BB technologies.

jim beam said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

M-gineering said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Both Shimano and Campagnolo use new BB designs that are a response to
> the failings of the square taper. This is not idle design work.
You're joking. This is marketing people copying each other.

Quoted message said:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
BINGO!

why the fear and irrationality about "marketing"?

You are clearly confusing a healthy dose of skepticism and a disdain
for 'solutions in search of a problem' with "fear and irrationality".

Quoted message said:

this is a persistent
thread on r.b.t and consistent with an inability to think for ones self.

Au contraire, the ability *to* think for one's self is what leads to
calling market driven [censored] exactly what it is.

Those who can't think for themselves just go along like sheep in a
flock. You know the type: when they can no longer get those
proprietary BBs, they'll just go along and swallow the next plate of
[censored], with a smile.

Quoted message said:

not all development or innovation is marketing.

Very true. And, personally speaking, I was an early adapter of many
'innovations', including index capable RDs, clipless pedals, 7SP and
8SP rear cogsets.

Quoted message said:

not all marketing is
evil.

Evil is too strong a word for the little root weevils.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

M-gineering said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

> shimano use roller bearings.
Yes on the 7700, 1/2 of the bearings,

It's a needle bearing, even Shimano agrees 😉

JUST CUT A TOASTED ULTEGRA/6500 bb apart and it's 7-7/32 balls on each
side, round ones, not needle bearings

To quote a frequent poster:

Reality, what a concept!

😉

Ozark Bicycle said:

jim beam said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

On Feb 6, 1:54 am, M-gineering <[email hidden]> wrote:
> [email hidden] wrote:
>> Both Shimano and Campagnolo use new BB designs that are a response to
>> the failings of the square taper. This is not idle design work.
> You're joking. This is marketing people copying each other.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
BINGO!

why the fear and irrationality about "marketing"?

You are clearly confusing a healthy dose of skepticism and a disdain
for 'solutions in search of a problem' with "fear and irrationality".

Quoted message said:

this is a persistent
thread on r.b.t and consistent with an inability to think for ones self.

Au contraire, the ability *to* think for one's self is what leads to
calling market driven [censored] exactly what it is.

provided it's not ignorance or knee-jerk, sure. underinformed opinion
however doesn't qualify as thinking.

Quoted message said:

Those who can't think for themselves just go along like sheep in a
flock. You know the type: when they can no longer get those
proprietary BBs, they'll just go along and swallow the next plate of
[censored], with a smile.

Quoted message said:

not all development or innovation is marketing.

Very true. And, personally speaking, I was an early adapter of many
'innovations', including index capable RDs, clipless pedals, 7SP and
8SP rear cogsets.

Quoted message said:

not all marketing is
evil.

Evil is too strong a word for the little root weevils.

Quoted message said:

What makes you believe that left crank bolts ate more liable to loosen
than right ones? What mechanism loosens them? What "loosens" right
AND left square taper crank bolts is well understood. So what's the
cause with Octalink?

I hope I don't need a Michelin star to declare a rotten egg unfit for
consumption (yes I know, some parts are excellent 😉)

I don't have a tested explanation handy, but that doesn't disqualify the
observation as you seem to imply.

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

jim beam said:

M-gineering said:

jim beam wrote:
your argument is that square taper does the same job as octalink -

Quoted message said:

that's true. but octalink is stiffer, lighter, doesn't work loose
like square tapers often do

Playing team mechanic I always check(ed) the LH crankbolt. Roughly 50%
will be loose. Next time back they will be loose again

are you using a torque wrench? i'm no lightweight and i'm no slug
either, and i've never had one loosen. i torque per manufacturer spec.
it's tight. 50-70Nm is not something you can easily achieve with a 6"
hex wrench.

Shimano says 35-50 Nm, and there isn't much point in a wrench longer
than the crankarm.

