The carbon cranks actually aren't > lighter than aluminum ones, but the BB is lighter, so overall, you save > weight. However, much of the savings come from the tiny bearings, which you > need to replace annually on most models. > > I am a lightweight rider, and I don't tend to break components, so I > sometimes am tempted by a titanium spindle. Then I think of the > consequences if it breaks (almost certain to crash), and I realize that > it's not worth the risk. > > It's interesting to note that none of the titanium BBs are made by > companies who have their components fatigue-tested to the universally > accepted industry standards. > > Disclosure: Compass Bicycles Ltd. sell SKF bottom brackets. > > Jan Heine > Compass Bicycles Ltd. > www.compasscycle.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. Other professional writing services. http://www.resumespecialties.com/ www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/ Patrick Moore Alburquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Vereinigte Staaten ** ** *The point which is the pivot of the norm is the motionless center of a circumference on the contours of which all conditions, distinctions, and individualities revolve. *Chuang Tzu *Stat crux dum volvitur orbis.* *(The cross stands motionless while the world revolves.) *Carthusian motto *It is *we *who change; *He* remains the same.* Eckhart *Kinei hos eromenon.* (*It moves [all things] as the beloved.) *Aristotle -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https:
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Again . . all about nothing !Hey how much does that glass of water you just drank weigh ? "Oh man . . . that extra weight is really a burden !" "After I pee I feel so light !" Ahahahaahahahahah ! So it is with everything . . . relative nonsense !Relative to nothing but it's own relativity . As usual . . . . just ride baby ! just ride !! Hey , whatcha got for a ride ? * What-ever, it rides so let's ride ! w ! * On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 2:19:09 PM UTC-4, Ron Mc wrote: > > I guess it adds up when you carry it around for 50,000 mi > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
In this situation, when a square taper is called for, I'd go for a Shimano, see how long it lasts and if you need a new BB in one year or five, re-evaluate. I scrounged my Phils from swap meets and what not so my investment was far lower. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
I guess it adds up when you carry it around for 50,000 mi On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 12:38:58 PM UTC-5, Garth wrote: > > > A 110mm SKF weighs in at a whopping 291 grams.Wow , a real hunk of > lead ! Ahahaahahahahahah All about nothing. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
A 110mm SKF weighs in at a whopping 291 grams.Wow , a real hunk of lead ! Ahahaahahahahahah All about nothing. On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 1:07:32 PM UTC-4, Lungimsam wrote: > > Someone said SKFs are heavier than other bbs. > So just how much heavier is an SKF than other bbs? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
On 04/28/2016 01:06 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: In addition, there's the inherently good and pleasing act of doing maintenance on your bike. I know this guy who says that he removes his chain and soaks it in mineral spirits every 100 miles. Cest m'oi He rides several thousand miles per year, For the past several years, between seven and eleven thousand per year so I figure he's removing and soaking a chain at least once per week. Sometimes as many as three times a week, sometimes less, depending on how the rotation is going He must enjoy it and I admire the devotion. It's usually a pleasant way to check over the bike and make sure everything's working well. It's not onerous or painful -- just shake the can once in a while -- and then after a few minutes, hang the chain to let it dry and then reinstall and reapply T9. I personally also like the act of maintaining my bike. It's a way to express gratitude to the machine that I cherish. Except those times when I'm lazy and don't feel like working on my bike +1 And for those times or those jobs you really don't feel like doing, there's the LBS, and using them gives you the opportunity to help support the LBS. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
The entire range of square taper BB weights is from about 140g to about 300g. SKF and cheap Shimanos are at or just below 300g. SKFs are heavy and expensive but they last an incredibly long time, even in lousy conditions. Other cheap BBs can be around 240g. The lightest cheap disposable BB I've seen is an Origin 8. Ti BB spindles can save about 100g and cost about $100 more. People like to round 100g to a quarter-pound. On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 10:07:32 AM UTC-7, Lungimsam wrote: > > Someone said SKFs are heavier than other bbs. > So just how much heavier is an SKF than other bbs? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Someone said SKFs are heavier than other bbs. So just how much heavier is an SKF than other bbs? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
oh wow, did not know about this before now. thanks this could be really cool. On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 12:26:45 PM UTC-4, Mark Reimer wrote: > > Yeah, that is a pretty cool BB. I see White Industries is making an > external BB version of their ENO/VBC cranks now, which means I'm not dead > set on running square taper all the time (I'm a big fan of their cranks). > That threadfit combined with white cranks would make for a super hot and > long lasting combo. > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Mike in WA > wrote: > >> Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be >> upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable Shimano BB >> ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the time leads to a >> lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets go bad in about a >> year. With the King design, you can easily flush out and add new grease >> with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do not disassemble" on the >> cups and you have to just throw them away when they get contaminated. I'd >> rather have something that is serviceable and won't creak or squeak (like >> some cheap BB's do because of larger mfg. tolerances) over the long term. >> >> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: >>> >>> Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? >>> Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does >>> it roll smoother, faster, etc)? >>> >>> I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. >>> About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 >>> or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out >>> if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something >>> similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And >>> support the occasional overnighter. >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
