Outboard BB really do anything?

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com

On May 31, 7:48*am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote in
> messagenews:f4ced17e-bdac-4b2d-a60d-7d95c83f31d6@y22g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Back of Velonews, Look with integrated seatmast,
> > "enhances torsional rigidity, improves handling and comfort." ohh
> > please.......
>
> Well, at least it makes the bike unsalable as a used bike since you probably
> can't get it to fit anyone else after you hacksaw the frame to fit yourself.
> Certainly that is a great help to the manufacturer.

No doubt plus no test ride bikes where you can get the seat height at
least close. Means if you are gonna sell Looks or whatever, have a
fleet of them, different seat heights and sizes, BUT sell no other cuz
can't afford to. Plus, end of the year, time to sell demos..that's
gonna be tough as well.

jim beam

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
> On May 31, 7:35 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> andresm...@aol.com wrote:
>>> On May 30, 7:03 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>>>>> On May 29, 9:49 am, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On May 29, 5:54 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>>>>>>>> On May 28, 9:59�pm, RS <r_schil...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Square taper to octalink to ISIS to outboard bearings. �Do the outboard
>>>>>>>>> bearings really make for a useable and/or noticeable difference over older
>>>>>>>>> systems? � Would especially like to hear from anyone who switched out
>>>>>>>>> an ISIS or Octalink for a current outboard bearing type of crank.
>>>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>>> Outboard bearings was the 'solution' to the poor design Octalink,
>>>>>>> sorry peter, that's not an accurate assessment - octalink is an
>>>>>>> excellent design solution to a very real problem. while it may not have
>>>>>>> been an everyday occurrence, the physical design of square taper renders
>>>>>>> it more susceptible to fatigue than the larger pipe spindle designs:
>>>>>>> http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/...ghttp://pardo.n...
>>>>>>> it's simply a function of skin stress. larger diameter means lower
>>>>>>> stress and thus less fatigue. thus, octalink showed the way to
>>>>>>> solution. continuing from that, the next step has to be outboard
>>>>>>> bearing because it's not possible to get a larger spindle inside a
>>>>>>> standard bb shell and still have bearings inside as well.
>>>>>>> all the bleating about the supposed "poor design" of octalink was
>>>>>>> generated by jobst brandt who, somewhat typically, failed to notice one
>>>>>>> of its small but very important design features and thus he criticizes
>>>>>>> octalink for a failure mode that doesn't exist.
>>>>>>>> followed by the poor ISIS. Nether were an improvement to square taper,
>>>>>>>> just something 'new' started in 1997 by shimano. Being the gorilla,
>>>>>>>> Octalink(that shimano never licensed BB wise), waned and shimano
>>>>>>>> started outboard bearings, and all crank makers came on board with,
>>>>>>>> Campagnolo being the last to market it. Octalink and ISIS answered no
>>>>>>>> question, solved no problem with regards to square taper but you see
>>>>>>>> what the market has done. BB30 is being embraced by frame makers,
>>>>>>>> along with 1 1/4 and 1.5 inch lower headtubes because it makes it
>>>>>>>> easier(cheaper) for frame makers to hook great big tubes to bigger
>>>>>>>> tubes(BB shell and headtube). Crank makers that are embracing BB30 are
>>>>>>>> assuming all frame makers are going to go that way, but we'll see. FSA
>>>>>>>> hasn't seen a new idea it didn't like as shown by their speed in
>>>>>>>> making an ISIS, then outboard, then BB30 crank. A gent from FSA once
>>>>>>>> told me right after they started the outboard bearing design they
>>>>>>>> would rather copy than create.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> It is interesting that all of those are '70/80s Campy NR spindles from
>>>>>> open bearing BBs. Are there pictures of Shimano cartridge BB square-
>>>>>> taper spindles failing? Not saying they didn't, but I never saw one
>>>>>> fail -- just had bearings go south after many, many miles of riding.
>>>>>> I killed ISIS (and to a lesser extent Octalink) bearings in short
>>>>>> order -- within a few thousand miles. The latest one was an expensive
>>>>>> FSA -- but FSA would not touch it because the company had abandoned
>>>>>> ISIS. As it turned out, I had broken the ISIS crank, too. The female
>>>>>> insert in the CF arm had cracked all to hell. FSA did not have a
>>>>>> replacement arm because, again, they had abandoned ISIS. I now have
>>>>>> expensive key chain fobs. -- Jay Beattie.
>>>>> Not to mention that there were many thousands of square taper Campag
>>>>> BB spindles and the percentage of breakage was low. I didn't keep the
>>>>> 3 octalink BBs that I replaced that broke in the center of the spindle
>>>> you really should have - these are the first i've ever seen reported.
>>>> next one you get, please post here - i'd love to examine it.
>>>>> nor the octalink cranks that failed from 'lash, mostly MTB ones where
>>>>> a rider gets airborne and then lands. To state that Octalink and ISIS
>>>>> was produced by shimano and others to fix the huge square taper
>>>>> breakage problem of Campagnolo is silly.
>>>> one more problem with square taper and "lash", i've had a number of them
>>>> work loose over the years. and on many occasion i've stopped to help
>>>> mtb riders with that problem too. i've never had an octalink crank work
>>>> loose and i've never had to stop and help anyone else with a loose
>>>> octalink crank either.
>>> Square tapers will work loose if not properly installed pretty
>>> quickly, not over the years. If they are properly installed, they will
>>> not work themselves loose.
>> true - let me re-word my statement since it appears to be ambiguous: my
>> experience over the years has been that of having had a number of square
>> taper cranks work loose.
>>
>>> Octalinks and Isis have only been sold for
>>> two to three years and then they were discontinued.
>> untrue. octalink has been out for a decade and is still sold/supported
>> by shimano.
>
> No V1 Octalink cranks for shimano in 2008, V2 only, only low end.

