# OSBB clicking



## RkFast

[x post from Components/Wrenching]

Got a new S-Works Tarmac with about 1500 miles on it and my BB30/OSBB bottom bracket has an intermittent click (not creak) going on with it. 

First, Ive done all the isolation work and confirmed 100% its the BB. 

The click noise appears when applyingf pressure to the pedals, on smaller hills or when standing, but only for a few pedal revolutions and it then goes away. Sometimes Ill hear it on a specific climb, at a specific speed, climbing a specific way. Fifteen minutes later under the same exact conditions (my midweek AM rides include a few laps of a short loop in a park) the noise will not be there.

Sometimes it will click a bit when launching from the first few stoplights on a ride and then wont be heard from again for the rest of the ride.

Oh, and this is new....sometimes will will go click click click when just soft pedaling along for about three revolutions of the crank....and then go away.

When off the bike, I can grab the crank and rock it back and forth and it will go click click click. Ill then rotate the crank a few times backwards, try to rock the crank again, and there is no noise at all. 

There is about 2-3 MM of play in the bb/crank assembly. From what Im told by my LBS, who checked with Spesh...this is normal.

Best guess I can come up with is that its a bearing thats bad with perhaps one or two of the balls in the bearing assembly out of whack or broken... so that it only causes the noise when the faulty balls (heh) are at a certain position in the bearing assembly. These are ceramic bearings that came with the bike. Im thinking if something was loose in the cranks or the delrin cups the bearings are seated in, the noise would be consistent. Ive had the BB broken down and regreased twice so far. That keeps everything silent for about 150 miles, then the condition comes back.

[seperate rant-like comment] I am LESS than impressed with the quality of this bike. The paint around the head tube has bubbled and flaked off on me, Ive had issues with the headtube not being milled straight requiring I put more spacers under the headset cap to compensate, and now Ive got a chronic issue with the BB. The ride, when everything is right, is sublime. But in a few short months Ive had one issue after the next with what is suppossed to be Spesh's "top of the line" bike. This is starting to look like its going to be my first and last Specialized bike.[/rant]

Thoughts/feelings/advice/insults?


----------



## ukbloke

Two to three mm of (lateral) play in the bb/crank assembly is considered normal? This doesn't sound right to me. I have no direct experience with OSBB, but with the standard Shimano external bearings and crank, I'd be expecting less than 1mm of play. Do you have true BB30 with a metal shell in the frame, or the newer PF30 with the carbon shell? What cranks are you using?


----------



## RkFast

ukbloke said:


> Two to three mm of (lateral) play in the bb/crank assembly is considered normal? This doesn't sound right to me. I have no direct experience with OSBB, but with the standard Shimano external bearings and crank, I'd be expecting less than 1mm of play. Do you have true BB30 with a metal shell in the frame, or the newer PF30 with the carbon shell? What cranks are you using?


Well get this....Spesh said up to FIVE mm of play is allowed. I know...crazy.

Its a stock S-Works Tarmac SL3. So its the bearings which sit in a delrin shell, which are then pressed into the frame. There are no clips and the bearings dont get loctited in, like with traditional BB30. The cranks are OEM S-Works.


----------



## ukbloke

RkFast said:


> Well get this....Spesh said up to FIVE mm of play is allowed. I know...crazy.


If that is their manufacturing tolerance for OSBB and/or Specialized cranks, then I will never buy a bike with either. 0.5mm should be closer to the mark. I cannot imagine having multiple mm of slop in my crank assembly - totally bogus IMHO. I was starting to come around to the belief that Specialized had finally got the OSBB and Specialized cranks right starting with the SL3 (ie. PF30 and carbon shell). Your post has made me think again.

How about swapping out the ceramic bearings for some cheaper stock bearings just to see if that is the cause of the problem? Also, I bet you can find examples where people have fixed PF30 clicks/creaks by using one of the weaker loctite formulations.

Presumably you bought this at a Specialized dealer? I'd keep going back again until they make it right. Is there the equivalent of a lemon law for bike purchases?


----------



## RkFast

Im thinking of going wiith plain old steel bearings. But first Im going back to the LBS Sat and hes gonna break down the BB and go through it again. They have been great so far. 

Im not aware of any lemon law type of deal, but Im gonna fire off a letter to Spesh, for sure. Between the four month wait for the bike and all the issues since I picked it up I have a lot to tell them.


----------



## ukbloke

Maybe they can also take measurements to figure out where that play is coming from? For example, the bare shell width, the width with the bearings/cups in place, and the width of the crank itself. I think the Specialized crank has a 2 piece design with a fancy coupling between them. Do the pieces couple together properly, and is the bolt that fastens them together greased and torque'd to spec? Maybe there are some display models that you could check for yourself to see if that play is normal?


----------



## ukbloke

Here are the Specialized instructions for your crank installation. It is pretty complicated - it is possible that your mechanic is cutting corners in the install.


----------



## serious

I went through this with my S-Works Roubaix (2008 frame). The clicking got worse until it was there all the time. Replacing the original bearings with steel bearings did not fix the problem. So it was not the bearings or the crank. Specialized finally replaced the 2008 frame with a new 2011 frame. The clicking is gone now, but I am so afraid that the clicking will start again if the interface/tolerance between frame and the crank assembly is not perfect. 

As for play in the crank - it makes no sense to me to have any.


----------



## tonytourist

I had the same issue as serious, except mine was a 2009 Tarmac SL2. I don't see how play in the crankset can be considered normal, your shop or Specialized should take care of the problem!


----------



## aaric

I could see 5mm of play, if that was measured before using the wavy washer, as the washer would take up the play, and keep the chainline consistent. The wavy washer / extra washers in the BB30 install (at least with my Red crank/bearings) are there to handle the spacing.

If your crank has that much play fully installed with the wavy washer installed, I'd venture to say something's not installed correctly. Perhaps the press fit cups weren't completely seated, the washers got installed, and over time the cups fully seated into the frame, leaving you with excess play now?


----------



## ukbloke

I suspect that one or more pieces are simply missing - maybe one or both spacers or the wavy washer. I'd check everything very carefully against the assembly diagram, and compare the widths on each component to make sure that the right pieces are being used.


----------



## jjsteeno

I have a 2011 S-Works Roubaix that I had my LBS build for me with S-Works crank and Force group. No clicks with that setup. I recently had them swap out the S-Works crank for the Force compact crank that came with the group...same thing, no clicks or creaks at all, and with both, ZERO play. I've got the OSBB frame with the carbon shell. 

I hope your LBS is able to figure it out since I know how annoying that can be, especially on a $3k frame.


----------



## chuckji

I have a 2011 Tarmac Pro Sram, with a Specialized crank. It too developed a "click" noise when applying pressure. I tightened the crank center bolt and seemed to solve the problem.
Note that from 2011 the bolt changed to a T45 Torx. Glad to see this change because the 2010 and earlier 6mm Hex was easy to strip (the bolt heat/tool interface). The T45 seems to work much better - IME.
BTW - the instructions in post #7 are for the 2010 crank (since you mentioned a "new" Tarmac, I assume you have a 2011 model) - which shows the center bolt is a 6mm Hex. Check the Specialized web site for the latest instruction manual.
As far as any play, never seen any play in my Specialized cranks, MTB or road.


----------



## RkFast

So LBS stripped it down and there is play in the bearings, themselves. Everything else is tight as a drum. New bearings are in order it seems.

Kinda lame these ceramic bearings Spesh specs are cooked in three months. Im a light guy and the bike hasnt seen a spot of rain. 

Add another item to the "list" of complaints. Not happy.


----------



## RkFast

Bumpy bump.....

New bearings were dropped in....cranks were good and tight....500 miles later, clicky click is back, along with a few millimeters of lateral play in the cranks.

Yay.

This bike has now been in the sjhop four times for a problem that wont go away. Every 300-500 miles its eating bearings. Something aint right. 

I fired off an email to spesh and seeing my dealer this week. Ive had chronic bb issues, paint issues and the head tube is rubbing the headset top cap. I think I want the whole frame warrantied. The one I got is a lemon.


----------



## tommyturbo

It does sound like you somehow got a lemmon, and that's not right. About a month ago, I ordered the last size 56 satin carbon/gloss white 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 frame available through US Specialized dealer inventory. I should say the last threaded BB frame, as there are still many, many 2011 OSBB frames available. I could have had my frame for several hundred dollars less if I wanted the OSBB model. I passed on the 2012 SL4 because I couldn't get a threaded BB. My SL3 is absolutely perfect as far as quality of the build and finish.