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

M-gineering said:

jim beam said:

M-gineering said:

jim beam wrote:
your argument is that square taper does the same job as octalink -
> that's true. but octalink is stiffer, lighter, doesn't work loose
> like square tapers often do

Playing team mechanic I always check(ed) the LH crankbolt. Roughly
50% will be loose. Next time back they will be loose again

are you using a torque wrench? i'm no lightweight and i'm no slug
either, and i've never had one loosen. i torque per manufacturer
spec. it's tight. 50-70Nm is not something you can easily achieve
with a 6" hex wrench.

Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet. i'll post a
pic if you want.

Quoted message said:

and there isn't much point in a wrench longer
than the crankarm.

illogical nonsense. tighten to manufacturer spec. end of story.

In article <[email hidden]>,

jim beam said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

You just keep on trying, sooner or later you may be able to think for
yourself.

eh? was my post a personal criticism? why are you taking it as one?

Ah, consider the source, jim. Ozark is not one of our more reasoned
posters.

Quoted message said:

Non-Squid said:

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 22:16:07 GMT, Dan Connelly
<d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> wrote:

> [email hidden] wrote:
>> Dear Dan,
>>
>> Where do you feel this difference?
>>
>> If you're applying the same power in both cases, the "feel" at
>> your foot should be the same, since it's pushing just as hard in
>> both cases.
>>
>> If more of the same power reaches the contact patch because of
>> more efficient power transmission, you'll go slightly faster. Are
>> you noticing a measurable speed difference and a distinctly higher
>> cadence in the same gear?
>
>
> No -- I just spin the pedals backwards, freewheeling the cassette,
> and it spins substantially further with my Ultegra BB than with the
> external bottom brackets (alhough I haven't tried Campy, just
> Shimano, FSA, and SRAM).
>
> Of course, you would be correct if you suggested this may also be
> due to the freehub body.
>
> Dan

Dear Dan,

A quick and easy method of demonstrating the tiny amount of drag in
a typical bottom bracket is to pull the chain off the front
sprocket, level the pedals, and see how many dimes you can stack on
a pedal before it drops:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/ffb74cfbe0ef2f1f

An elderly Shimano cartridge will drop when a third dime is laid on
a pedal, suggesting that there's not likely to be a dime's worth of
difference between it and the finest bottom bracket available.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

What if you use gold?

Dear Phil,

Assuming that you can find 24 carat gold in 2.268 gram chunks (roughly
what a dime weighs) . . .

http://goldprice.org/us-gold-price.html

A little under fifty bucks.

But whether it's a gram of gold or a gram of feathers, it still won't
be a dime's worth of difference at the contact patch. The difference
in drag between reasonably adjusted bottom brackets isn't enough to be
detected by a human finger moving back and forth between them, much
less a hind leg on a pedal.

What about bipeds?

--
Phil

Non-Squid said:

Quoted message said:

Non-Squid said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 22:16:07 GMT, Dan Connelly
> <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> wrote:
>
>> [email hidden] wrote:
>>> Dear Dan,
>>>
>>> Where do you feel this difference?
>>>
>>> If you're applying the same power in both cases, the "feel" at
>>> your foot should be the same, since it's pushing just as hard in
>>> both cases.
>>>
>>> If more of the same power reaches the contact patch because of
>>> more efficient power transmission, you'll go slightly faster. Are
>>> you noticing a measurable speed difference and a distinctly higher
>>> cadence in the same gear?
>>
>>
>> No -- I just spin the pedals backwards, freewheeling the cassette,
>> and it spins substantially further with my Ultegra BB than with the
>> external bottom brackets (alhough I haven't tried Campy, just
>> Shimano, FSA, and SRAM).
>>
>> Of course, you would be correct if you suggested this may also be
>> due to the freehub body.
>>
>> Dan
>
> Dear Dan,
>
> A quick and easy method of demonstrating the tiny amount of drag in
> a typical bottom bracket is to pull the chain off the front
> sprocket, level the pedals, and see how many dimes you can stack on
> a pedal before it drops:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/ffb74cfbe0ef2f1f
>
> An elderly Shimano cartridge will drop when a third dime is laid on
> a pedal, suggesting that there's not likely to be a dime's worth of
> difference between it and the finest bottom bracket available.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

What if you use gold?

