OK, it's end of 2013 -what's the verdict on BB standards?

[bikerjulio]

Or this from FSA, threaded BB shells and BB386 cranks.

B(irmingham).S(mall).A(rms). FTW!

One of the few "new" setups I like, although the supposed benefits of a wider BB shell are absent.

Does FSA use a self-extracting crank bolt? Looks like but cannot find confirmation.

Good comparison between FSA BB30 and BB386 EVO cranksets here:

http://www.bikerumor.com/2011/12/22/fsa-bb30-vs-bb386evo-a-visual-comparison-weights/

[WMW]

They're designed to benefit the builders, not the owners, and the problems have been downloaded to the people who need to live with the bikes. That sucks.

How does lower weight and higher stiffness not benefit the rider?

I'd say that the problems are associated with poor tolerances and having way too many different options.

The Klein Quantum I bought in '88 had pressed in BB cartridges. It worked fine then and could work fine now. I put about >50k miles on that thing and never replaced the bearings... just popped off the seals and regreased them periodically.

I'm fairly clueless about the new BB stuff, but the idea if plastic bearing housing pressed into a carbon BB shell sounds like it should work. I guess they call that "press fit"? What are the issues with that system?

[jekyll man]

Popped back into this thread, and thanks for this!

Just gone through the rigmarole of getting one of these fitted to a friends Felt F6 which was advertised as being a BB30 compatible f/set. Turns out it wasnt, and he managed to get a very good price out of Wiggle for one, as thats who mis-advertised his bike in the first place.
But even then, they managed to send him a megaexo bb, and not megaevo!!
Only thing that slips through the net is- a ****ing spanner that fits
No shop i talked to has even seen one...

I must say from a manufacturers point of view its a 1 size fits all product- or nearly all; no italian thread cups.

I wondered where the shim went. I thought it should go NDS, but doesnt look great when its actually on. A lack of installation instructions didnt help

@ Julio- it is single release. Its 10 or 12mm hex, instead of typical 8mm

[dvincere]

I find it very hard to believe that people don't find regular threaded crank systems stiff enough, even for track.
What I really don't understand is the new 'standard' bbs being used on cross bikes.

Excuse my ignorance, but what bb standard is best for cross conditions? Why?

[kolarzyk]

I think that threated bb seems to be the best - no creacking, easy to maintance.

[bm0p700f]

While it looks good what is the size of the balls used in those bearings. If they are smaller than those found in 6805 bearings then wear could be an issue.

I still quite square taper BB's for general riding but I Power torque and hollowtech threaded BB's on my main bikes. Alot of bikes sold today are race bikes or race inspired bikes sold to people who don't race and have different needs, this is were all the newer BB standards fall down.

Klien's press fit system (borrowed from Vicount who probably borrowed it from someone else) is a wonderful thing, why because it has big bearings with big balls inside. That is why the bearing lasted so long. Modern BB have much smaller balls in the bearing due to the large spindles so wear becomes a problem far more quickly. That is my worry for those FSA cups. This is why ISIS was so god damm awful in the U.K. when I had it on my MTB every three months I had to change the BB, hollowtech was an improvement on that.

So that FSA system may work well in dry conditions but I am certain take it out on wet roads week after week and bearing wear will be an issue.

So it looks like the best on paper I think unfortunatley it is another side step.

[jekyll man]

I suspect the bearings will be whatever "standard" bb30 bearings are; 30mm I.D and O.D will match what is normally in the frame. In essence its a long spindle BB30 with altered arms so you dont ride like John wayne

Bearing seals are going to be along the same levels as any external bearing BB; having bikes with HT2 (shimano and aftermarket), UT and PT, i cant see longeivity being any worse. It's probably an improvement on mega exo though.


I think if you trash bb bearings regularly, you wont be any worse off with the mega evo option

[WMW]

Modern BB have much smaller balls in the bearing due to the large spindles so wear becomes a problem far more quickly. That is my worry for those FSA cups. This is why ISIS was so god damm awful in the U.K. when I had it on my MTB every three months I had to change the BB, hollowtech was an improvement on that.

With all these people inventing new standards from scratch, it would be really stupid to use bearings that are too small...

Isis fit within the existing BSA dimensions, so with a larger spindle, something had to give. But there is a solution...

My favorite system to date is Octalink with a DA BB. The DA is light (185g) and uses roller bearings with ball bearings on the outside for lateral forces (which are minimal). They can also be taken apart and serviced, which I generally do once a year after the summer rainy season. They seem to last a very long time. I had to toss one last year though because water must have accumulated in the shell and rusted the bearings and races.

[bm0p700f]

If FSA are using a 6806 bearing then it will be more relaible than hollowtech as there will be the same diameter balls as in the 6805 bearing but more of them running over a larger race. I take it back this might be step in the right direction finally. I might have to try this now.

Octalink was certainly better than ISIS but the first XTR M950 BB was terrible one muddy ride and it had to be rebuilt, that was useless. The Road version may be a bit better and you right they are light and not a bad system. Still my favourite chainsets are the Shimano FC-7410 586g with 7410 BB 216g and the Campagnolo Record carbon square taper cranks 530g with Record BB 180g. Of course the bearings on the record BB can be replaced so that is one for life I hope.

Still old shimano cup and cone BB's are very good and exceptionally well sealed. I use them on one of my MTB's and after really filthy rides I take it apart and wonder why I bothered not a bit of grit or water there.

[eric]

That FSA looks like a "BSA30": BB30 6806 bearings in cups that thread into a BSA shell.

Any 30mm spindle crank with a long spindle will work. Lightning, Rotor, Quark-Sram all make them. The Zipp VumaQuad too.
With the longer spindle it will be a little heavier than a true BB30 crank and won't have the nice heel clearance.

[jooo]

On one hand I can't believe people have so much dislike (bordering on hatred) towards pressfit bb's but then I'm reminded of how little logic appears to be present in a lot of bike related debates. IMO this sums it up well:

This could not be more similar to the Shimano v Campagnolo thread, or the Tubular v Clincher thread.....

Some of the standards have quirks I guess but this is the same for all options. The concept has worked perfectly in headsets for years, not to mention a huge quantity of non-bicycle related equipment. Pressfit bb's are also pretty standard on BMX bikes which deal with far more abuse than most road bikes are likely to see. Plenty of 'dirt' riders are also likely to get their bikes pretty filthy. Maybe they see less mud than CX/MTB but that could easily be offset by getting a heap less maintenance.

To me the main issues just seem to be sloppy tolerances from frame/component manufacturers and poor mechanics who don't seem to have common sense of how these things work outside the bike industry. Why blame design if it's not at fault? I'm not suggesting everyone goes out and trains as a qualified fitter just to service their bottom bracket but there is so much non-bike info out there that it seems crazy people have so many problems with a relatively simple assembly

[de zwarten]

I only know BSA and ITA. It works great. I would not blame the design of BB30 etc. by itself.
But it seems that there are more issues with the new systems. If those issues originate from poor mechanics, they are still issues nonetheless.
I cannot see what real advantages the modern standards have. They have advantages in theory, but in practice, I feel that the weight advantage is maybe the only one. And if I would not save weight in a place, it has to be in the BB area.
For me, the stiffness of the BB area is far more important than the stiffness of the BB itself. And BSA/ITA are pretty much maintenance free.

I have no problems outsprinting guys with the new systems with square taper BB in ITA and BSA. So I do not feel the need to change, as any difference would be very marginal (except for my wallet).