New Wheels

mikedmonds said:

I am getting into cycling again, and am looking to fix up my 10 year old Trek 1100 Road Bike. The rear wheel has gritty detents in it when it turns (after replacing bearings and relubing), so I am looking at new wheels. Do most all have cartridge bearings now (like mountain bikes)? I hope so. I really dislike having to adjust bearings. What are some good components for, say $250 or so for a set?

Shimano and Campagnolo still use cup, cone, and loose ball bearings; even in Shimano Mountain bicycle hubs.
Ajusting bearings gives best of life and operational abilities.
Ultegra hubs and well built wheels using quality spokes like DT Competition 14/15 DB or Sapim Race 14/15 DB and quality rims like Mavic OpenPro or CXP-33 or Velocity Aerohead wit Aerohead OC for rear fit your price range. You don't need to adjust the bearings very often and it is less expensive to refresh the hubs with grease and new ball bearings every 10,000 miles or every year to keep them running smoothly for years to come.
Cartridge bearings are usually not adjustable and require total replacement when worn. Cartridge bearings are not as well sealed as Campagnolo or Shimano hubs. Cartridge bearings are more difficult to find in most shops and tools are often specialized for their maintenance. There must be a reason why to top two hub manufacturers have stayed with cup, cone, and loose ball bearings in their hub lines. There have been many improvements in both Shimano and Campagnolo hubs over the years. Before deciding that cartridge bearings are the way to go, you should give some of these new hubs a close examination.

daveornee said:

There must be a reason why to top two hub manufacturers have stayed with cup, cone, and loose ball bearings in their hub lines.

They are much cheaper because the tolerances are much lower. The other reasons are just justifications to use cheaper bearings. 😉

wilmar13 said:

They are much cheaper because the tolerances are much lower. The other reasons are just justifications to use cheaper bearings. 😉

I think the reasons Campagnolo and Shimano still use them is that they are most suitable to the tasks in real bicycle applications.
Precision in cartridge bearings is attainable, but ABEC 5 bearings and the best loose ball bearings can be adjusted to the same when the bearings are new. When the bearings wear, cup and cone bearings can be easily adjusted. I have yet to find cartridge bearing hubs that that feature.

Thats funny my car has sealed cartridge bearings and it's only 1200miles shy of 100,000 miles and I've never once wished that it had cup and cone bearings so I could adjust them.

Hey this is a rare thing for me. But I have to agree with Wilber on this one. Loose ball bearing hubs are something that are best to be long forgotten. Like 5 speed freewheels and friction downtube shifters.

Do yourself a favor and check out the nearly frictionless sealed cartridge bearings in a pair of Bontrager Race X Lites. I can't imagine why anyone would ever want to mess with that old [censored] again.

daveornee said:

I think the reasons Campagnolo and Shimano still use them is that they are most suitable to the tasks in real bicycle applications.
Precision in cartridge bearings is attainable, but ABEC 5 bearings and the best loose ball bearings can be adjusted to the same when the bearings are new. When the bearings wear, cup and cone bearings can be easily adjusted. I have yet to find cartridge bearing hubs that that feature.

IronDonut said:

Thats funny my car has sealed cartridge bearings and it's only 1200miles shy of 100,000 miles and I've never once wished that it had cup and cone bearings so I could adjust them. Hey this is a rare thing for me. But I have to agree with Wilber on this one. Loose ball bearing hubs are something that are best to be long forgotten.

Yeah if your bearings have worn enough you need to "adjust them" you are already hosed*. The reason that you need to service your bearings is not because they have worn, but rather because you need to readjust back to the setting they were already set with to account for the poor tolerance. In other words you are not compensating for wear, but returning the setting to where it was the first time you "adjusted" them. It is just a rationalization of using a cheaper design.

* yeah they do wear, but a properly designed bearing will not wear before its designed lifespan

Oh and IronDonut don't confuse disagreeing with statements such as "I broke 5 CF frames in a row before I got my Ti. CF is total garbage for everything" or " take the stickers off a Ti frame and they are all the same" as not being on the same page when it comes to generalities. Yeah the rider matters way more than the bike, yeah CF is usually bling and has many applications where it is the wrong material, yeah Ti is one of the best materials to make bike frames out of... but notice the difference between sweeping black and white statements as doctrine compared to generalities with exceptions, that is where we disagree, not on the gist of most things.

wilmar13 said:

Yeah if your bearings have worn enough you need to "adjust them" you are already hosed*. The reason that you need to service your bearings is not because they have worn, but rather because you need to readjust back to the setting they were already set with to account for the poor tolerance. In other words you are not compensating for wear, but returning the setting to where it was the first time you "adjusted" them. It is just a rationalization of using a cheaper design.