Dear Phil,

Assuming that you can find 24 carat gold in 2.268 gram chunks (roughly
what a dime weighs) . . .

http://goldprice.org/us-gold-price.html

A little under fifty bucks.

But whether it's a gram of gold or a gram of feathers, it still won't
be a dime's worth of difference at the contact patch. The difference
in drag between reasonably adjusted bottom brackets isn't enough to be
detected by a human finger moving back and forth between them, much
less a hind leg on a pedal.

What about bipeds?

Dear Phil,

Feathers come from bipeds.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

jim beam said:

Ozark Bicycle wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You just keep on trying, sooner or later you may be able to think for
yourself.

Quoted message said:

eh? was my post a personal criticism? why are you taking it as one?

Ah, consider the source, jim. Ozark is not one of our more reasoned
posters.

So nice of you to snip the context of the exchange, putz.

Quoted message said:

Both Shimano and Campagnolo use new BB designs that are a response to
the failings of the square taper. This is not idle design work.
There are serious flaws that cause these design changes even though it
is not common knowledge what fails.

Jobst Brandt

Nope. Octalink for shimano was a 'response' to square taper, when they
found Octalink didn't work and Campagnolo followed because the cycling
public wouldn't buy a square taper BB in an outboard BB world. The
square taper worked well for decades..Octalink and now outboard
bearings are another 'standard' that will come and go while square
taper will still be around.

John Dacey said:

"Defendit numerus." - Anon.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

JUST CUT A TOASTED ULTEGRA/6500 bb apart and it's 7-7/32 balls on each
side, round ones, not needle bearings

I wouldn't deny another mechanic the guilty pleasure of breaking
something, but this particular egg had been cracked over three years
ago:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/bdb48b8cb1123c67...

. . . a thread in which you participated yourself.
-------------------------------
John Dacey
Business Cycles, Miami, Florida
Since 1983
Our catalog of track equipment: online since 1996
Phone: 305-273-4440http://www.businesscycles.com
-------------------------------

getting old ain't for sissies!!

jim beam said:

M-gineering said:

jim beam said:

M-gineering wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
> your argument is that square taper does the same job as octalink -
>> that's true. but octalink is stiffer, lighter, doesn't work
>> loose like square tapers often do
>
> Playing team mechanic I always check(ed) the LH crankbolt. Roughly
> 50% will be loose. Next time back they will be loose again
>
are you using a torque wrench? i'm no lightweight and i'm no slug
either, and i've never had one loosen. i torque per manufacturer
spec. it's tight. 50-70Nm is not something you can easily achieve
with a 6" hex wrench.

Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet. i'll post
a pic if you want.

What crank are you referring to? The 8mm allan bolt for the XTR-2007
is to be tightened to 45-55 Nm. See FC-M970.

--
Joe Riel

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Both Shimano and Campagnolo use new BB designs that are a response to
> the failings of the square taper. This is not idle design work.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

M-gineering said:

You're joking. This is marketing people copying each other.

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

BINGO!

jim beam said:

why the fear and irrationality about "marketing"? this is a persistent
thread on r.b.t and consistent with an inability to think for ones self.
not all development or innovation is marketing. not all marketing is
evil.

Yes, that's true, but many riders have learned, and not just from cycle
goods, that "new, improved" is just as likely to mean "cheaper,
shoddier" at a "new" higher price or often "more gizmos, useless
'features' with less substance". Oft bitten, now shy.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Joe Riel said:

jim beam said:

M-gineering said:

jim beam wrote:
> M-gineering wrote:
>> jim beam wrote:
>> your argument is that square taper does the same job as octalink -
>>> that's true. but octalink is stiffer, lighter, doesn't work
>>> loose like square tapers often do
>> Playing team mechanic I always check(ed) the LH crankbolt. Roughly
>> 50% will be loose. Next time back they will be loose again
>>
> are you using a torque wrench? i'm no lightweight and i'm no slug
> either, and i've never had one loosen. i torque per manufacturer
> spec. it's tight. 50-70Nm is not something you can easily achieve
> with a 6" hex wrench.
Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet. i'll post
a pic if you want.

