Lighter Dura Ace Octalink BB?

[A Muzi]

Weisse Luft wrote:

> The bottom bracket, as we know it today, has gone through 2 major
> industry wide changes, namely from cottered cranks with open bearings
> to cotterless with sealed bearings. We all survived just fine with
> cottered cranks but cotterless was easier to service. Loose bearings
> were just fine, it only took two tools to service...well, once you got
> the cranks off which took another tool. Well, that is if someone
> didn't strip the dust cover threads in the crank.
>
> Fast forward to today's Shimano design. If you bought aftermarket, the
> cranks come with the BB tools. You simply thread the cups into the
> frame, insert the right side crank and then slap on the left crank.
> Tighten the nut to preload bearings and then tighten the pinch bolts on
> the left crank. Easiest BB/crank setup ever. Its a winner.
>
>
bing bing bing. We have a winner.
All these 'improvements' are directed to Shimano's
customers, the factory manager and bike designer.

You and I are not even on the radar screen. If it can't be
serviced five years out, not their problem. They are looking
out for their customers- who demand ad-friendly gee-gaws and
shorter factory assembly times.

What problem does a 'sealed' system solve for the rider?
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/STBBRUST.JPG

Loose ball systems last many years longer, work better. But
of course require more time and a skilled installer. Can't
have that now, can we?
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[MSA]

In article <[email protected]>, vecchio51
@aol.com says...
> Answer-no, shimano never licensed the design so shimano is the only
> manufacturer and they are abandoning it.
>

So should those of us "unlucky" enough to have purchased an expensive
carbon crankset with Octalink be stocking up for the future? How long
should a Dura-Ace BB last (how long is a bit of string is easier to
answer I guess!)? Is it worth buying up a spare or will something
always be available?


--
Mark (MSA)
______________________________________________
Remember, half the people you know are below average

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

MSA asks-<< So should those of us "unlucky" enough to have purchased an
expensive
carbon crankset with Octalink be stocking up for the future? How long
should a Dura-Ace BB last (how long is a bit of string is easier to
answer I guess!)? Is it worth buying up a spare or will something
always be available? >><BR><BR>

I say, ask yourself how bad it would be to have to buy a $400+ crankset because
you can't find a $50 BB.

I would get a few-ultegra or 105 level, better than the finicky DA one IMO. The
DA one will last for a long time if regularly overhauled and adjusted well BUT
it doesn't like wet conditions.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Luft-<< You simply thread the cups into the
frame, insert the right side crank and then slap on the left crank.
Tighten the nut to preload bearings and then tighten the pinch bolts on
the left crank. Easiest BB/crank setup ever. Its a winner. >><BR><BR>

I say-so ease on installation is the reason the change things. Great for the
wrech but what about the rider?
I say that take a DA or FSA outside the BB shell crank and BB and a cup and
ball BB/crank, set them on the bench and time how long each takes to install.
DA will be about 15 minutes, the other about 20...Is that 5 minutes worth a
completely new, not compatible with anything else design? That costs in the
neighborhood of $400+

On the bike it isn't any better. The claims of stiffness is with a gigantic
monster of a machine that develops much more force than any rider.
Saying they are 'stiffer' is marketspeak. It implies others are 'not stiff'
which is poopycock.

Plus, crash really hard on the DA setup, bend a crank and spend another $400 to
replace it.


Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

jstarr-<< Hi, what tools are supposed to come with a Shmano BB, if bought
aftermarket?
I don't recall getting any tools with my DA 9-speed triple BB, should
I have? >><BR><BR>

Ooops. The DA cranks, 9s and 10s, all come with the specific tools for their
installation and neither have a torque wrecnh, essential to the 10s one.
Killing a pinch bolt on the left side of 7800 will cost you $400+

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Jobst writes-<< Having been around these square taper BB spindles for a while,
you
must have seen failures and heard the never ending tales of woe from
people who didn't properly tighten the cranks on the spindle. Ball
races on these spindles are overloaded and fail by spalling. I have a
great collection of them. >><BR><BR>


I say-sure I have from bike wrenchs who don't have a clue. With these systems
that are installed correctly, like any part on a car, there is no problem.
Re-design for crummy wrenches is a poor idea unless it comes out of the
marketimg department, then it is a 'good' idea for them.