What I have heard through the grapevine is that most of the OSBB bikes are fine, but many people have had frustrating experiences like you have. A lot of these customers eventually give up and use the adapters and install a Shimano crank.

I ride Campagnolo and I didn't want to risk the adapters not working with the 2012 S-Works Tarmac SL4.


----------



## RkFast

Hey Tom, if you get the chance and hear some feedback on the adaptor/Shimano crank solution solving the issue let me know....Id be just fine running that solution.


----------



## tommyturbo

I have heard of no problems at all through the dealer network with using the Shimano cranks and adapters. Specialized is aware that they have a problem with the Campy 42mm adapter and the 46mm Delrin cups, and they were working on a solution. I have not heard of anything at all regarding SRAM cranksets.


----------



## aclinjury

Note to self: avoid Tarmac SL3 with OSBB and stick to something proven: shimano standard.


----------



## tommyturbo

Certainly there is no reason to avoid the Tarmac, one of the best bikes in the world. I chose to avoid the S-Works Tarmac SL4, bought a S-Works Tarmac SL3 frame with a threaded BB, and moved my Campagnolo Super Record over from my SL2. No queaks or noises of any kind, no lateral play; just rock solid stiffness like it was in the SL2.


----------



## RkFast

I decided to go with the SL3 OSBB and I dont regret it per se. I think I just got a lemon of a frame and Im looking to get it fixed. I know plenty of people with OSBB, BB30, etc....some with this exact bike and have no issues. 

That said, after having both the OSBB and the Shimano threaded BBs on other bikes, Im STILL convinced that the threaded BBs are the simplest, best way to go. Whatever weight penalty there is vs. BB30/OSBB becomes hugely overshadowed by a threaded system's simplicity and ease of use. Not only is it very easy to get and keep silent, its a three second affair to check and change bearings as needed. Ive done it literally on the side of the road and trail (on the MTB) with a multi tool. 

If I had a desired way to go here and IF IF IF I do wind up with a new frame Im hoping they have a threaded one lying around where I can pick up the DA 7900 cranks and have a superb system. My whole bike would then go from 15.25 to 15.45 pounds. Big-fricking deal.


----------



## tommyturbo

RkFast,

I agree with you that perhaps the crank/BB system is not the place to worry about saving a few grams at the expense of reliability, convenience, etc. Also, I figure that there will be plenty of demand for a threaded BB SL3 when I decide to sell the frame. Of course, if threaded BB frames do go away, I may just wind up keeping the frame I have for a long time. As far as I am concerned the S-Works Tarmac SL3 has to be pretty close to a perfect bike.

I think we have reached a point of very diminishing returns. It's getting harder and harder to separate the marketing lingo from the reality of improvement.


----------



## RkFast

I think Ive solved this.....

I noticed I can push the cranks laterally about 1-2MM. Which means that the only think holding the whole BB assembly in place is that wavy washer. So under load, that wavy washer is flexing, allowing a massive amount of side load on the bearings, which of course leads to their destruction in short order. 

What a terrible design....who the hell thought of this? 

This would also make sense as to why Tommy is saying the Wheels Manufacturing BB adapter with Shimano cranks would resolve the issue. With that system, any "side play" is taken OUT of the bb assembl, which means no side load on the bearings and they would last a long time. 

I think a conversion is in order for me.........


----------



## ukbloke

It still sounds to me like something is out of spec. Can you check the width of the BB shell to see if it is off by this 1-2mm? Another possibility would be the crank assembly. This is the Specialized design in two pieces that mates together in the centre of the spindle right? Do they mate together perfectly? Perhaps the LBS can try another to see if it has the same issue?


----------



## RkFast

Ill check BB width. I pulled the cranks and they look good, but the bearings are sloppy. A lot of play in them. The beat goes on...........


----------



## EightFiveTwo

This clicking noise happened to me with two different bikes.

1st one---s-works crank on a SL3---click wont go away, never got it fixed as bike is no longer mine
2nd one--bought a brand new venge with a different s-works crank---100-miles into it that FXCKING ANNOYING click came....was i pissed. I literally throw that pc of shxt back in the dealer's face---"you make that **** go away or I will make you warranty the whole thing including the frame--as if you say you don't know what makes the noise."

They took apart the cranks, re-installed it, now clicks went away. Let's see how long it takes before (if) it comes back.


----------



## jinnjia

RkFast said:


> Ill check BB width. I pulled the cranks and they look good, but the bearings are sloppy. A lot of play in them. The beat goes on...........


Please keep us updated.......


----------



## RkFast

Well well well....this is interesting:

http://service.specialized.com/coll...t---S-Works-Road-Carbon-Instruction-Guide.pdf

Was just looking at the tech docs online....It appears on the latest tech doc for the Specialized S-Works crankset, the wave washer has been replaced with a two conical spacers on the non drive side, one of which you "adjust" to remove the lateral play in the crank! Is this a new design?


----------



## purdyd

RkFast said:


> Well well well....this is interesting:
> 
> http://service.specialized.com/coll...t---S-Works-Road-Carbon-Instruction-Guide.pdf
> 
> Was just looking at the tech docs online....It appears on the latest tech doc for the Specialized S-Works crankset, the wave washer has been replaced with a two conical spacers on the non drive side, one of which you "adjust" to remove the lateral play in the crank! Is this a new design?



Good catch, yes that is new, interesting


----------



## roadworthy

Clicking cranks are either bad bearings or set up error. Its all about axial preload. Axial clearance with not do. I would say 70% of all bike shops don't have a clue how to set up a BB-30 or PF-30. Specialized cranks used a wave washer to take up axial tolerance to keep a preload on the bearings. Cartridge bearings need a modest preload to keep some tension between inner race, balls and outer race. Without it, they will rattle, click and pop. Same applies to cartridge hub wheels and headsets.
Most wave washer cranks offer spacers to dial in the proper amount of preload. If the wave washer when properly spaced is in the middle of compression as it should be, then your bearings should be quiet provided they aren't defective. PF-30 BB's tend to be quieter than BB-30 because plastic is a more natural sound deadener...one of the reasons this design was adopted. For those BB-30 clicking suffers, Loctite 640 is your friend.


----------



## RkFast

roadworthy said:


> Clicking cranks are either bad bearings or set up error. Its all about axial preload. Axial clearance with not do. I would say 70% of all bike shops don't have a clue how to set up a BB-30 or PF-30. Specialized cranks used a wave washer to take up axial tolerance to keep a preload on the bearings. Cartridge bearings need a modest preload to keep some tension between inner race, balls and outer race. Without it, they will rattle, click and pop. Same applies to cartridge hub wheels and headsets.
> Most wave washer cranks offer spacers to dial in the proper amount of preload. If the wave washer when properly spaced is in the middle of compression as it should be, then your bearings should be quiet provided they aren't defective. PF-30 BB's tend to be quieter than BB-30 because plastic is a more natural sound deadener...one of the reasons this design was adopted. For those BB-30 clicking suffers, Loctite 640 is your friend.


Thats the thing, on my setup the wave washer is not providing the proper amount of preload and the cranks slide back and forth laterally with little pressure. I can literally do it with two fingers pressure.

I was poking around the Specialized website last night and it appears that the documents for the cranks that showed the wave washer were removed and replaced with a document that shows two conical spacers on the non-drive side, one of which has three small hex bolts that you use to take the lateral play out of the system all together. It appears Specialized has updated the design. Im going to call them tomorrow to try any get to bottom of this.


----------



## roadworthy

RkFast said:


> Thats the thing, on my setup the wave washer is not providing the proper amount of preload and the cranks slide back and forth laterally with little pressure applied to the cranks. I was poking around the Specialized website last night and it appears that the documents for the cranks that showed the wave washer were removed and replaced with a document that shows two spacers, one of which has three small hex bolts that you use to take the lateral play out of the system all together. It appears Specialized has updated the design. Im going to call them tomorrow to try any get to bottom of this.