What crank are you referring to? The 8mm allan bolt for the XTR-2007
is to be tightened to 45-55 Nm. See FC-M970.

octalink - bb7700.

jim beam said:

M-gineering said:

jim beam said:

M-gineering wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
> your argument is that square taper does the same job as octalink -
>> that's true. but octalink is stiffer, lighter, doesn't work loose
>> like square tapers often do
>
> Playing team mechanic I always check(ed) the LH crankbolt. Roughly
> 50% will be loose. Next time back they will be loose again
>
are you using a torque wrench? i'm no lightweight and i'm no slug
either, and i've never had one loosen. i torque per manufacturer
spec. it's tight. 50-70Nm is not something you can easily achieve
with a 6" hex wrench.

Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet. i'll post a
pic if you want.

please do, because in the leaflets here the crankbolts are 35-50 Nm, and
the picture just below (illogical order i'll admit) gives 50-70 for the
bottom bracket

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and there isn't much point in a wrench longer than the crankarm.

illogical nonsense. tighten to manufacturer spec. end of story.

If it is illogical I'd say the bearings are well and truly f***ed 😉

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> a écrit:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

M-gineering wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

Quoted message said:

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet.
i'll post a pic if you want.

Those that I found in a quick search do specify 35-50 Nm:

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-16P0B-EN.pdf

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-1EFOC-GE.pdf

That only covers three examples, of course: FC-7700, 7701, and FC-7703.

James Thomson

James Thomson said:

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> a �crit:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> M-gineering wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

Quoted message said:

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet.
i'll post a pic if you want.

Those that I found in a quick search do specify 35-50 Nm:

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-16P0B-EN.pdf

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-1EFOC-GE.pdf

That only covers three examples, of course: FC-7700, 7701, and FC-7703.

James Thomson

you and marten are correct. i was looking at the bb, not the spindle
bolt - it is indeed 35-50Nm.

even so, i still challenge you to get that tight with a 6" allen wrench!

jim beam said:

James Thomson said:

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> a �crit:

Quoted message said:

>> M-gineering wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

Quoted message said:

no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet.
i'll post a pic if you want.

Those that I found in a quick search do specify 35-50 Nm:

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-16P0B-EN.pdf

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-1EFOC-GE.pdf

That only covers three examples, of course: FC-7700, 7701, and FC-7703.

James Thomson

you and marten are correct. i was looking at the bb, not the spindle
bolt - it is indeed 35-50Nm.

even so, i still challenge you to get that tight with a 6" allen wrench!

mine is 7", just as long as the crank, and 50+ is no problem whatsover.
Easier than with the torquewrench infact as the allan wrench doesn't
have the height the torquewrench has

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

M-gineering said:

jim beam said:

James Thomson said:

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> a �crit:

>>> M-gineering wrote:

>> Shimano says 35-50 Nm,

> no dude, it's 50-70Nm. i checked the instruction leaflet.
> i'll post a pic if you want.

Those that I found in a quick search do specify 35-50 Nm:

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-16P0B-EN.pdf

http://www.paul-lange.de/produkte/shimano/support/Handbuecher_archiv/SI-1EFOC-GE.pdf

That only covers three examples, of course: FC-7700, 7701, and FC-7703.

James Thomson

you and marten are correct. i was looking at the bb, not the spindle
bolt - it is indeed 35-50Nm.

even so, i still challenge you to get that tight with a 6" allen wrench!

mine is 7", just as long as the crank, and 50+ is no problem whatsover.

braggart. on both counts.

Quoted message said:

Easier than with the torquewrench infact as the allan wrench doesn't
have the height the torquewrench has