As I have sadi many times, I have C-record crank and BB on my italian threaded
frameset for almost 20 years. My BB is about 15 years old and all of it works
just fine, thankyou.

Cranks and BB spindles of square taper have broken in the past but not because
of the design but because of materials. use a better material, install right
and it will work. ISIS, Octalink and DA 10s are not a solution.

Rememebr that first gen XTR and DA 9s were cup and ball, not cart bearing and
they had all the installation problems you cite.

As for threadless, it was for fork makers to save money. To imply it is a
'better' system is not correct.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Tom-<< Taper sizes vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. >><BR><BR>

II say-there are only two-JIS and ISO.

Tom<< With a tapered spindle, the chainline can vary with repeated
installations of the right crank. >><BR><BR>

I say-with proper installation and a torque wrench this is lost in the noise.

Tom-<< Tapered spindles aren't foolproof (they offer the opportunity
to destroy the crank by repeatedly tightening the bolt). >><BR><BR>

I say-see above. Repeated tightening of any bolt 'just because' is dumb and
will result in a failure.

Tom-<< I've used tapered spindles for years with no failures.
Chalo Colina says they aren't durable enough for his
purposes (see http://tinyurl.com/4nlop ) and I believe him.
Pics of failed tapered parts can be seen at
http://pardo.net/pardo/bike/pic/fail/FAIL-001.html >><BR><BR>

I say-most of things bicycle are not suitable to Mr Colina. That does not make
the design bad, just bad for him who is on the fringe of the 'bell curve'.

Splining may be a good idea but the present ones, ISIS and Octalink are
marketing solutions, not fixes for real everyday problems we see in the bicycle
business.

In two years shimano will have their one piece crank/BB and......square taper
for low end cranks.

Square taper could be improved via better materials but ISIS, Octalink and DA
10s isn't the answer.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[jim beam]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> Luft-<< You simply thread the cups into the
> frame, insert the right side crank and then slap on the left crank.
> Tighten the nut to preload bearings and then tighten the pinch bolts on
> the left crank. Easiest BB/crank setup ever. Its a winner. >><BR><BR>
>
> I say-so ease on installation is the reason the change things. Great for the
> wrech but what about the rider?
> I say that take a DA or FSA outside the BB shell crank and BB and a cup and
> ball BB/crank, set them on the bench and time how long each takes to install.
> DA will be about 15 minutes, the other about 20...Is that 5 minutes worth a
> completely new, not compatible with anything else design? That costs in the
> neighborhood of $400+
>
> On the bike it isn't any better. The claims of stiffness is with a gigantic
> monster of a machine that develops much more force than any rider.
> Saying they are 'stiffer' is marketspeak. It implies others are 'not stiff'
> which is poopycock.

peter, i'm sure you're talking from your personal experience, but so am
i when i tell you that the shimano hollowtech/octalink combo /is/
noticably stiffer for me. maybe it's because i weigh more/ride a larger
frame that i notice it more.

this does /not/ mean that campy is in some way inadequate, but when you
ride a machine with a campy crank, swap it for shimano, then swap it
back to campy & then to shimano yet again just to be beyond pedantially
sure, i'm telling you, you /do/ notice the difference!

does it make you faster? no! - there are no hysteresis losses in the
materials involved - i simply prefer the feel of the stiffer solution.

regarding design, if you do the math for a large diameter shimano
spindle compared to the smaller diameter campy, shimano sees less
surface stress thereby being in a much better position to enjoy a longer
fatigue life.