You are on the right path to resolving your issue. It takes approx. 25-50 lbs normal force to compress a wave washer. when you remove it, place it between two blocks of wood and set it on the bathroom scale and compress it. A properly set up BB should have the wave washer between 50-80% compression. You will not be able to move the crank laterally when the crank is properly shimmed...unless you are very strong. I would say 95% of all clicking BB bearing issues for integrated BB is due to lack of axial preload. Bearings will rattle without it. Specialized in no different than other companies that make silent engineering changes...or running changes to address issue with the designs that have been released.
Most bike shops don't take the time or have the skill to set up a crank properly. Wave washer cranks like Specialized, Campy, Sram, Cannondale etc all take more care to set up compared to Shimano and Rotor cranks with adjustable preload. Most of the wave washer cranks offer spacers to adjust for BB width tolerance. Let us know what Specialized says. It comes down to set up for a quiet integrated BB.


----------



## purdyd

roadworthy said:


> Most wave washer cranks offer spacers to dial in the proper amount of preload..


very true, if for example, you got a red BB30 crankset it would come with a bunch of plastic washer shims

or even an aftermarket bearing set, like the one from hawk racing would come with shimes

the wave washer should be half compressed when the crankset is installed

specialized doesn't seem to ship the spacers and from my experience of one bike, it doesn't need them

however, if your bike does need it then 

1) bearings are note wide enought to spec
2) delrin cups are not to spec
3) frame bottom bracket is not to spec
4) crankset is not to spec

to me with the s-works delrin cup, it doesn't seem likely that you could install the bearings wrong to create play - it would more likely that they aren't press in enough

is suppose the crank might not be tightening properly

at any rate you should be able to measure 1-4 above and figure out where the problem lies and act accordingly


----------



## RkFast

Just stopped by my LBS. Every SL4 they had on the floor had this new type spacer design.


----------



## roadworthy

RkFast said:


> Just stopped by my LBS. Every SL4 they had on the floor had this new type spacer design.


Specialized is one if not thee most evolved engineering company. Sounds like they have introduced spacers with compressiblity and modest springrate to remove some of the onus from operator set up which is good because most don't know how to set BB/PF-30 cranks up. Also Delrin cups may take a set over time which introduces more axial play as Delrin has a much lower modulus than an alloy to alloy BB-30 interface...but it is also quieter and more forgiving with respect to tolerance stack up. The pleathora of clicking with BB/PF-30 throughout the industry, is not an indictment against the design per se as much as the tech that sets up the BB doesn't dial in enough axial preload. Doesn't matter if you use those new spacers or simply shims to introduce the correct amount of preload as long as you have some thrust force on the cartridge bearings to keep them from resonating. See if Specialized will send some of the new spacers to your LBS so you can set your cranks up properly. If not, obtain some spacers from one of many different cranks mfr's.


----------



## EMB145 Driver

I had clicking with an SWorks crank on 2009 Tarmac Pro and fixed it. Take it to the shop have them see if the spider locking ring is tight, as it probably isn't. Take it off and put a little blue loctite on it when you reinstall. Just tightening it will make the click go away, the blue loctite will keep it away. Mine has 2 to 3 mm of lateral play and it's been dead silent for the last 10,000 miles.


----------



## RkFast

EMB145 Driver said:


> I had clicking with an SWorks crank on 2009 Tarmac Pro and fixed it. Take it to the shop have them see if the spider locking ring is tight, as it probably isn't. Take it off and put a little blue loctite on it when you reinstall. Just tightening it will make the click go away, the blue loctite will keep it away. Mine has 2 to 3 mm of lateral play and it's been dead silent for the last 10,000 miles.


I dont trust advice from anyone who flies an airplane made in Brazil


----------



## EMB145 Driver

RkFast said:


> I dont trust advice from anyone who flies an airplane made in Brazil


I only flew it after 6,000 hours in McBoeings and a layoff. I'm back in the McBoeing now, so I'm trust worthy again.

Seriously, your problem sounds exactly like the click I had. The Specialized dealer has the tool to tighten that lock ring. I bet that's what it is.


----------



## EMB145 Driver

You can try dribbling some oil/lube down behind that spider and see if that temporarily clears it up for you. We fixed mine once by tightening it, then it started again, so we used loctite the next time and that's been about 16months ago.


----------



## purdyd

EMB145 Driver said:


> You can try dribbling some oil/lube down behind that spider and see if that temporarily clears it up for you. We fixed mine once by tightening it, then it started again, so we used loctite the next time and that's been about 16months ago.


the assembly instructions for the spider say to loctite it

so perhaps it was installed correctly to begin with


----------



## EMB145 Driver

purdyd said:


> the assembly instructions for the spider say to loctite it
> 
> so perhaps it was installed correctly to begin with


I have no idea whether it was done right or not, mine wasn't initially. It's literally a 2 minute fix, if you have access the Specialized spider wrench. It's definitely worth taking it off, cleaning, and reinstalling properly.


----------



## purdyd

EMB145 Driver said:


> I have no idea whether it was done right or not, mine wasn't initially. .


then it wasn't installed properly as it clearly says, "Use blue threadlocker #242
on lockring threads." in the installation instructions


----------



## RkFast

roadworthy said:


> Specialized is one if not thee most evolved engineering company. Sounds like they have introduced spacers with compressiblity and modest springrate to remove some of the onus from operator set up which is good because most don't know how to set BB/PF-30 cranks up. Also Delrin cups may take a set over time which introduces more axial play as Delrin has a much lower modulus than an alloy to alloy BB-30 interface...but it is also quieter and more forgiving with respect to tolerance stack up. The pleathora of clicking with BB/PF-30 throughout the industry, is not an indictment against the design per se as much as the tech that sets up the BB doesn't dial in enough axial preload. Doesn't matter if you use those new spacers or simply shims to introduce the correct amount of preload as long as you have some thrust force on the cartridge bearings to keep them from resonating. See if Specialized will send some of the new spacers to your LBS so you can set your cranks up properly. If not, obtain some spacers from one of many different cranks mfr's.


Called Specialized yesterday. The cust service rep checked with the tech guys and I was told...get this....they "prefer" the wave washer.

Im not following that. If the Wave washer setup is better, then why did they do away with it, change the design and then utilize the new design on all new bikes?


----------



## ukbloke

RkFast said:


> Im not following that. If the Wave washer setup is better, then why did they do away with it, change the design and then utilize the new design on all new bikes?


Maybe they think that they have a better chance of educating the LBS with the new system? It seems to me that the underlying problem is that Specialized isn't able to manufacture every frame's BB shell to the precision required for BB30/PF30. They've compounded this by not shipping a set of spacers with the bike, and not educating the LBS as to how to use the spacers to load up the wave washer correctly for frames that need it. This has resulted in a number of customer issues (like yours), and their reaction as an engineering company is to redesign something. It amazes me that so many years into their OSBB transition and they're still not getting it right on bikes costing up to $10k.


----------



## PJ352

ukbloke said:


> Maybe they think that they have a better chance of educating the LBS with the new system? *It seems to me that the underlying problem is that Specialized isn't able to manufacture every frame's BB shell to the precision required* for BB30/PF30. They've compounded this by not shipping a set of spacers with the bike, and not educating the LBS as to how to use the spacers to load up the wave washer correctly for frames that need it. This has resulted in a number of customer issues (like yours), and* their reaction as an engineering company is to redesign something*. It amazes me that so many years into their OSBB transition and they're still not getting it right on bikes costing up to $10k.


I've come to basically the same conclusion. A lot of what I read here and elsewhere re: OSBB issues has shades of 'Trek Madone'. First they replaced frames, then redesigned bearings, then started employing shims (frame replacements must've gotten expensive). 

I don't mind to (and do) all my own wrenching, but my bottom line is that a bike is a tool. That being the case, that tool has to perform... consistently and with minimal breakdown. At this juncture, given the problems with OSBB's (and their variations) and considering I've read no substantive documentation proving any advantages, I see zero reason to go with such a system. 

End rant.


----------



## ukbloke

PJ352 said:


> At this juncture, given the problems with OSBB's (and their variations) and considering I've read no substantive documentation proving any advantages, I see zero reason to go with such a system.


Agreed, and leads me to speculate that the last Tarmac that I might ever consider upgrading to is the 2011 SL3 with threaded BB (ideally the S-Works).


----------



## RkFast

ukbloke said:


> Agreed, and leads me to speculate that the last Tarmac that I might ever consider upgrading to is the 2011 SL3 with threaded BB (ideally the S-Works).