In addition, there's the inherently good and pleasing act of doing maintenance on your bike. I know this guy who says that he removes his chain and soaks it in mineral spirits every 100 miles. He rides several thousand miles per year, so I figure he's removing and soaking a chain at least once per week. He must enjoy it and I admire the devotion. I personally also like the act of maintaining my bike. It's a way to express gratitude to the machine that I cherish. Except those times when I'm lazy and don't feel like working on my bike Bill Lindsay El Cerrito, Ca On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:56:34 AM UTC-7, Mark Reimer wrote: > > Ah right, I forgot about labour costs. I just do my own so it only costs > time. And time spent working on a bike is time well spent IMO. > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Mike in WA > wrote: > >> $45 for each cheap BB replacement with labor and they may go bad sooner >> than a year. I would expect the cost would amortize in 3-4 years and the >> King won't have inevitable creaking during that time. I expect the Kings >> would last basically forever with regular maintenance. Less stuff in the >> landfill too. >> >> >> On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 04/28/2016 12:11 PM, Mike in WA wrote: >>> > Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be >>> > upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable >>> > Shimano BB ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the >>> > time leads to a lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets >>> > go bad in about a year. With the King design, you can easily flush out >>> > and add new grease with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do >>> > not disassemble" on the cups and you have to just throw them away when >>> > they get contaminated. I'd rather have something that is serviceable >>> > and won't creak or squeak (like some cheap BB's do because of larger >>> > mfg. tolerances) over the long term. >>> >>> How long do you think it will take you to break even? >>> >>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Ah right, I forgot about labour costs. I just do my own so it only costs time. And time spent working on a bike is time well spent IMO. On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Mike in WA wrote: > $45 for each cheap BB replacement with labor and they may go bad sooner > than a year. I would expect the cost would amortize in 3-4 years and the > King won't have inevitable creaking during that time. I expect the Kings > would last basically forever with regular maintenance. Less stuff in the > landfill too. > > > On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: >> >> >> On 04/28/2016 12:11 PM, Mike in WA wrote: >> > Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be >> > upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable >> > Shimano BB ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the >> > time leads to a lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets >> > go bad in about a year. With the King design, you can easily flush out >> > and add new grease with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do >> > not disassemble" on the cups and you have to just throw them away when >> > they get contaminated. I'd rather have something that is serviceable >> > and won't creak or squeak (like some cheap BB's do because of larger >> > mfg. tolerances) over the long term. >> >> How long do you think it will take you to break even? >> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
$45 for each cheap BB replacement with labor and they may go bad sooner than a year. I would expect the cost would amortize in 3-4 years and the King won't have inevitable creaking during that time. I expect the Kings would last basically forever with regular maintenance. Less stuff in the landfill too. On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > > On 04/28/2016 12:11 PM, Mike in WA wrote: > > Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be > > upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable > > Shimano BB ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the > > time leads to a lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets > > go bad in about a year. With the King design, you can easily flush out > > and add new grease with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do > > not disassemble" on the cups and you have to just throw them away when > > they get contaminated. I'd rather have something that is serviceable > > and won't creak or squeak (like some cheap BB's do because of larger > > mfg. tolerances) over the long term. > > How long do you think it will take you to break even? > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
A long time, probably close to ten years hah! But then again, if I was interested in just riding something cheap that did the job, I wouldn't own a Riv, would I On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > On 04/28/2016 12:11 PM, Mike in WA wrote: > >> Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be >> upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable Shimano BB >> ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the time leads to a >> lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets go bad in about a >> year. With the King design, you can easily flush out and add new grease >> with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do not disassemble" on the >> cups and you have to just throw them away when they get contaminated. I'd >> rather have something that is serviceable and won't creak or squeak (like >> some cheap BB's do because of larger mfg. tolerances) over the long term. >> > > How long do you think it will take you to break even? > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