>
> Plus, crash really hard on the DA setup, bend a crank and spend another $400 to
> replace it.
>
>
> Peter Chisholm
> Vecchio's Bicicletteria
> 1833 Pearl St.
> Boulder, CO, 80302
> (303)440-3535
> http://www.vecchios.com
> "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[jim beam]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> Tom-<< Taper sizes vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. >><BR><BR>
>
> II say-there are only two-JIS and ISO.
>
> Tom<< With a tapered spindle, the chainline can vary with repeated
> installations of the right crank. >><BR><BR>
>
> I say-with proper installation and a torque wrench this is lost in the noise.
>
> Tom-<< Tapered spindles aren't foolproof (they offer the opportunity
> to destroy the crank by repeatedly tightening the bolt). >><BR><BR>
>
> I say-see above. Repeated tightening of any bolt 'just because' is dumb and
> will result in a failure.
>
> Tom-<< I've used tapered spindles for years with no failures.
> Chalo Colina says they aren't durable enough for his
> purposes (see http://tinyurl.com/4nlop ) and I believe him.
> Pics of failed tapered parts can be seen at
> http://pardo.net/pardo/bike/pic/fail/FAIL-001.html >><BR><BR>
>
> I say-most of things bicycle are not suitable to Mr Colina. That does not make
> the design bad, just bad for him who is on the fringe of the 'bell curve'.
>
> Splining may be a good idea but the present ones, ISIS and Octalink are
> marketing solutions, not fixes for real everyday problems we see in the bicycle
> business.

just because the marketing droids get let loose on a product launch
doesn't mean they were anywhere /near/ the product development lab.

>
> In two years shimano will have their one piece crank/BB and......square taper
> for low end cranks.
>
> Square taper could be improved via better materials

not possible for a cost that the bike market would tolerate. unless you
go carbon, which at this time is still not up to the job because of
fabrication issues. steel is about the most practical high strength
high modulus material you can in this kind of application. if steel
alloys are still used for high stress components in f/a-18's - and they
are - i think we can agree that it's not because md would feel shy about
using a better material to avoid the embarrassment of asking for more
tax dollars. it's simply the case that steel's where it's at.

> but ISIS, Octalink and DA
> 10s isn't the answer.

maybe, but they're better than small diameter tapered spindles. there's
simply no technical argument against better bearings, lighter weight &
better stiffness/fatigue properties. the only possible point of
discussion is the interface, but again, octalink combines the
interference benefit of a taper with the idiot tolerance of splines - an
elegant solution that addresses the problem of torque criticality for
square tapers quite well. octalink still needs to be torqued correctly
to make sure there /is/ taper interference, but beyond that, it's fit &
forget. haven't used shimano 10s yet, but i handled one for a while at
a shimano propaganda fest, and it's really quite a nice piece of kit.
it at least uses a proper interference fit on the drive side of the
spindle - interference is the least imperfect interface.

>
> Peter Chisholm
> Vecchio's Bicicletteria
> 1833 Pearl St.
> Boulder, CO, 80302
> (303)440-3535
> http://www.vecchios.com
> "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[John Dacey]

On 24 Dec 2004 15:41:03 GMT, [email protected] (Qui si parla
Campagnolo ) wrote:

>Square taper could be improved via better materials but ISIS, Octalink and DA
>10s isn't the answer.

The Front Range Grinch says Shimano's a blot
On the landscape of bike componentry.
Others like Hollow-Tech Two quite a lot.
What's the root of this Shiman-opponentry?

He makes it seem there's some disgrace
To fit your bike with Dura-Ace;
Parts that bear the mark "Ultegra"
Are welcomed less than Green Eggs are.

Perchance Grinchy's headset preload's not right.
Maybe his spoke tension's wound a bit tight.
It could be a case of hemorroidance
Precipitates STI avoidance.

The reason for Grinchy's solecism?:
Messianic campagnolicism.
Loyalty is great, but not zealotry--
It blinds you from the good others clearly see.

-------------------------------
John Dacey
Business Cycles, Miami, Florida
Since 1983
Comprehensive catalogue of track equipment: online since 1996.
http://www.businesscycles.com

 

[[email protected]]

Johnny Walker writes:

> Peter, I'm sure you're talking from your personal experience, but so
> am I when I tell you that the Shimano Hollowtech/Octalink combo /is/
> noticably stiffer for me. Maybe it's because I weigh more/ride a
> larger frame that I notice it more.

Could you explain where the elasticity in the square taper BB
assembly arises and what is flexing, considering that the cranks are
solid and have the same external dimensions as the hollow ones. Any
flexing in the BB spindle is masked by lateral flexing of bicycle
frame and torsional and lateral bending of cranks that both have many
times the torsional and bending flex of the spindle.

> Regarding design, if you do the math for a large diameter Shimano
> spindle compared to the smaller diameter Campy, Shimano sees less
> surface stress thereby being in a much better position to enjoy a
> longer fatigue life.