Spesh isnt stupid...the threaded BB frames outsell the OSBB ones by a mile. I wouldnt be shocked to see them start making SL4s with threaded BBs.


----------



## ukbloke

RkFast said:


> Spesh isnt stupid...the threaded BB frames outsell the OSBB ones by a mile. I wouldnt be shocked to see them start making SL4s with threaded BBs.


Almost all of the Tarmac/Roubaix bikes and frames have gone over to OSBB. They will be reusing those molds for the 2013 bikes. Also, they will be finalizing the spec and order volumes for 2013 in the next few months. And they'll have to eat about 5 years of crow first


----------



## roadworthy

PJ352 said:


> I've come to basically the same conclusion. A lot of what I read here and elsewhere re: OSBB issues has shades of 'Trek Madone'. First they replaced frames, then redesigned bearings, then started employing shims (frame replacements must've gotten expensive).
> 
> I don't mind to (and do) all my own wrenching, but my bottom line is that a bike is a tool. That being the case, that tool has to perform... consistently and with minimal breakdown. At this juncture, given the problems with OSBB's (and their variations) and considering I've read no substantive documentation proving any advantages, I see zero reason to go with such a system.
> 
> End rant.


The problem here is BB-30 has gotten a bum rap from those that don't know how to set them up....which btw includes likely the majority of bike shops out there. The OP is a notable example. 2mm axial play = click. This is pretty elementary forgive me.
Trek shot themselves in the foot because they spec'ed slip fit bearings to their version of BB-30. Why? Less premium on machining tolerances and easier installation = cost. Where they messed up is they didn't estimate how many couldn't manage a simple joint like a BB-30. Slip fit bearings...just like a slip fit integrated headset need axial preload. This seems to escape many. Clickity click.
Specialized is a bit more evolved technically. They spec a pressed fit bearing joint and also spec Loctite 640 which is the best practice for quieting a noisy BB-30 slip fit or not. Privately many shops that handle Trek Madone's loctite the bearinngs and surprise...no noise...even with less than optimal axial preload adjustment.

The BB-30 has merit even though it is lost on many. If it didn't all the top bicycle manufacturers wouldn't base their livilihood on it. It will take a while for bike shops and owners to understand the technology. Set up varies with respect to what crank you select for example. It is a bit more sensitive to noise than the PF-30 which Specialized is moving more to in their Sworks frames...also partly driven by cost btw which is partly the driver for BB-30 in the first place but BB-30 as the end of the day if set up properly is dead quiet, bearings are cheap....can be swapped out in 10 minutes and is incrementally lighter and stiffer than traditional threaded BB cranks due to large diameter spindle which can be made lighter due to increased section modulus.


----------



## PJ352

roadworthy said:


> The problem here is BB-30 has gotten a bum rap from those that don't know how to set them up....which btw includes likely the majority of bike shops out there. The OP is a notable example. 2mm axial play = click. This is pretty elementary forgive me.
> Trek shot themselves in the foot because they spec'ed slip fit bearings to their version of BB-30. Why? Less premium on machining tolerances and easier installation = cost. Where they messed up is they didn't estimate how many couldn't manage a simple joint like a BB-30. Slip fit bearings...just like a slip fit integrated headset need axial preload. This seems to escape many. Clickity click.
> Specialized is a bit more evolved technically. They spec a pressed fit bearing joint and also spec Loctite 640 which is the best practice for quieting a noisy BB-30 slip fit or not. Privately many shops that handle Trek Madone's loctite the bearinngs and surprise...no noise...even with less than optimal axial preload adjustment.
> 
> The BB-30 has merit even though it is lost on many. If it didn't all the top bicycle manufacturers wouldn't base their livilihood on it. It will take a while for bike shops and owners to understand the technology. Set up varies with respect to what crank you select for example. It is a bit more sensitive to noise than the PF-30 which Specialized is moving more to in their Sworks frames...also partly driven by cost btw which is partly the driver for BB-30 in the first place but BB-30 as the end of the day if set up properly is dead quiet, bearings are cheap....can be swapped out in 10 minutes and is incrementally lighter and stiffer than traditional threaded BB cranks due to large diameter spindle which can be made lighter due to increased section modulus.


Sorry, but I think your logic is flawed a bit.

To say that BB30 gets a bum rap because many consumers and LBS's don't know how to set them up doesn't hold water, because Spec (among others) aren't coming to the aid of consumers/ LBS's telling them what they're doing wrong. Rather, some framesets have been warrantied, then came the design changes. This tells me the problem runs deeper - and consumers are the 'field testers'. And BTW, Loctiting the bearings isn't the magic bullet. If you doubt me, review some posts in Trek's forum on the related topic.

All things considered, I see the inherent design as the problem, which in turn causes problems with set up. Good designs don't require a number of steps/ resteps to be taken to ensure reliability. The install process is thought out and built into the design. It's a crankset we're talking about here, not a spaceship, and Shimano seems to have gotten it right with Hollowtech, so I see no reason to convert. 

And speaking of converting, just why would someone do so. As I previously posted, there is no reliable documentation out there that (save for a slight weight loss) supports the claim that BB30 (or similar) provides any increased performance, and they certainly can't claim reliability. 

Bearings are easily replaced? Mine are too, and they last for 12k plus miles, trouble free. Stiffer? Show me reliable documentation, because an increased diameter and changing to an alu spindle doesn't dictate that will be the case. And even if it is, does it really matter to all but the pros? Lighter? I have a bike that weighs 18.5 lbs and another that weighs 16.4 lbs and there's zero diff in my performance on them, so given BB30's 'edge' and it's corresponding problems hardly makes the change worthwhile, IMHO.

Apologies to the OP for straying slightly off topic here. I hope you get your problems sorted out. God knows you've expended a huge effort to do so.


----------



## roadworthy

PJ352 said:


> Sorry, but I think your logic is flawed a bit.
> 
> To say that BB30 gets a bum rap because many consumers and LBS's don't know how to set them up doesn't hold water, because Spec (among others) aren't coming to the aid of consumers/ LBS's telling them what they're doing wrong. Rather, some framesets have been warrantied, then came the design changes. This tells me the problem runs deeper - and consumers are the 'field testers'. And BTW, Loctiting the bearings isn't the magic bullet. If you doubt me, review some posts in Trek's forum on the related topic.
> 
> All things considered, I see the inherent design as the problem, which in turn causes problems with set up. Good designs don't require a number of steps/ resteps to be taken to ensure reliability. The install process is thought out and built into the design. It's a crankset we're talking about here, not a spaceship, and Shimano seems to have gotten it right with Hollowtech, so I see no reason to convert.
> 
> And speaking of converting, just why would someone do so. As I previously posted, there is no reliable documentation out there that (save for a slight weight loss) supports the claim that BB30 (or similar) provides any increased performance, and they certainly can't claim reliability.
> 
> Bearings are easily replaced? Mine are too, and they last for 12k plus miles, trouble free. Stiffer? Show me reliable documentation, because an increased diameter and changing to an alu spindle doesn't dictate that will be the case. And even if it is, does it really matter to all but the pros? Lighter? I have a bike that weighs 18.5 lbs and another that weighs 16.4 lbs and there's zero diff in my performance on them, so given BB30's 'edge' and it's corresponding problems hardly makes the change worthwhile, IMHO.
> 
> Apologies to the OP for straying slightly off topic here. I hope you get your problems sorted out. God knows you've expended a huge effort to do so.


