Specialized Venge S-Works OSBB - Campag Super Record 11-spee

[Gary]

Can anyone tell me what kit is required to fix the latest (not EPS) Super Record 11-speed chainset to my new Venge S-Works frameset? I am confused by the amount of bearings and cups available and I don't want to buy the wrong kit-I also want the best out there!! Any assistance would be greatly appreciated! Cheers

[tuanmynsr]

Campagnolo Ultra Torque BB30 68X42.

[ace0fclub5]

BB's confuse me too.
I've got the Wheels Mfg BB30 Delrin adaptor on mine. Not sure what the difference is between it and Campy's version, but Campy's seem lighter by 20g.

[thisisatest]

You CANNOT use Campy's 68*42 cups, cannot use their 68*46 cups either.
Clarification: initially, Specialized suggested pushing Campy's 68*42 cups into Specialized's OSBB cups, which went into the frame. There were a lot of problems with creaking and th cups prying out. I wouldn't even trust Specialized's revised epoxy method on their cups with that.
Specialized does now make aluminum reducers for Campy. You need to pull the bearings off the spindle first, then it all goes together like any bb30/pf30-reducer-crank system.
WheelsMfg also makes a similar delrin reducer that allows you to keep your campy bearings. downside is you end up with two sets of bearings. not a problem, just difficult for me to justify, even if there is no weight or performance penalty.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[graeme_f_k]

OK, we have played with this extensively at Velotech Cycling Ltd as we get a lot of queries on this subject, being the UK Main Campagnolo Service Centre.

I've had invaluable assistance from George Gori and others at Sigma Sport in Kingston on this.
We have worked on this alongside Campagnolo in Italy (thank you Vincenzo Garbin) and with reference to Specialized in Morgan Hill, Calif. - thanks to George Lee there.

thisisatest is correct, you can't use the 68*42 cups, nor the 68*46 - both these sets of cups are designed for use in a metal BB shell or liner - OSBB is composite - hence the issues with creaking and so forth that have been experienced.

The Specialized-made adaptors that we have seen require removal of the UT bearings and the seating of a different bearing on a different part of the UT axle, closer in to the centre of the axle - thereby negating many of the advantages of any outboard BB system in addition to loading the Campag axle in a way it was not designed to withstand - using these parts will certainly invalidate your warranty and the assembly will make a noise, to boot. The only way we got even vaguely satisfactory performance from these units was to solidly shim the axle rather than using Specialized's version of the wavy washer, thereby negating two warranties - Campag's by improper bearing position AND Specialized's by modifying their installation.

As far as I can tell, Specialized have developed their solution without reference to Campagnolo - although I don't have a definitive answer on that from either Morgan Hill or from Vicenza - however, I don't think that Campag would have said "yes" to the Specialized bearing placement ...

The only really satisfactory solution we have found is a BB mounting sleeve by C-Bear in Belgium. It's a tight interference fit sleeve that is threaded to carry the requisite threaded Campagnolo cups. Using it will invalidate your Specialized frame warranty, though.

I have no direct experience of the Wheels Manufacturing bearing adaptors but my opposite number in the US told me that they work, but can be very noisy (more creaking ...)

OK, now to provoke a storm of criticism, no doubt - this is my personal opinion - The fundamental problem with all of these BB systems, BB30, BB30PF, OSBB, BBRite etc. is that they use a press-fitted bearing or cup to retain the bearing, around which there is turning moment that tends to try and peel the bearing or bearing cup out of the frame. Viscount worked out that this was a bad idea with the Aerospace Pro frame-sets with Lambert BBs in the 1970s for goodness sake! I'd have thought a two-year-old could have seen that none of these systems are going to work very well but that hasn't stopped frame "designers" from trying to smack an obviously square peg into an equally-obviously round hole .... BB86 might be a better way to go, if only the bearings were not working directly against part of the frame, so that if the bearing *do* fret, the bearings will erode the frame - a shortcoming of many integrated headsets, too ...

[thisisatest]

The bb systems mentioned are only flawed when adapting them to a crank that has a wider bearing stance. Then you get the obvious peeling out of the cup. When used purely as intended, the bearings and cups are loaded almost entirely radially.
My own criticism of one fitment specification is with PF30: supposed looser tolerances. Frame companies will push the limits of those tolerances. One company routinely makes their frames slightly too wide, binding their crank system without even turning the preload collar. Other frames are competely hollow inside the mounting areas for the cups. When you use a press to push them in, the unsupported upper parts of the frame flex inward, while the bottom area, supported by the bottom wall of the down tube/chainstays, is rigid. Then bearings aren't well aligned. On top of that, "premium" bb makers offer pf30 sets... with ALUMINUM CUPS! WTF is supposed to take up the tolerance?? Then you're back to bb30, maybe we should have stayed there overall and let individual frame manufacturers figure out how they want their bearings to be held in.
If there's one company that is consistently good with their carbon frame bb tolerances, it's Specialized. Their installed bearings are always smooth and easy to turn. Cranks always slip right through the bearings.


Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4 Beta