Did you try Loctite 7649 primer with Loctite 641 or 609?
EM3

_________________
________________

My 2011 Cervelo R5

I didn't use the Loctite primer and 609 on the Campg cups - I tried torque paste. but that was worse. I thought about using Loctite on the Campag cups but was concerned that because they have a low contact area, they'd damage the carbon BB hole on the Cannondale. The contact surface on the SRAM PF plastic fitting is much better, like 15mm. So I cleaned the BB hole in the frame and used the Loctite process to fit the SRAM PF30.
To me, the SRAM PF30 has 2 things over the Campag cups: greater contact area and the left and right cups joining with a sliding tube in the middle.

I also feel that 5mm of contact is just not enough. THM has even less but the 2 BB parts are threaded together so it should not move as much but may creak. So for campy cranks there does not seem to be any good solution. All of the bonding of locktite into the carbon BB shell also seems scary to me.

I think a good solution for campy cranks to work on a PF30 frame is to just use the SRAM PF30 to BSA Adapter kit:
http://www.hammerheadbikes.com/sram-pf30-to-bsa-bb-adapter-kit/

I have found that the best bottom brackets actually thread together. I really like the THM bottom brackets but there are others. I still use Loctite 609 and primer and additionally Loctite on the threads. I torque the two parts of the bottom bracket a little tighter than recommended. THM suggests 40NM, I tighten mine to 60NM.

I think the ideal product would be two Campy cups that connect in the middle and thread together like the THM. Something like the Hammer Head BB might be better than the cups but after dealing with loose SRAM bottom brackets without threads I think you could still have problems.

Once you get use to a BB that threads together and tightens up and never moves or makes noise you get spoiled.

Unfortunately I have never seen any Campy cups that thread together but that would be the best solution. I have a Felt cross bike with Campy cups and installed them with 609 and primer and I have not had any problems but it is the luck of the draw with PF30 tolerances and non-tightening cups.

This is the very reason WHY you should use the Loctite 7649 primer with Loctite 641 or 609 solution...the depth of the campy cups is simply too shallow to retain a firm "press fit" so the ONLY solution, if you really want to fix your issue, is the use of the stronger gap filling compound from Loctite (641 or 609). This is what Cervelo recommends for BBRIght and Cannondale also recommends. Why keep fiddling with it if the solution is already outlined in this thread...? EM3

_________________
________________

My 2011 Cervelo R5

Yes em3, you're right that Cannondale recommends using the Loctite products, but they also state that the contact area MUST be greater than 12mm... and then the BB adapter should be installed with Loctite as well.
To me, the risk with bonding the Campag cups was a possibility of damaging my frame.
Seeming I had a SRAM BB supplied with my frame, it was not a difficult decision to bin the Campag cups and use the SRAM.
At some stage in the near future I'm planning on turning up a pair of new cups patterned on the Campag ones, but which have greater contact area and are joined by a tube similar to the SRAM PF30 BB. Something similar to the Praxis Shimano BB30 adapter.

That would be good. Who is working on that ?

This thread illustrates how precise the tolerances in a BB30 system need to be and how difficult it seems to be for manufacturers to achieve them. So much so that Cannondale has given up it's flagship standard on it's highest end frame and gone with PF30 instead. Looks like an admission of failure on their part.

_________________
dangerous curves ahead

Hi bikerjulio,
I not sure you understand what the issue is here. There is no problem with tolerances in the BB30 or PF30 designs (respectfully, I suggest you have a look at the definition of "tolerance"). The issue we are discussing here is using a crankset which Cannondale does not use in it's production bikes, which uses external bearings as opposed to bearings housed within the BB shell.
The problem is Campagnolo makes a set of PF30 adapter cups that are of poor design. Nothing more or less.
Like I said earlier, on my EVO, the SRAM PF30 adapter is working well and despite my initial reservations (I'm a professional aircraft engineer) about my EVO frame having no metal insert for the BB, it seems to work well.

Also, for those interested in this thread, it's worth checking the MTB forums for their BB30 issues.

From what I've seen, the only worthwhile external bearing adapter is the Praxis one, but at the moment they don't make a Campag one so I am making my own. Will post pics in a few weeks.
Cheers.

BTW, I am curious to hear if anyone if having success with that setup.

I'm familiar with the concept in practice. I have had a Cannondale SS with the BB30 Campy adapters for 2 years now with no problems at all.

Yes, I do understand about the PF30 Campy cups, and that their approach to this looks to be less than optimal, shall we say.

My comment was a little off topic I agree, but related to why PF30 came into being in the first place - that it allowed for looser manufacturing tolerances than BB30, and was not invented (I'm told here), by Cannondale.

And since Cannondale were the originators of BB30 over 10 years ago and have been promoting it all this time, to not be using it on their premium frame seems to be a little like an admission that there is a problem with the BB30 design. If Cannondale are not going to stick with it, who will?

_________________
dangerous curves ahead

the pf30 fitment is an evolution of bb30. besides the larger frame bore and its looser allowed tolerances, it's identical. that, to me, shows that bb30 was NOT worth abandoning. it was so good, others chose to take it and evolve it slightly to make manufacturing easier.
bb30 is not a failure. i would say that its tolerance requirements in manufacture are a limitation in high volume production.

I had this exact problem on an aluminum frame with a PF30 BB. In order for the Campy cups to stay put, the BB has to be faced very, very precisely. If the faces are not exactly parallel, the axle will force the cups to orient themselves to each other (not the BB faces), and a gap will appear between the cup and the BB. The tricky part is the cups can be pressed in so they are flush, giving the appearance of a nicely faced BB, but after a few rides the gap will appear. I pulled the cups, refaced the BB, and it has been perfect and silent ever since. You have to be careful and not remove so much material that the BB width falls out of Campy's specs for the UT axle. There are a lot of high end custom frames successfully using PF30, but I definitely prefer threaded BB's.

Hi guys, I purchased Cervelo R3 2012. I run Campagnolo Ultra Torque cranks.
I read a lot about the issues about BBRight and Campy cups, so I went to LBS to make a proper instalation. I was told that they have very good experience with using Loctite 638, which is even stronger than 609, but they used it without primer 7649.
Today, after 24 hours after instalation I went for a ride. After few kilometres I found out that the drive side cup is coming out of the frame, only a little bit, like 0,5mm.
So, the loctite does not work.

What am I to do now? Should I go to LBS and ask them to use primer 7649 and 609? Will it really work? What is the purpose of the primer? As I said, LBS used 638 a pretty stronger Loctite than 609....

Please advice what to do.
I quess I should not run the cranks until it is solid bonded, right?

Thank You for help!

See pics of the cups.