Its ok to have your opinion but it you with flawed logic. Sadly a simple joint is complex if you didn't go to engineering school I guess. But it is your opinion against the team of engineers that work with each top bike company that have embraced BB-30 and its derivatives. _*All*_ the top bike companies sell a large percentage of their bikes now with integrated bearings. You mention Shimano. The reason why Shimano cranks work so well with integrated bearings is because they have adjustable preload. Same applies to Rotor cranks...Rotor is owned by Cervelo. Rotor cranks with Cervelo BBright don't click. Why? They are simple to set up to dial in correct about of bearing preload. Thousands of BB-30 bikes are being produced each year by a myriad of bike companies. How many do you think click?. A small subset. The OP is the poster boy for the clicking issue. No crank...from BB-30 to external threaded OB bearing cranks to square taper should have 2mm of axial play. It is destined to make noise. It is no different than riding around with a loose integrated head set. Same issue btw applies to Campy UT. It is highly documented. The Campy UT with external threaded BB is one of the best cranks on the market. Will it click if there is too much axial play even though the bearings are press fit to respective spindles separated with a Hirth joint? Like clockwork. Set up. A wave washer crank with is the majority of cranks out there has to be under tension. When a BB-30 wave washer crank is properly set up you can't move it laterally. It takes 50 lbs of compessive force to compress a wave washer fully. A wave washer under compression not only neutralized the cranks for accurate shift changes but also keeps thrust load against the inner race of bearings which preload balls and outer race which keeps them quiet. As mentioned, this is elementary but escapes many. I have never seen a BB-30 that wouldn't work flawlessly if set up properly and that includes after a number of bearing replacement repetitions. The engineers that release integrated BB's for all the top bike companies know this and sadly many frames are needless warrantied because bike shops which many have a hard time even adjusting a derailleur, can't even set up a simple bearing joint like a BB-30. Most of the top wave washer cranks offer extra spacers...like Cannondale and Sram for example to dial in proper wave washer preload. If you own a Specialized bike with Specialized crank with undersized BB which would be an exceedingly rare statistical outliar than there are a plethora of spacers on the market to shim the crank properly to put the wave washer under compression to quiet the BB.


----------



## PJ352

roadworthy said:


> Sadly a simple joint is complex if you didn't go to engineering school I guess. But is is your opinion against the team of engineers that work with each top bike company that have embraced BB-30 and its derivatives.


The engineers are the ones that made the simple joint complex, not I. And IMO they're being driven by marketeers (that you seem to embrace), rather than a problem to be solved. 

You can write paragraphs of 'reasons why' (BB30's are problematic), but fact is, they are. That's as far as this non-engineer needs to take things.

From here, I'll leave it to you to espouse the virtues of OSBB (and similar) and other members to decide for themselves, as I have.


----------



## roadworthy

PJ352 said:


> The engineers are the ones that made the simple joint complex, not I. And IMO they're being driven by marketeers (that you seem to embrace), rather than a problem to be solved.
> 
> You can write paragraphs of 'reasons why' (BB30's are problematic), but fact is, they are. That's as far as this non-engineer needs to take things.
> 
> From here, I'll leave it to you to espouse the virtues of OSBB (and similar) and other members to decide for themselves, as I have.


Quite right, I am defending the engineer's for this design because threads on a BB are pretty unnecessary as there is very little axial load on a crank. But you have a lot of company when it comes from those that have been frustrated with clicking BB's. Many are just like the OP...they don't have technical training and are being led by bike shops who are equally clueless. You can say you don't like this BB design which is fine. Another way of looking at is...they are here. So you can either ride a top of the line bike like a Sworks now with PF-30...or a lesser frame with threaded BB. Or alternatively, you can loosen the integrated headset on your current bike, ride it around and criticize the design for being noisy.


----------



## RkFast

roadworthy said:


> Its ok to have your opinion but it you with flawed logic. Sadly a simple joint is complex if you didn't go to engineering school I guess. But it is your opinion against the team of engineers that work with each top bike company that have embraced BB-30 and its derivatives. _*All*_ the top bike companies sell a large percentage of their bikes now with integrated bearings. You mention Shimano. The reason why Shimano cranks work so well with integrated bearings is because they have adjustable preload. Same applies to Rotor cranks...Rotor is owned by Cervelo. Rotor cranks with Cervelo BBright don't click. Why? They are simple to set up to dial in correct about of bearing preload. Thousands of BB-30 bikes are being produced each year by a myriad of bike companies. How many do you think click?. A small subset. The OP is the poster boy for the clicking issue. No crank...from BB-30 to external threaded OB bearing cranks to square taper should have 2mm of axial play. It is destined to make noise. It is no different than riding around with a loose integrated head set. Same issue btw applies to Campy UT. It is highly documented. The Campy UT with external threaded BB is one of the best cranks on the market. Will it click if there is too much axial play even though the bearings are press fit to respective spindles separated with a Hirth joint? Like clockwork. Set up. A wave washer crank with is the majority of cranks out there has to be under tension. When a BB-30 wave washer crank is properly set up you can't move it laterally. It takes 50 lbs of compessive force to compress a wave washer fully. A wave washer under compression not only neutralized the cranks for accurate shift changes but also keeps thrust load against the inner race of bearings which preload balls and outer race which keeps them quiet. As mentioned, this is elementary but escapes many. I have never seen a BB-30 that wouldn't work flawlessly if set up properly and that includes after a number of bearing replacement repetitions. The engineers that release integrated BB's for all the top bike companies know this and sadly many frames are needless warrantied because bike shops which many have a hard time even adjusting a derailleur, can't even set up a simple bearing joint like a BB-30. Most of the top wave washer cranks offer extra spacers...like Cannondale and Sram for example to dial in proper wave washer preload. If you own a Specialized bike with Specialized crank with undersized BB which would be an exceedingly rare statistical outliar than there are a plethora of spacers on the market to shim the crank properly to put the wave washer under compression to quiet the BB.


I dont mind being the poster boy for this, nor do I mind doing the work. Although I wish I didnt have to do it, in a strange way its fun. And Im happy to share my learnings with others, as long as they are correct!!!!

Regarding spacers, my LBS installed a shim on the non drive side between the wave washer and the bearing. The wave washer is now not flat, but much more compressed. The cranks are rock solid now. No movement at all. Im hoping to get out there and test ride, but unfortunately quad tendonitis has me sidelined until probably Christmas. And then its Winter. So it might be a while before I get to test this out.


----------



## roadworthy

RkFast said:


> I dont mind being the poster boy for this, nor do I mind doing the work. Although I wish I didnt have to do it, in a strange way its fun. And Im happy to share my learnings with others, as long as they are correct!!!!
> 
> Regarding spacers, my LBS installed a shim on the non drive side between the wave washer and the bearing. The wave washer is now not flat, but much more compressed. The cranks are rock solid now. No movement at all. Im hoping to get out there and test ride, but unfortunately quad tendonitis has me sidelined until probably Christmas. And then its Winter. So it might be a while before I get to test this out.


Good to hear and glad to hear your lbs stepped up. A simple shim for wave washer cranks is typically all is needed to quiet a clicking BB-30. The wave washer should be in the middle of its compression if properly shimmed and quite right the crank should be rock solid...can't move the crank laterally when pulling on it if properly installed. Hard to say why you had movement as it is quite rare to have a low side of tolerance BB width. I wonder if all the proper spacers will installed initially whoever set the BB up.
Knowledge is good to have. I for example enjoy the technology and building bikes as much as riding and I ride a lot. There is a lot of sour grapes about BB-30 on the web and you can see how a small thing like a lack of proper shimming will spoil the party.
Have fun.


----------



## tommyturbo

You can go back and forth on this topic forever. The bottom line in my opinion:
BB30, OSBB is largely marketing driven. It's getting harder and harder to improve (and differentiate) new models of bikes that already are quite extraordinary. The manufacturers must continue to come up with reasons for consumers to buy their products. It's called marketing and some are better at it than others.

It's not just the bike manufacturers that have this issue. The component companies do as well.

Specialized is a fantastic company and has many of the best people in the industry working in new product design and development. If they are struggling with OSBB issues (and they definitely are) that in itself speaks volumes. The fact that Shimano and Campagnolo are not making BB30 cranksets must also mean something. SRAM and FSA have jumped in big time because they need a way to differentiate their products from, guess who, Shimano and Campagnolo.

I think Specialized is making a mistake by not offering threaded frames to the many, many people who would prefer to use proven components not manufactured by Specialized. I have two Campagnolo Ultratorque cranks (Record 10s and Super Record 11s). My Record crank has over 26,000 miles on the original bearings. I'm happy with the performance, reliability, etc of this system. Dropping 50g for a new approach is not a reason for me to switch.

I recently ordered one of the last threaded 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 frames after waiting a long time to be able to buy the new 2012 SL4 model. I wanted a threaded BB and did not want external cables (and I didn't like the look of the new S-Works SL4, but I could have gotten over that).

Some people in my situation will do what I did; others will find another manufacturer who is making great bikes with threaded BB's. I think this move to OSBB only frames will hurt Specialized. Whether or not they decide to offer threaded BB's with the SL4 is anybody's guess.