Failure in the Octalink occurs in the aluminum crank, not the spindle.

Jobst Brandt
[email protected]

 

[Tom Ace]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:


> Tom-<< Taper sizes vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. >>
>
> II say-there are only two-JIS and ISO.

But sizes vary a bit in practice. Sutherlands devotes about two
pages to discussing the vagaries of tapered crank/spindle fits.


> Tom<< With a tapered spindle, the chainline can vary with repeated
> installations of the right crank. >>
>
> I say-with proper installation and a torque wrench this is lost
> in the noise.
>
> Tom-<< Tapered spindles aren't foolproof (they offer the opportunity
> to destroy the crank by repeatedly tightening the bolt). >>
>
> I say-see above. Repeated tightening of any bolt 'just because'
> is dumb and will result in a failure.

Maybe the hapless do-it-yourselfer has a book on his shelf
that says to retighten crank bolts (such books do exist).

I admit my bias: I think that all else equal,
a part that is harder to screw up is preferable.


Tom Ace

 

[jim beam]

[email protected] passive-aggressively misattributes:
> Johnny Walker writes:
>
>
>>Peter, I'm sure you're talking from your personal experience, but so
>>am I when I tell you that the Shimano Hollowtech/Octalink combo /is/
>>noticably stiffer for me. Maybe it's because I weigh more/ride a
>>larger frame that I notice it more.
>
>
> Could you explain where the elasticity in the square taper BB
> assembly arises and what is flexing, considering that the cranks are
> solid and have the same external dimensions as the hollow ones.

do the math jobst. torsion. spindle radius. octalink cranks have the
same size externals? no. but why bother to measure when facts merely
get in the way of your ability to try picking a fight?

> Any
> flexing in the BB spindle is masked by lateral flexing of bicycle
> frame and torsional and lateral bending of cranks that both have many
> times the torsional and bending flex of the spindle.

that's another misconception in the same league as your assertion that
tire flex eliminates wheel transmission of road surface texture. it
also proves, yet again, that you're expressing opinion on equipment
you've never used. same frame, different cranks = eliminate the frame
from the equation. same frame, different cranks = easily determined
relative differences.

>
>
>>Regarding design, if you do the math for a large diameter Shimano
>>spindle compared to the smaller diameter Campy, Shimano sees less
>>surface stress thereby being in a much better position to enjoy a
>>longer fatigue life.
>
>
> Failure in the Octalink occurs in the aluminum crank, not the spindle.

what part of my statement suggests a shimano spindle breaks before its
crank??? don't put words in my mouth.

>
> Jobst Brandt
> [email protected]

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Jim-<< regarding design, if you do the math for a large diameter shimano
spindle compared to the smaller diameter campy, shimano sees less
surface stress thereby being in a much better position to enjoy a longer
fatigue life. >><BR><BR>


I say that once again the above implies that designs other than shimano are
somehow destined to fail early and that just isn't so.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Jim-<< just because the marketing droids get let loose on a product launch
doesn't mean they were anywhere /near/ the product development lab. >><BR><BR>

In the last 15 years or so I will say they seem to be on another planet. Little
to nuthin in the last 15 years can be seen as a good idea, that makes cycling
better, more enjoyable. Nothing to keep the person on a bike and keep them
there. Not since lever mounted shifting and clipless pedals.

All the cuurent 'stuff', like threadless, 1 1/8 inch, compact, carbon ass ends,
spline, boutique wheels, oversized handlebars, integrated HS...all just goop.

\Jim writes-<< maybe, but they're better than small diameter tapered spindles.
there's
simply no technical argument against better bearings, lighter weight &
better stiffness/fatigue properties. >><BR><BR>

Bearings are the same quality, just not servicable. Lighter weight at the
expense of poor reliability is dumb(DA cup and ball BB), and better stiffness
is not something that is actually happening. Your square taper BB is not
twisting, your aluminum cranks are not flexing. If they were, they wopuld
break. i suspect is something else. You and Jobst can argue that one out.

BTW-I have seen many DA/ultegra/105 cranks destroyed by poor installation. I
have also seen XT/XTR MTB cranks break because they like to go in one direction
only, don't like to be 'jumped'.

BUT shimano and Octalink are parting ways.

