Outboard BB really do anything?

RS said:

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

Forget 'em. Adopt BB30 now.

RS said:

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,
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.

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

BB30 is being embraced by frame makers,

Does this mean that if BB30 will become the standard, we'll have to buy new
frames the moment that no more octalink/outboard BB will be available?

Derk

RS said:

In article <86ea583f-4440-4c76-87c6-
[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...

Quoted message said:

RS said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

thanks

Quoted message said:

Forget 'em. Adopt BB30 now.

Yep, I forgot to list that and it is probably viable. But you need a frame that's
built for it?

Right, you gotta get a frame with the larger BB shell. Cannondale is
leading the charge...

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".

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

RS said:

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/spindle-fail-001.jpg
http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-002.jpg
http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-003.jpg
http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-004.jpg

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.

Quoted message said:

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.

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

RS said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

thanks

Quoted message said:

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/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-002.jpghttp://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-003.jpghttp://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-004.jpg

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.

Quoted message said:

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.

Jay Beattie said:

I killed ISIS (and to a lesser extent Octalink) bearings in short
order -- within a few thousand miles.

Huh? Octalink lasts about 3 years on my bikes, which is at least 35000 km or
slightly more.

Derk

Derk said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

BB30 is being embraced by frame makers,

Does this mean that if BB30 will become the standard, we'll have to buy new
frames the moment that no more octalink/outboard BB will be available?

Why? Square taper has been deprecated for years now, yet is still
readily available.

BB30 will require you to buy new frames only if you're the type of
person who always has to have the latest and most expensive equipment.

--

John ([email hidden])

Derk said:

Jay Beattie said:

I killed ISIS (and to a lesser extent Octalink) bearings in short
order -- within a few thousand miles.

Huh? Octalink lasts about 3 years on my bikes, which is at least 35000 km or
slightly more.

Derk

Sorry, bad writing. What I meant to convey is that the bearings on
the Octalink are better than the ISIS BBs and last longer -- at least
in my experience. I toasted an FSA and a TruVativ ISIS BB in very
short order. I have had much better luck with Octalink (road). Both
Octalink and ISIS have OS spindles and similar tiny bearing problems,
so I don't know why one would be better than the other, but that has
been my experience. -- Jay Beattie.

John Thompson said:

Why? Square taper has been deprecated for years now, yet is still
readily available.

I couldn't buy a new BB for my 15 year old D-A any more.

Quoted message said:

BB30 will require you to buy new frames only if you're the type of
person who always has to have the latest and most expensive equipment.

This changing of standards all the time makes me sick. I have over 10
Octalinks in stock here, so I'm OK for the years to come.

Derk

Derk said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

BB30 is being embraced by frame makers,

Does this mean that if BB30 will become the standard, we'll have to buy new
frames the moment that no more octalink/outboard BB will be available?

Derk

BB30 frames can use conventional cranks and BBs. BUT if ya get a BB30
crank, it has to match the frame with that system. Not all frame
makers are going to embrace this.

Jay Beattie said:

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On May 28, 9:59�pm, RS <[email hidden]> 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> thanks

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Outboard bearings was the 'solution' to the poor design Octalink,

Quoted message said:

sorry peter, that's not an accurate assessment - octalink is an
excellent design solution to a very real problem.  while it may nothave
been an everyday occurrence, the physical design of square taper renders
it more susceptible to fatigue than the larger pipe spindle designs:

Quoted message said:

http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://pardo.n...

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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
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.

Derk said:

John Thompson said:

Why? Square taper has been deprecated for years now, yet is still
readily available.

I couldn't buy a new BB for my 15 year old D-A any more.

103 mm JIS taper is what your Dura Ace crankset uses. Three readily
available sources below.

http://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=16123&category=3166
Sugino
http://www.tokenproducts.com/05htm/products.php?pc1id=29 Token
http://www.philwood.com/SpecStainlessBB.htm Phil Wood

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BB30 will require you to buy new frames only if you're the type of
person who always has to have the latest and most expensive equipment.

This changing of standards all the time makes me sick. I have over 10
Octalinks in stock here, so I'm OK for the years to come.

Derk

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

Jay Beattie said:

On May 29, 5:54 am, jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> On May 28, 9:59�pm, RS <[email hidden]> 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> thanks

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Outboard bearings was the 'solution' to the poor design Octalink,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://pardo.n....