* yeah they do wear, but a properly designed bearing will not wear before its designed lifespan

Oh and IronDonut don't confuse disagreeing with statements such as "I broke 5 CF frames in a row before I got my Ti. CF is total garbage for everything" or " take the stickers off a Ti frame and they are all the same" as not being on the same page when it comes to generalities. Yeah the rider matters way more than the bike, yeah CF is usually bling and has many applications where it is the wrong material, yeah Ti is one of the best materials to make bike frames out of... but notice the difference between sweeping black and white statements as doctrine compared to generalities with exceptions, that is where we disagree, not on the gist of most things.

I agree to disagree with you.
I have ridden over 250,000 miles on my bicycles, some with cartridge bearing hubs. I still have some cartridge bearing hubs on my road and mountain tandems .... Phil Wood. I have had bearing failures with virtually all the cartridge bearing hubs I have ever ridden. When the bearings fail they can be difficult to maintain. Some require "return to factory" type service or at least not something that you or your local bicycle shop can do "in the field". I had one of my cross-country tours lengthened by 5 days due to "sealed" (Cartridge) bearing failures in hubs and bottom bracket. I had to rebuild the wheels with new spokes and hubs because of bearing failure and I couldn't wait for the 10 day turn-around for bearing replacement. I also replaced the cargridge bearing Bottom Bracket with a cup and cone one so I could send it back to the factory for "free" bearing replacement.
I have ridden wheels built by Mavic, Bontrager, Ritchey, Campagnolo, Shimano, Velocity and others. My experience is that well maintained and properly lubricated cup & cone hubs give me the best performance at the least cost per mile. Newer designs by both Shimano and Campagnolo are working much better than the older designs. There is a vast difference amongst cartridge bearing hubs as to how well "sealed" they are. Unfortunately, some of the better hub designs for spokes are some of the poorer designs for bearing seals (like Phil Wood). I don't give out my advice without some thought and experience.
Here is what Jobst Brandt writes:
"There is a basic misconception about seals. The seals commonly sold in the bicycle business are not capable of sealing out water because they were never designed for that purpose. These seals are designed to prevent air from being drawn through the bearing when used in, typically, electric motors where the motor rotation pumps air that would centrifugally be drawn through the bearing. If this were permitted, the lubricant would act as fly paper and capture all the dust that passes, rendering the lubricant uselessly contaminated.

Seal practice requires a seal to leak if it is to work. The seepage lubricates the interface between shaft and seal and without this small amount of weeping, the seal lip would burn and develop a gap. In the presence of water on the outside, the weeping oil emulsifies and circulates back under the lip to introduce moisture into the bearing.
This is usually not fatal because it is only a small amount, but the displaced grease on the lip dries out and leaves the lip unlubricated.

The next time water contacts the interface, it wicks into the gap by capillary action and begins to fill the bearing. This is an expected result for seal manufacturers who live by the rule that no two fluids can be effectively separated by a single seal lip. Two oils, for instance, must have separate seals with a ventilated air gap between
them. If a seal is to work with only one lip the contained fluid must be at a higher pressure so that the flow is biased to prevent circulation.

None of the effective methods are used in the so called 'sealed' bearings that Phil Wood introduced into bicycling years ago. His components failed at least as often as non sealed units and probably more often because they make field repair difficult. These are not liquid seals but merely air dams."

I have extended the life of my current Phil Wood hubs by carefully lifting the seal and injecting some additional grease into the cartridge. If I find water in there I carefully remove it so that it doesn't stay in and start the rusting process. I also keep on hand quality replacement cartridges of the proper sizes for my "Field Serviceable Axle" hubs so I am not stuck searching for help when I want to continue riding with my "bride of 35+ years"
I have built over 500 wheels and some of them have cartridge bearings.

daveornee said:

I agree to disagree with you.
I have ridden over 250,000 miles on my bicycles, some with cartridge bearing hubs.