The one piece thing is a $50 solution to a $5 problem.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Thanks John...I guess when you have been in the bike biz somewhere where there
are actually people that ride you will see my disdain for things shimano and
Campagnolo that answer no question, solve no problem.

besides, what do you care what I think?

Got a pithy answer in latin? A dead language in a dead cycling community, great
match.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[jim c]

This has been an interesting thread, Ive learned "poopycock" and
"Messianic campagnolicism", both terms which I will now use as if I
invented them. But seriously, I would like to add a bit of the human
element to the discussion. We choose much of our equipment because it
just plain strikes a chord with us or makes us feel better in some way.
Sometimes we even rationalize our decisions with a little pseudo
science, which is where a lot of these threads get started, but heres
why *I* am switching to the FSA bb/crank with an otherwise Chorus drive
train from a Chorus bb and crank on my new bike; I could not get my
Chorus to stop creaking and clicking. period.
Now I know Ive left a very wide gap for many people to jump in and ask
"have you..." or "did you..." or "just because..." but the bottom line
is that, to the best of my ability to understand the physics involved
and the products available, I have decided to switch interfaces. Could
it be a mistake? yes. Could it coincidentally work out for me? yes. I
promise that I will never claim that it is a "better" interface, really
I do.

 

[A Muzi]

jim c wrote:

> This has been an interesting thread, Ive learned "poopycock" and
> "Messianic campagnolicism", both terms which I will now use as if I
> invented them. But seriously, I would like to add a bit of the human
> element to the discussion. We choose much of our equipment because it
> just plain strikes a chord with us or makes us feel better in some way.
> Sometimes we even rationalize our decisions with a little pseudo
> science, which is where a lot of these threads get started, but heres
> why *I* am switching to the FSA bb/crank with an otherwise Chorus drive
> train from a Chorus bb and crank on my new bike; I could not get my
> Chorus to stop creaking and clicking. period.
> Now I know Ive left a very wide gap for many people to jump in and ask
> "have you..." or "did you..." or "just because..." but the bottom line
> is that, to the best of my ability to understand the physics involved
> and the products available, I have decided to switch interfaces. Could
> it be a mistake? yes. Could it coincidentally work out for me? yes. I
> promise that I will never claim that it is a "better" interface, really
> I do.
Well written!

Yes we sometimes forget that riders want something just
because they want it. That should be reason enough.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Terry Morse]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

> Your square taper BB is not
> twisting, your aluminum cranks are not flexing.

That statement is obviously untrue. Everything flexes under stress,
some more than others. Evidence the chain rub on the front
derailleur when standing. Just about everyone has experienced that,
which is caused by a combination of bending spindle and flexing
bottom bracket.

From a mechanical standpoint, a hollow structure is stiffer and
stronger than a solid structure of equal weight. When comparing
strength versus weight, hollow cranks and spindles are clearly
superior to solid ones -- assuming they can be built reliably and
don't introduce other problems.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

 

[jim c]

A Muzi wrote:
> jim c wrote:
>
>> This has been an interesting thread, Ive learned "poopycock" and
>> "Messianic campagnolicism", both terms which I will now use as if I
>> invented them. But seriously, I would like to add a bit of the human
>> element to the discussion. We choose much of our equipment because it
>> just plain strikes a chord with us or makes us feel better in some
>> way. Sometimes we even rationalize our decisions with a little pseudo
>> science, which is where a lot of these threads get started, but heres
>> why *I* am switching to the FSA bb/crank with an otherwise Chorus
>> drive train from a Chorus bb and crank on my new bike; I could not get
>> my Chorus to stop creaking and clicking. period.
>> Now I know Ive left a very wide gap for many people to jump in and ask
>> "have you..." or "did you..." or "just because..." but the bottom line
>> is that, to the best of my ability to understand the physics involved
>> and the products available, I have decided to switch interfaces. Could
>> it be a mistake? yes. Could it coincidentally work out for me? yes. I
>> promise that I will never claim that it is a "better" interface,
>> really I do.
>
> Well written!
>
> Yes we sometimes forget that riders want something just because they
> want it. That should be reason enough.
>
I forgot to mention that due to my accident, I am replacing everything,
so I am in the enviable position of re-evaluating based on preference
and not cash outlay.(Thanks for the most-excellent wheels, Peter)

jim