On 04/28/2016 12:11 PM, Mike in WA wrote: Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable Shimano BB ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the time leads to a lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets go bad in about a year. With the King design, you can easily flush out and add new grease with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do not disassemble" on the cups and you have to just throw them away when they get contaminated. I'd rather have something that is serviceable and won't creak or squeak (like some cheap BB's do because of larger mfg. tolerances) over the long term. How long do you think it will take you to break even? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Yeah, that is a pretty cool BB. I see White Industries is making an external BB version of their ENO/VBC cranks now, which means I'm not dead set on running square taper all the time (I'm a big fan of their cranks). That threadfit combined with white cranks would make for a super hot and long lasting combo. On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Mike in WA wrote: > Different kettle of fish from the square taper world, but I'll be > upgrading to a Chris King Threadfit BB ($155) when my disposable Shimano BB > ($20) goes bad. Riding in dirt and wet conditions all the time leads to a > lot of grime, and I found the cheapo bottom brackets go bad in about a > year. With the King design, you can easily flush out and add new grease > with a special tool, whereas the Shimanos say "do not disassemble" on the > cups and you have to just throw them away when they get contaminated. I'd > rather have something that is serviceable and won't creak or squeak (like > some cheap BB's do because of larger mfg. tolerances) over the long term. > > On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: >> >> Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? >> Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does >> it roll smoother, faster, etc)? >> >> I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. >> About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 >> or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out >> if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something >> similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And >> support the occasional overnighter. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
It would be closer simplification to use the triangle of features: Light, Strong, Cheap. Choose two. If it's light and strong, it won't be cheap. If it's light and cheap, it wont be durable. If it's strong and cheap, it won't be light. The $40 BB you buy from Riv will be durable and cheap. An SKF is a weird outlier, because it is neither cheap nor light, but it's SUPER durable. On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 2:22:55 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: > > Oh right, I forget weight is also a thing people consider ;). I also like > the match of white industries crank to white industries bottom bracket and > love supporting a CA business. Though buying from Riv also fulfills that > for me a bit. > > So are we mostly talking durability and maintenance then? Better with more > expensive models? > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Bill Lindsay > wrote: > >> There is no massive performance benefit to expensive BBs. Nobody has >> ever said "Hey, I just upgraded my bottom bracket and now I'm way >> faster!". If they did say that, they were delusional. $40 bottom brackets >> work great and you don't touch them for 5 years or so. >> >> I own two White Industries Bottom Brackets. One I bought for a really >> light build and I bought their expensive Titanium BB. The other one is a >> steel unit I bought along with a White Industries VBC crankset. I bought >> it because it seemed right to match the crankset with the BB, and because >> White Industries is a very good supporter of Bay Area Youth Cycling, and I >> felt good figuring out another way to put money in their register. I like >> to reward local companies that employ nice people and give a lot back to >> the cycling community. >> >> Bill Lindsay >> El Cerrito, CA >> >> >> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: >>> >>> Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? >>> Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does >>> it roll smoother, faster, etc)? >>> >>> I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. >>> About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 >>> or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out >>> if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something >>> similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And >>> support the occasional overnighter. >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Re: Talk to me about bottom brackets
Oh right, I forget weight is also a thing people consider ;). I also like the match of white industries crank to white industries bottom bracket and love supporting a CA business. Though buying from Riv also fulfills that for me a bit. So are we mostly talking durability and maintenance then? Better with more expensive models? On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Bill Lindsay wrote: > There is no massive performance benefit to expensive BBs. Nobody has ever > said "Hey, I just upgraded my bottom bracket and now I'm way faster!". If > they did say that, they were delusional. $40 bottom brackets work great > and you don't touch them for 5 years or so. > > I own two White Industries Bottom Brackets. One I bought for a really > light build and I bought their expensive Titanium BB. The other one is a > steel unit I bought along with a White Industries VBC crankset. I bought > it because it seemed right to match the crankset with the BB, and because > White Industries is a very good supporter of Bay Area Youth Cycling, and I > felt good figuring out another way to put money in their register. I like > to reward local companies that employ nice people and give a lot back to > the cycling community. > > Bill Lindsay > El Cerrito, CA > > > On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:27:49 PM UTC-7, dstein wrote: >> >> Why are more expensive bottom brackets more expensive? What do you gain? >> Is it just durability? Or is there any sort of performance gain (ie, does >> it roll smoother, faster, etc)? >> >> I've worked on most bike parts now minus the bottom bracket and headset. >> About to change cranks on my hunqapillar form the Sugino triple (with a 107 >> or 110 bb) to a White Industries Eno (with a 113 bb). Trying to figure out >> if I go w/ the $40 bb on Riv's site? Or a White Industries or something >> similar? This bike will see 500-1000 miles a year on dirt and some mud. And >> support the occasional overnighter. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/uQgg6v9B0tk/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