Notice that you are still talking about cost... The fact is that cup and cone is by far the most popular and standard type, therefore it will certainly be much easier to service and cheaper to maintain. Fact is if everyone used good cartridge bearings (that were standardized) with proper lubrication access this would not be the case. You seem to have more wheel bearing experience than I do, and I am not trying to say you are wrong about anything you said, merely that cup and cone bearings are the cheapest solution, which it seems you are saying in this post anyway. Like Iron Donut said, I don't regret not needing to adjust the bearings on my car, if the bicycle industry were to embrace cartridge bearings universally (again standards or lack of and poor applications are a big part of your problems with cartridge bearings), I don't think I would miss needed to overhaul my hubs every 5000 miles. Agree?

Regarding seals, as long as you have proper grease points who cares? My Campy Neutrons have been through hell, and they are good as new, at least partially because the hubs have a nice little grease hole which I use somewhat close to the recommended intervals which will purge all the [censored] that may have gotten through the seals.

wilmar13 said:

Notice that you are still talking about cost... The fact is that cup and cone is by far the most popular and standard type, therefore it will certainly be much easier to service and cheaper to maintain. Fact is if everyone used good cartridge bearings (that were standardized) with proper lubrication access this would not be the case. You seem to have more wheel bearing experience than I do, and I am not trying to say you are wrong about anything you said, merely that cup and cone bearings are the cheapest solution, which it seems you are saying in this post anyway. Like Iron Donut said, I don't regret not needing to adjust the bearings on my car, if the bicycle industry were to embrace cartridge bearings universally (again standards or lack of and poor applications are a big part of your problems with cartridge bearings), I don't think I would miss needed to overhaul my hubs every 5000 miles. Agree?

Regarding seals, as long as you have proper grease points who cares? My Campy Neutrons have been through hell, and they are good as new, at least partially because the hubs have a nice little grease hole which I use somewhat close to the recommended intervals which will purge all the [censored] that may have gotten through the seals.

Yes, those are 2 very good ifs (Standardization of cartridge bearings and an suitable way to purge and relube them), but at present they are not. Price of $250 was one of the objectives of the original poster who seemed to want to go with cartridge bearing hubs.
My experience tells me that at that price the best value is Ultegra hubs with well built standard rims, spokes, and nipples.
If you can afford the higher price and/or limited availability of replacement and serviceablilities of unique cartridge bearing wheels, you certainly have those choices available. It is convenient and often less costly to accept standards in cup & cone hubs, with standard lengths and mountings of spokes and nipples, with standard replacement of rims.
There are cup & cone hubs that have "purge ports" to extend service intervals. I use some older Shimano and Campagnolo hubs that have them. They are running smooothly and well after over 25,000 miles each. Ihave not needed to adjust the cones after the initial setting.
I have a classic Phil Wood hub sitting here that just costs too much to service and it has less than 2,000 miles on it. Since it requires tools that I don't have and that are not available at any local bicycle shop in the Chicago area, it will remain as a paperweight and a reminder of my negative experiences with cartridge bearing hubs (and expensive cartridge bearing Bottom Brackets).
Life cycle costs are important to me. I have learned over the years and miles that there are many "new" features that turn out to be disadvantageous over the product life.

daveornee said:

Yes, those are 2 very good ifs (Standardization of cartridge bearings and an suitable way to purge and relube them), but at present they are not. Price of $250 was one of the objectives of the original poster who seemed to want to go with cartridge bearing hubs.
My experience tells me that at that price the best value is Ultegra hubs with well built standard rims, spokes, and nipples.
If you can afford the higher price and/or limited availability of replacement and serviceablilities of unique cartridge bearing wheels, you certainly have those choices available. It is convenient and often less costly to accept standards in cup & cone hubs, with standard lengths and mountings of spokes and nipples, with standard replacement of rims.
There are cup & cone hubs that have "purge ports" to extend service intervals. I use some older Shimano and Campagnolo hubs that have them. They are running smooothly and well after over 25,000 miles each. Ihave not needed to adjust the cones after the initial setting.
I have a classic Phil Wood hub sitting here that just costs too much to service and it has less than 2,000 miles on it. Since it requires tools that I don't have and that are not available at any local bicycle shop in the Chicago area, it will remain as a paperweight and a reminder of my negative experiences with cartridge bearing hubs (and expensive cartridge bearing Bottom Brackets).
Life cycle costs are important to me. I have learned over the years and miles that there are many "new" features that turn out to be disadvantageous over the product life.