so? only "low end" square taper is now available! and because "high
end" is not available doesn't mean it's gone away!


> I
> think there are more square taper cranks than V2 as well, but would
> have to check. . Only 2 V1 BBs made now, 105 and DA. No doubt this
> 'design' is going away.

again, DA doesn't mean it's "gone away". and "no doubt" is highly doubtful.


>>> I am sure that if
>>> they are properly installed, they will last for a long time. However,
>>> too many reports of failures lead to them being redesigned.
>> what failures? we have q.s.p.c with allegedly three failures, and no
>> others. unless you mean loosening, which is jobstian myth, not reality.
>>
>>> Square
>>> tapers have been in existence for several decades, so comparisons in
>>> terms of durability are not adequate. Since people would report
>>> failures w/ octalink and the did not offer an incredible advantage
>>> over square taper, they were abandoned soon.
>> but they do, they're noticeably stiffer, at least to us big heavy guys,
>>
>>
>>
>>> Regarding people that you will find with loose BBs, that is likely in
>>> cases were people just purchased a new bike that was not properly
>>> adjusted, or people who recently had a tuneup and the bb had not been
>>> properly tightened. That, or they rode five times in five years. If
>>> you use plumbers tape on the crack bolts, the don't work themselves
>>> loose even if they are poorly tightened.
>>> A problem that I would find with square tapers were on the Italian
>>> threaded ones. They required that the fixed cup would turn in a
>>> direction that would work itself loose unless it was really tight in
>>> the BB shell. This requires either a fancy and expensive Hozan tool
>>> that held the cup wrench in place to tighten the fixed cup, or a home
>>> made devise that would do the same function. Most shade tree mechanics
>>> and a bunch of bike shops had neither. This would lead new Italian
>>> threaded bike BBs to work themselves loose.
>>> Andres
>

Tom Kunich

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message >
> so? only "low end" square taper is now available! and because "high end"
> is not available doesn't mean it's gone away!

When did Phil Wood become low end?

> again, DA doesn't mean it's "gone away". and "no doubt" is highly
> doubtful.

What it means is that they had a lot left in stock because no one wanted to
buy expensive BB's for a losing proposition.

jim beam

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message >
>> so? only "low end" square taper is now available! and because "high
>> end" is not available doesn't mean it's gone away!
>
> When did Phil Wood become low end?

sorry, i thought we were talking "shimano". of course, someone like
chalo can machine a whole new spindle for you from something
aerospace-exotic, but i don't think that would count as "shimano" either.


>
>> again, DA doesn't mean it's "gone away". and "no doubt" is highly
>> doubtful.
>
> What it means is that they had a lot left in stock because no one wanted
> to buy expensive BB's for a losing proposition.

how odd - as soon as shimano announce that they were continuing to
support octalink with continued sales of new 105 and da spindles, this
stuff is suddenly "left in stock". perhaps you'd better call tom
ritchie and tell him that the octalink interface he paid good money to
license is going to be an expensive embarrassment when all those cranks
he manufactures to fit have nothing to work with. will you let us know
how that call goes please? thanks so much.

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com

On May 31, 11:33*pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> Tom Kunich wrote:
> > "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message >
> >> so? *only "low end" square taper is now available! *and because "high
> >> end" is not available doesn't mean it's gone away!
>
> > When did Phil Wood become low end?
>
> sorry, i thought we were talking "shimano". *of course, someone like
> chalo can machine a whole new spindle for you from something
> aerospace-exotic, but i don't think that would count as "shimano" either.
>
>
>
> >> again, DA doesn't mean it's "gone away". *and "no doubt" is highly
> >> doubtful.
>
> > What it means is that they had a lot left in stock because no one wanted
> > to buy expensive BB's for a losing proposition.
>
> how odd - as soon as shimano announce that they were continuing to
> support octalink with continued sales of new 105 and da spindles, this
> stuff is suddenly "left in stock". *perhaps you'd better call tom
> ritchie and tell him that the octalink interface he paid good money to
> license is going to be an expensive embarrassment when all those cranks
> he manufactures to fit have nothing to work with. *will you let us know
> how that call goes please? *thanks so much.