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> 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 -

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

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
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.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There is no question that square taper bbs work fine, provided that
they are properly installed and they are not ultra light. Thy have
passed the test of time quite succesfully. Regarding the new BBs, what
they promise is to make the whole bb stiffer and hence "providing a
better ride. Plus, supposedly, they are easy to change (not that the
square taper were not). I still have square taper BBs in all my bikes.
The people that I ride with have mostly newer bikes with outboard
BBsand other latest tech stuff. Nobody seems to get faster whenever
the switch to a new bike. The question is for someone who is
considerig the investment: Does the new technology improve riding
considerably? Can you sprint, climb better and feel a more responsive
bike? Can anyone who has switched BBs feel a significant difference?
If ayone has tried them and feel the difference, Then, it is certainly
worth it.

A couple of things that I notice make a significant difference in
speed. One is more trainning. The other is aerobars.

Andres

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

Jay Beattie said:

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
> On May 28, 9:59�pm, RS <[email hidden]> 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/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://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.

Quoted message said:

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.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted post said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

Jay Beattie said:

On May 29, 5:54 am, jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

> > On May 28, 9:59?pm, RS <[email hidden]> 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.

Quoted message said:

> >> thanks

Quoted message said:

> > Outboard bearings was the 'solution' to the poor design Octalink,

Quoted message said:

> 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:

Quoted message said:

>http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://pardo.n...

Quoted message said:

> 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.

Quoted message said:

> 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.

Quoted message said:

> > 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 -

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

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
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.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There is no question that square taper bbs work fine, provided that
they are properly installed and they are not ultra light. Thy have
passed the test of time quite succesfully. Regarding the new BBs, what
they promise is to make the whole bb stiffer and

How will it make the bottom bracket stiffer? And to what purpose?
The critical design problem around bottom brackets is limiting
twist of the chainstays; twist induced by large pedaling forces.
Another design problem is the chainstay to bottom bracket joint.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press said:

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted post said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

On May 29, 9:49 am, Jay Beattie <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> On May 29, 5:54 am, jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > > On May 28, 9:59?pm, RS <[email hidden]> 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > >> thanks

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > > Outboard bearings was the 'solution' to the poor design Octalink,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > 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:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://pardo.n...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > > 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 -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> 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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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
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.- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

- Show quoted text -

Quoted message said:

There is no question that square taper bbs work fine, provided that
they are properly installed and they are not ultra light. Thy have
passed the test of time quite succesfully. Regarding the new BBs, what
they promise is to make the whole bb stiffer and

How will it make the bottom bracket stiffer? And to what purpose?

I don't know, and I am the wrong person to ask. I don't have Outboard
BB nor do I make that claim. The people that promote the outboard BBs
claim that they are stiffer and that they result in more pedaling
power. Since I have square taper I cannot make that claim.

Quoted message said:

The critical design problem around bottom brackets is limiting
twist of the chainstays; twist induced by large pedaling forces.
Another design problem is the chainstay to bottom bracket joint.

--
Michael Press

In article <f2e2a6a5-cd11-4caa-805a-
[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...

Quoted message said:

Derk said:

Jay Beattie said:

I killed ISIS (and to a lesser extent Octalink) bearings in short
order -- within a few thousand miles.

Huh? Octalink lasts about 3 years on my bikes, which is at least 35000 km

or

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

slightly more.

Derk

Sorry, bad writing. What I meant to convey is that the bearings on
the Octalink are better than the ISIS BBs and last longer -- at least
in my experience. I toasted an FSA and a TruVativ ISIS BB in very
short order. I have had much better luck with Octalink (road). Both
Octalink and ISIS have OS spindles and similar tiny bearing problems,
so I don't know why one would be better than the other, but that has
been my experience. -- Jay Beattie.

I can't figure this one out also, and also toasted one ISIS but no issues with
Octalink. Same size spindle on both, one uses 8 teeth and the other 10 so
really no significant difference. The crital component, as you say, is that there
is exactly the same amount of bearing space in ISIS and Octalink so its odd
that ISIS developed a bad reputation.

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

Jay Beattie said:

On May 29, 5:54 am, jim beam <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>> On May 28, 9:59�pm, RS <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>> Square taper to octalink to ISIS to outboard bearings. �Do the outboard
>>> bearings really make for a useable and/or noticeable difference overolder
>>> 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/spindle-fail-001.jpghttp://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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

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. Octalinks and Isis have only been sold for
two to three years and then they were discontinued. 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. 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.

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