Dave, agree with you. My Velomax hubs have the press-in cartridge bearings. Believe they are the easy way for a boutique manufacturer to build a hub. But my experience is that they just aren't sealed properly. They may be great in motors, but not so great on bike wheels ridden in rain and road grit.

One good rain ride was enough to make my bearings noisy with rust. When I called Velomax tech support, they recommended bearing replacement, and then in future, pulling back the end caps and drying out any water on the bearings with a dry cloth. It's not difficult, but it's a maintenance task easy to forget after a long rain ride.

On the other hand, the Ultegra hubs I've got have gone 10 years and 25000 miles with only one minor adjustment. They have proper lip seals on the axle to prevent water and grit intrusion into the bearings, and seem to last much longer than the cheap motor bearings.

Not a machinist but it would seem to me that it would be much cheaper to machine for a sealed bearing hub than a cup and cone system. Granted most manufacturer would already have this in place but assembly would certainly be more with cup a cone hubs. I have had american classic sealed hubs fail they were very simple to replace. So simple in fact I can see why a hub maker may choose to use them. Unless the cost of the actual bearing was a factor. I got four from American classic for twenty dollars shipped I figure if they paid $5 for them thats a lot. Loose bearings of course are cheaper still. Its a lot easier to press in a sealed bearing than it is to lay in 11 or so loose bearing on each side and adjust it. No cup and cone systems failed yet going back to my Campy High Flange. Then again most BB are sealed so go figure. Toasted a few of those as well.

daveornee said:

Price of $250 was one of the objectives of the original poster who seemed to want to go with cartridge bearing hubs.
My experience tells me that at that price the best value is Ultegra hubs with well built standard rims, spokes, and nipples.

You could not be more wrong... Centaur hubs with standard rims, spokes, nipples would be the best value 😉

OK I am kidding and totally agree with you regarding bang for the buck.

dhk said:

Dave, agree with you. My Velomax hubs have the press-in cartridge bearings. Believe they are the easy way for a boutique manufacturer to build a hub. But my experience is that they just aren't sealed properly. They may be great in motors, but not so great on bike wheels ridden in rain and road grit.
One good rain ride was enough to make my bearings noisy with rust. When I called Velomax tech support, they recommended bearing replacement, and then in future, pulling back the end caps and drying out any water on the bearings with a dry cloth. It's not difficult, but it's a maintenance task easy to forget after a long rain ride.

Agree this is totally unacceptable, but it isn't the bearings fault, it is the design of the hub... my point was only that the inherent design of cartridge bearings is fine and that cup and cone are used because it is the cheapest and easiest to use.

gubaguba said:

Not a machinist but it would seem to me that it would be much cheaper to machine for a sealed bearing hub than a cup and cone system.

The expense comes in the manufacturing of the bearing itself... but yeah, for the little guys it is cheaper to use the cartridge bearings because of ease of assembly.

Hey Wilber... I never said I broke a CF frame. I said that of the guys that I ride with we've had a 100% failure rate with Gary Fisher mountain bikes. And a high rate of failure with the Trek CF hardtails.

Even though they had a very high failure rate Trek did step up and replace all of the broken bikes usually replacing the frames with better ones.

wilmar13 said:

Oh and IronDonut don't confuse disagreeing with statements such as "I broke 5 CF frames in a row before I got my Ti. CF is total garbage for everything" or " take the stickers off a Ti frame and they are all the same" as not being on the same page when it comes to generalities. Yeah the rider matters way more than the bike, yeah CF is usually bling and has many applications where it is the wrong material, yeah Ti is one of the best materials to make bike frames out of... but notice the difference between sweeping black and white statements as doctrine compared to generalities with exceptions, that is where we disagree, not on the gist of most things.

IronDonut said:

Hey Wilber... I never said I broke a CF frame...

Ah brings back the good ole days eh? Sorry you didn't say you broke 5 you said you broke 3 out of 4 😉
http://www.cyclingforums.com/showthread.php?t=242982