The ones that were recalled or some other?
We are already seeing people with V1 XTR with no BB to support it. So,
if ya have a first gen V1 XTR BB go south, instead of a $50 BB, a $400
crank

jim beam

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
> On May 31, 11:33�pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message >
>>>> so? �only "low end" square taper is now available! �and because "high
>>>> end" is not available doesn't mean it's gone away!
>>> When did Phil Wood become low end?
>> sorry, i thought we were talking "shimano". �of course, someone like
>> chalo can machine a whole new spindle for you from something
>> aerospace-exotic, but i don't think that would count as "shimano" either.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> again, DA doesn't mean it's "gone away". �and "no doubt" is highly
>>>> doubtful.
>>> What it means is that they had a lot left in stock because no one wanted
>>> to buy expensive BB's for a losing proposition.
>> how odd - as soon as shimano announce that they were continuing to
>> support octalink with continued sales of new 105 and da spindles, this
>> stuff is suddenly "left in stock". �perhaps you'd better call tom
>> ritchie and tell him that the octalink interface he paid good money to
>> license is going to be an expensive embarrassment when all those cranks
>> he manufactures to fit have nothing to work with. �will you let us know
>> how that call goes please? �thanks so much.
>
> The ones that were recalled or some other?
> We are already seeing people with V1 XTR with no BB to support it.

but that's not news - it hasn't been supported in years.


> So,
> if ya have a first gen V1 XTR BB go south, instead of a $50 BB, a $400
> crank

so use a 105 bb. same interface, 3.0mm difference in chain line which
can be adjusted with a spacer.

here's another consideration - that xtr crank was not sold in anywhere
/near/ the same volume as the v2 xt cranks - even when they were new, i
only recall one person i know having had one, everybody else having xt
or race face and old square taper bb spindles. there has to be a limit
to "support" for a low volume product. and that's why v2 bb spindles
are still well supported. that xtr crank had an odd chain ring spider
diameter too iirc - again, not much point arguing about the bb if you
can't get rings.

Frank Krygowski

On Jun 1, 10:34 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> here's another consideration - that xtr crank was not sold in anywhere
> /near/ the same volume as the v2 xt cranks - even when they were new, i
> only recall one person i know having had one, everybody else having xt
> or race face and old square taper bb spindles.

Your friends had old square taper spindles? I thought those were so
archaic and fatigue prone that they could never get "old" without
failing!

Must have been a gently-pedaling Retro Club, I guess! ;-)

- Frank Krygowski

jim beam

Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Jun 1, 10:34 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> here's another consideration - that xtr crank was not sold in anywhere
>> /near/ the same volume as the v2 xt cranks - even when they were new, i
>> only recall one person i know having had one, everybody else having xt
>> or race face and old square taper bb spindles.
>
> Your friends had old square taper spindles? I thought those were so
> archaic and fatigue prone that they could never get "old" without
> failing!
>
> Must have been a gently-pedaling Retro Club, I guess! ;-)
>


hey, idiot, where's your buddy timmy the retard? i thought you two
needed to tag-team?

It's Chris

They all have a very important purpose; they force cyclists to spend
money on new stuff just to keep their bikes running when the find out
their current gear has ben needlessly rendered obsolete.

Just My Very Heartfeld Opinion.

- -
Compliments of:
"Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

If you want to E-mail me use:
ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net

My website:
http://geocities.com/czcorner

It's Chris

From: riggodeezil@hotmail.com

>BTW, I was joking about becoming an
>early adopter. BB30 might be "viable"
>but, really, what's the point? Other than
>to separate you from more $ in the quest
>for "more stiffness" that you don't need.
>Nothing wrong with the ol' square taper
>design for 99 and 44/100% of all cyclists
>out there. Marketing is the most powerful
>force in the universe...

>Personally, I find the whole "outboard"
>thing offensive on purely aesthetic
>grounds. I prefer my headset cups on the
>outside and my BB bearings on the
>inside...I guess that makes me "old
>school" or maybe just "old".

Not old, just sensable. I often wonder why so few people questioned why
the manufacturers went to all that trouble to stuff the headset bearings
IN the frame, only to turn around a day later and yank the bb bearings
OUT?

- -
Compliments of:
"Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

If you want to E-mail me use:
ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net

My website:
http://geocities.com/czcorner