I'm guessing that right now somebody is working on a cost analysis of producing threaded frames vs. potential market share loss if they don't. But what do I know? I'm not an engineer, just a cyclist who has four bikes (three of them Specialized) that I ride 10,000 miles a year.


----------



## ukbloke

The responsibility entirely lies with Specialized. They have set themselves up to have complete control of the end-to-end chain from manufacturing, distribution to sales. These are not "Mom and Pop" bike stores, they are all Specialized dealers and have full access to Specialized's technical support. The original information from the LBS that 2-3mm of lateral play is within the expected range beggars belief.

From Specialized's point of view they don't want any frame/bike returns, and from the bike store's point of view they want minimal repeat visits by customers to get their new bike working - all these interactions cost time and money and eat into profits. It is entirely up to Specialized to educate their employees, their manufacturing partners, their reps, the stores and the mechanics about how to set up the OSBB. Most end customers don't service their own BBs and needn't have any awareness of this, but information needs to be available for those who do. It really isn't rocket science. But they dropped the ball, and now they are scurrying to fix things up. Of course we don't know how widespread the problem is based on a few internet postings, but I'd guess it is substantial if they are making a running change from the wavy washer in the middle of a production year and issuing new technical bulletins.

Also I think Specialized will be having some interesting discussions internally and with their manufacturing partner as to why frames are being built way outside of the tolerance specified by their engineers. I think they are finding out that scaling OSBB from S-Works level to mass production isn't as easy as they thought. But I'm pretty sure they will stay the course with OSBB ... until the next new shiny BB thing comes along.


----------



## roadworthy

tommyturbo said:


> You can go back and forth on this topic forever. The bottom line in my opinion:
> BB30, OSBB is largely marketing driven. It's getting harder and harder to improve (and differentiate) new models of bikes that already are quite extraordinary. The manufacturers must continue to come up with reasons for consumers to buy their products. It's called marketing and some are better at it than others.
> 
> It's not just the bike manufacturers that have this issue. The component companies do as well.
> 
> Specialized is a fantastic company and has many of the best people in the industry working in new product design and development. If they are struggling with OSBB issues (and they definitely are) that in itself speaks volumes. The fact that Shimano and Campagnolo are not making BB30 cranksets must also mean something. SRAM and FSA have jumped in big time because they need a way to differentiate their products from, guess who, Shimano and Campagnolo.
> 
> I think Specialized is making a mistake by not offering threaded frames to the many, many people who would prefer to use proven components not manufactured by Specialized. I have two Campagnolo Ultratorque cranks (Record 10s and Super Record 11s). My Record crank has over 26,000 miles on the original bearings. I'm happy with the performance, reliability, etc of this system. Dropping 50g for a new approach is not a reason for me to switch.
> 
> I recently ordered one of the last threaded 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 frames after waiting a long time to be able to buy the new 2012 SL4 model. I wanted a threaded BB and did not want external cables (and I didn't like the look of the new S-Works SL4, but I could have gotten over that).
> 
> Some people in my situation will do what I did; others will find another manufacturer who is making great bikes with threaded BB's. I think this move to OSBB only frames will hurt Specialized. Whether or not they decide to offer threaded BB's with the SL4 is anybody's guess.
> 
> I'm guessing that right now somebody is working on a cost analysis of producing threaded frames vs. potential market share loss if they don't. But what do I know? I'm not an engineer, just a cyclist who has four bikes (three of them Specialized) that I ride 10,000 miles a year.


BB30 issues are only real for those that don't understand them. There is no issue for an enlightened owner or tech. I too ride Campy UT and I still prefer a threaded BB as well...but BB30 is lighter and simple and works just fine if you know what you are doing. If a frame you want has BB30 or PF30 which is essentially the future like it not, it should not be a show stopper. For a Campy UT if you want to keep what I would agree is a great crank, then you have two options if you have a BB30 frameset. One...Campy's alloy cups pressed into the BB30 alloy sleeves...or two, a more bulletproof solution...Sram's BB30 to BSA conversion sleeve which has the structural integrity of a std threaded BSA BB. All BB30 frames can be converted to a threaded BSA BB with Sram's sleeve which is loctited in place. The sleeve can also be removed if you want to run a BB30 crank later. Loctite 640 has very low shear strength which makes it ideal for BB30 applications for service. So you can have your Campy crank and a BB30 frame without issue.
Also, Specialized still makes frames with a threaded BB. I just ordered a 2012 Roubaix SL3 Pro with threaded BB so I could use my Campy UT plug and play. But even if this frame were only available in BB30 or PF30, I would still have ordered it. The frame is too good not to ride independent of the BB. If the frame had BB30, I would ebay my Campy UT crank and purchase one of many BB30 cranks that would work just fine with my Campy groupset. I could of course insert it with Sram's BSA conversion sleeve but BB30 has merit and no reason not to utilized its inherent benefits.


----------



## tommyturbo

Like I said, I'm not an engineer, and solving mechanical engineering problems is not why I ride bikes. Specialized has issues with the Campy adapters and the Specialized Delrin cups (and apparently with Shimano as well based on this discussion). When I talked to Specialized, they didn't have a clear-cut idea as to how they were going to solve the problem with Campy cranksets.

I didn't want to wait and I didn't want to take the chance of buying a frame and winding up with crank issues. And no, I did not want to Ebay my Ultratorque crank.


----------



## tommyturbo

PS If that SRAM adapter is made out of alloy, the way I understand if from Specialized is that it will void the warranty on your carbon shelled OSBB frame. Threaded BB's are not offered on S-Works Tarmac SL4 models.


----------



## PJ352

tommyturbo said:


> PS If that SRAM adapter is made out of alloy, the way I understand if from Specialized is that it will void the warranty on your carbon shelled OSBB frame. Threaded BB's are not offered on S-Works Tarmac SL4 models.


If I had an OSBB frame and wanted to use a standard SRAM/ Shimano crankset, I'd opt for the adapters below. They're available for both Shimano and SRAM, use the OE (6806) BB30 bearings and are slip fit (as in, easily removable).

Wheels Manufacturing - BB30 Shims for SRAM

Wheels Manufacturing - BB 30 Shims


----------



## roadworthy

tommyturbo said:


> Like I said, I'm not an engineer, and solving mechanical engineering problems is not why I ride bikes. Specialized has issues with the Campy adapters and the Specialized Delrin cups (and apparently with Shimano as well based on this discussion). When I talked to Specialized, they didn't have a clear-cut idea as to how they were going to solve the problem with Campy cranksets.
> 
> I didn't want to wait and I didn't want to take the chance of buying a frame and winding up with crank issues. And no, I did not want to Ebay my Ultratorque crank.


No BB-30 for you then which is OK with me. BB-30 isn't for everybody. I just ordered a new Roubaix SL3 Pro frameset in fact as reflected from the other thread and according to Specialized website is a 'threaded' BB. It is speculated that Specialized changed their Pro frame from BB-30 to threaded. Reading between the lines, this is because many prefer a threaded BB. I ride Campy UT. I am also enlightened enough to know that a choice in crank should never trump what frame one prefers. This includes BB-30 versus a BSA threaded BB. The frameset itself is more important than the BB because there are pro's and con's to any BB and crank design. Campy cranks don't belong on a BB-30 framset period. Many try to make them work...some with success and others struggle with them. If the alloy campy cups are properly loctited to the alloy BB-30 integrated press cups, then there is no reason why they can't work well provided there is adequate axial preload. Again, I ride Campy. That doesn't mean I need a Campy crank. There are many great cranks on the market that will work just fine with Campy 10 or 11s. A hypothetical is...lets say my Roubaix Pro comes in with BB-30. First, I won't reject the frame, I will embrace the fact it is BB-30 which can be set up lighter and imperceptibly stiffer. Second, I will not even attempt to install the Campy crank. The two designs don't belong together nor were they intended to be. Campy alloy cups were an ill attempt by Campy to comport with this new standard that came out of the sky so Campy could sell more cranks and not be left in the cold. Campy doesn't make framesets. It is not a good marriage even though if set up properly will work fine. Instead, I would purchase one of many great BB-30 cranks. 1 of 10 out there will work perfectly and be lighter and stiffer than Campy UT. I will run my Campy 10s groupset which I love.
So, steadfast adherence to a particular crank or rejection of a new technology like BB-30 which has been out for a few years now and virtually all new bike companies embrace will leave you limited in what you ride. Your choice.


----------



## roadworthy

PJ352 said:


> If I had an OSBB frame and wanted to use a standard SRAM/ Shimano crankset, I'd opt for the adapters below. They're available for both Shimano and SRAM, use the OE (6806) BB30 bearings and are slip fit (as in, easily removable).
> 
> Wheels Manufacturing - BB30 Shims for SRAM
> 
> Wheels Manufacturing - BB 30 Shims


Yup..the way to go. Works perfectly. The threaded Sram sleeve is another option and in particular if one is wedded to a Campy UT, the way to go. Cups pressed into a BB-30 aren't as effective because the bearings are outboard of the shell and apply a lateral torque to the cups due to pedal/crank arm forces to try and peel away from the BB. The reason why PF-30 pressed in cups work better than the Campy cups pressed into a BB30 is because the bearings themselves are within the outboard press of the cups and hence they don't not apply this lateral torque. A threaded BSA sleeve negates this if one must run Campy with BB30.
As discussed in the other thread however, if I have a Campy groupset..and that is what I prefer...and a BB-30 frameset...the Campy crank goes on ebay as good as it is...and I buy one of many great BB30 cranks out there and enjoy the weight reduction.


----------



## roadworthy

tommyturbo said:


> PS If that SRAM adapter is made out of alloy, the way I understand if from *Specialized is that it will void the warranty on your carbon shelled OSBB frame*. Threaded BB's are not offered on S-Works Tarmac SL4 models.


Very well might. And the reason is..Specialized never spec'ed their OSBB framesets to be inserted with an alloy sleeve. Further...it depends which loctite you use for inserting alloy cup carbon shell BB's. Loctite 609 is meant to be a permanent solution. The ticket if somebody wants to do this is...use Loctite 640 which has reduced shear strength for easy removal. Specialized position is based upon concern of separating the inserted alloy cup from the carbon fiber shell upon removal.

I am not recommending this at all, but if somebody has a Specialized BB30 frameset and wants to run the Sram BSA adapter...he can loctite 640 the Sram adapter into the frame..no different than loctite 640 bearings into the BB per Specialized specification. If an issue comes up with the frameset, the Sram BSA insert can be easily pressed out of the frame prior to warranty submission. I am not endorsing this but an option of a owner than knows what he is doing. There is no way Specialized or anybody else could discern if the sleeve or BB30 bearings were loctited to a Specialized OSBB frame.
I will restate, I do not endorse this strategy but it could be done.

I will also say as I have stated before that the only reason why many buck the trend and using a BSA external bearing crank...like Campy UT in a BB30 frame is because of their personal bias. It is against design intent and the benefit of BB30 of weight savings in particular...if you don't put down the watts to feel the stiffness increase... goes unrealized.


----------



## ukbloke

roadworthy said:


> No BB-30 for you then which is OK with me. BB-30 isn't for everybody. I just ordered a new Roubaix SL3 Pro frameset in fact as reflected from the other thread and according to Specialized website is a 'threaded' BB. It is speculated that Specialized changed their Pro frame from BB-30 to threaded. Reading between the lines, this is because many prefer a threaded BB.


I think that all the Roubaix Pro frame-sets to date have been threaded BB. For 2012 they could have based the Pro frame-set on either the OSBB frame from the Pro bike or the threaded BB frame from the Expert bike (both are 10r carbon). They chose the threaded BB, perhaps to broaden the appeal. However, when they roll out SL4 to the Roubaix line, which will be the 2013 model year based on previous trends, I predict that they will go all OSBB like they did this year with Tarmac. If there's a huge consumer backlash against OSBB then maybe they would change course, but as far as I can tell they are selling plenty of 2012 OSBB Tarmacs.


----------



## roadworthy

ukbloke said:


> I think that all the Roubaix Pro frame-sets to date have been threaded BB. For 2012 they could have based the Pro frame-set on either the OSBB frame from the Pro bike or the threaded BB frame from the Expert bike (both are 10r carbon). They chose the threaded BB, perhaps to broaden the appeal. However, when they roll out SL4 to the Roubaix line, which will be the 2013 model year based on previous trends, I predict that they will go all OSBB like they did this year with Tarmac. If there's a huge consumer backlash against OSBB then maybe they would change course, but as far as I can tell they are selling plenty of 2012 OSBB Tarmacs.


Good post and thanks for your comments. TBD is all I can say about OSBB versus threaded BB for the Roubaix Pro frameset. Specialized on their site clearly states threaded BB for the Roubaix SL3 Pro frameset and yet I saw the frame below on ebay which is a 2012 Roubaix in black with neon blue and it clearly has an OSBB. My only interpretation can be that Specialized made a batch of 2012 Roubaix Pro framesets with OSBB and put them out there and then decided to change the BB to threaded for their next production run...as the frameset is on backorder currently. If anybody knows the status of this, please post if you would.
2012 Roubaix SL3 Pro frameset with OSBB below in spite of Specialized showing the Pro with a threaded BB on their website. A mystery for the ages.


----------



## ukbloke

roadworthy said:


> 2012 Roubaix SL3 Pro frameset with OSBB below in spite of Specialized showing the Pro with a threaded BB on their website. A mystery for the ages.


The most straightforward explanation for that ebay listing is that someone bought a 2012 Pro Roubaix *bike*, and is selling just the frame and fork. Maybe they are keeping the components for some other build. I notice that the seat-post is missing from that picture. Also, the steerer has been cut so it has been previously built into a bike.


----------



## ukbloke

Check out this one. It looks very similar, even down to the carpet and the piece of furniture! But this one is S-Works and 11r carbon, but has the black/blue paint of the Pro I think someone is clearing out pre-production samples or Specialized demo/test bikes. Both examples could have come from the same moulds as production bikes, or could have been a pre-mass production test mould. Anyway, I'm pretty confident that the production run for the Roubaix Pro frame-set is threaded.


----------



## tommyturbo

The Specialized website (USA at least) shows all of the complete Roubaix Pros having OSBB and the frame only as threaded. I would have been tickled pink if they would have done that with the S-Works Tarmac SL4. Better yet, offer the choice of OSBB or threaded frames, and then everybody would be happy. 

It looks like the S-Works Roubaix is OSBB only for compete bike or frame.


----------



## ukbloke

tommyturbo said:


> The Specialized website (USA at least) shows all of the complete Roubaix Pros having OSBB and the frame only as threaded.


That is correct. But also note that the Pro frame-set is identical to the frame of the Expert bike. No extra moulds or tooling required. It is also the same as the previous year.



> I would have been tickled pink if they would have done that with the S-Works Tarmac SL4. Better yet, offer the choice of OSBB or threaded frames, and then everybody would be happy.


SL4 is a new mould this year. They decided to go OSBB only. Reading between the lines, the rationale for this is they believe it is "better", it makes good marketing and is one more reason to upgrade. They have to have a new thing every year to encourage people to toss perfectly good bikes/frames and buy new ones. Oh, and it sells a lot of Specialized cranks too, rather than group set cranks.

In previous years they offered both OSBB and threaded BBs, eg. for the S-Works frame-sets and I think on different bikes too. They have made a big move away from threaded BBs this year. My guess is that this will continue with Roubaix when they go to SL4. They also used to offer Tarmac team and regular geometries too, but now they have the regular geometry only with a slighly reduced head tube compared to before. The trend is to reduce the number of different frame SKUs to reduce costs and simplify inventory management issues. Compact frame sizing has also helped with this aim by reducing the number of different sizes. On the other hand they now have Tarmac, Roubaix, Venge, Amira and Ruby frames so that's still a lot of different high-end carbon moulds in total! (And that's just for road.)


----------



## PJ352

ukbloke said:


> SL4 is a new mould this year. They decided to go OSBB only. Reading between the lines, the rationale for this is they believe it is "better", it makes good marketing and is one more reason to upgrade. *They have to have a new thing every year to encourage people to toss perfectly good bikes/frames and buy new ones.* Oh, and it sells a lot of Specialized cranks too, rather than group set cranks.


Pretty much sums it up, IMHO. There's a reason for the "Innovate or die" mantra. 

I'm glad I went for the '11 Tarmac Pro when I did. Threaded BB, no internal cable routing - even my derailleur cables are exposed!  Since I tend to keep my bikes a long time this'll give me some time to see if Spec gets this OSBB thing sorted out. If not, there's always steel.

But I'm not a complete retro grouch. I think a refined, wireless Di2 (or similar) would have real potential. :thumbsup:


----------



## roadworthy

I can't recall an innovation like BB30 that has created such a stir. Not even threadless integrated headsets, internal cable routing...maybe carbon fiber initially but that has subsided for most that have experienced the benefits. BB-30 has been out for quite a while now and virtually all bike companies have embraced it and released it in one form or another. I guess many don't remember how crappy square taper cranks were. PJ...you and I part company on Di2 on a roadbike. But maybe I will come around on this as well. I do have a nice wireless computer on my bikes and also have run an LED light on occassion. Wireless Di2 would definitely be cool if not subject to EMI issues or cross talk...will see if it happens.

As to BB technology...Specialized continues to evolve as well. I saw nobody differentiate OSBB. There is BB-30 and PF-30. The latter is what Specialized S-work frames are. See a PF-30 BB below.
The reasons for yet another evolution toward PF-30 are manifold. Most of you guys know that cost is a big driver of change, over and above weight and stiffness. Of course marketing can spin the weight and stiffness benefit but cost is a big driver at the end of the day. This isn't a bad thing btw if there is technical improvement and some of the cost savings can be passed along to the customer which competitition will drive. This applies to BB-30 certainly. If it is perceived that threads aren't really needed with such low axial crank loads...which technically is correct...but mandates that inserted alloy cups be machined very precisely for co-axiality and diametral tolerance...which they are...then the difference with a threaded BB is simply the inserted alloy cups that are machined for alignment aren't threaded. Saved step and lower cost. 

Enter PF-30...direction taken by Specialized for S-works which will likely trickle down to lower models over time. A single large thru bore that can be molded right into the carbon shell. Very low cost and easier to manage.
No bonding/inserting of alloy cup into carbon fiber and no finish machining to ensure alloy cups are co-axial. Maybe a finish machine cut in the virgin carbon shell but likely not...haven't seen the process sheet.

Benefits of PF-30?

- Quieter...no metal on metal bearing to alloy cup interface that transmits sounds complained about so often if BB-30 improperly set up. Composite, i.e. plastic cups inherently damp sound more effectively.

- Bore alignment...cups can be molded precisely and thru bore is simple to produce as a straight cylindrical hole...bearings will line up and crank spindle will rotate with low drag.

- Inserted alloy cups in BB-30 will wear with bearing replacement repetititions...not a big deal but plastic PF-30 cups are replacable and cups won't need to be replaced very often or rarely but preserves frame BB interface.

What will be interesting is to see if the entire industry morphs toward PF-30. My prediction is that it will. Partly because the noise issue maybe better compared to BB30 but again...the silent driver of change...cost as well.

PS: PJ...you maybe happy you bought your frameset when you did but if I were a betting man which I am on ocassion, I will wager that the SL4 will be a better frame than the SL3 in any variety. The BB is only one aspect of a frame and most embrace hidden cable routing including me. What is reported...is team pro's have weighed in with their assessment of the SL3 Tarmac which is a great racing frame and have requested a bit more vertical compliance without compromise to torsional rigidity. The SL4 is said to be more vertical compliant for improved ride compared to the SL3 Tarmac with equivalent if not better energy transfer. In summary the technical bar continues to be raised and my money is that Specialized will continue to innovate and offer the best bikes in the world.

A reference below defining the constant innovation of BB's and mfr's means to differentiate their bikes from others: 

BB30, or 30 X 68 and 30 X 73mm bottom brackets, come in either 68mm or 73mm shell widths for road or mountain bikes. The spindle diameter is 30mm, and the 41mm-diameter bearings press straight into the BB shell and are held in place by snaprings. In addition to Cannondale (who named the system) and Specialized (which doesn’t call its system BB30), FSA and SRAM (TruVativ) make BB30 cranksets; Shimano does not, and Campagnolo makes press-in adaptor cups to fit its Ultra-Torque (and Fulcrum Racing-Torq) cranks to a BB30 shell.

Scott and Shimano came up with BB83/BB86, often called the “Shimano system,” but not by Shimano. It accepts a standard 24 X 90mm road or 24 X 95mm MTB crank spindle. The shell is 86.5mm wide with a 41mm ID. The bearing has a 37mm OD and is pressed into a nylon insert with a 41mm OD that presses into the frame . Each insert’s shoulder is 1.75mm wide, creating the 90mm width and hence the BB90 name. Shimano, FSA and SRAM offer BBs to fit this shell; Campagnolo makes press-in adaptor cups to fit its Ultra-Torque (and Fulcrum Racing-Torq) cranks to BB83/BB86 shells.

BB92 is the MTB version of the BB83/BB86 with a 91.5mm wide shell for MTB triple cranks. Again, the 3.5mm of the two shoulders add width to 95mm.
BB90 is Trek’s Campy- (and Shimano-, SRAM-, FSA-) compatible Madone system. The BB shell is 90mm wide by 37mm ID. The 37mm OD bearings (the same bearings as inside an external-bearing cup) insert directly into the carbon frame and accept integrated-spindle cranks.

BB95 is the MTB version of BB90 with a 95mm wide shell on the new Trek Top Fuel and Fuel EX carbon.

Wilier’s new system has a 94mm wide BB into which a Campagnolo Ultra-Torque (or Fulcrum Racing-Torq) crankset fits directly without cups or retaining clip


----------



## PJ352

roadworthy said:


> PJ...you and I part company on Di2 on a roadbike.


... and BB30 and internal cable routing.

To clarify, I find wireless Di2 promising, but (trust me on this) if/ when it's offered, it'll be 'awhile' before I seriously contemplate purchasing it. The memory of a RD cable breaking miles from home is still fresh in my mind, but once it fades, I may stick with the current technology and just replace my cables more often. 



roadworthy said:


> PS: PJ...you maybe happy you bought your frameset when you did but if I were a betting man which I am on ocassion, I will wager that the SL4 will be a better frame than the SL3 in any variety. The BB is only one aspect of a frame and most embrace hidden cable routing including me. What is reported...is team pro's have weighed in with their assessment of the SL3 Tarmac which is a great racing frame and have requested a bit more vertical compliance without compromise to torsional rigidity. The SL4 is said to be more vertical compliant for improved ride compared to the SL3 Tarmac with equivalent if not better energy transfer. In summary the technical bar continues to be raised and my money is that Specialized will continue to innovate and offer the best bikes in the world.


Not to be snarky, but this is just more market speak. My opinion (which is key to my previous statement re: my Pro) is that BB30 IS the lesser system and internal cable routing is purely aesthetic. That being the case, I'm losing nothing over the SL4, and considering I run 23c's at ~90 PSI rear and ~80 PSI front, I already have vertical compliance - and this 'motor' doesn't require additional lateral stiffness. Even my '08 Comp is more than adequate in that area.

FWIW, I'll agree that PF-30 may well emerge as the true OSBB 'standard'. Beyond that, considering all of the posts here, it's apparent to me that there are two polarized 'camps' re: the BB30 issue. Ultimately, it's an individuals money, and each has to decide for themselves how and where to spend it.


----------



## ukbloke

roadworthy said:


> I can't recall an innovation like BB30 that has created such a stir.


I don't know if a few threads and some opinionated posters on RBR constitutes an industry stir! I think most of the concern here has been driven from specific problems occurring on people's bikes using newfangled BBs, rather than an outright rejection of new BB technology.



> Of course marketing can spin the weight and stiffness benefit but cost is a big driver at the end of the day. This isn't a bad thing btw if there is technical improvement and some of the cost savings can be passed along to the customer which competitition will drive.


There's no sign of this cost reduction being passed onto the consumer in 2012. Check out the price increase on the Tarmac Pro frame-set from $1900 in 2009 (threaded, SL Pro, 10r), to $2200 in 2011 (threaded, SL3, 10r), and $3000 in 2012 (OSBB, SL4, 10r).



> What will be interesting is to see if the entire industry morphs toward PF-30. My prediction is that it will.


No sign of that consolidation so far - you listed BB30, PF30, BB83/BB86, BB92, BB90, BB95 and BB94 (though some of those are MTB standards). There's also BBright recently introduced by Cervelo, and probably more. It seems like every manufacturer wants their own BB standard. There is bound to be some consolidation of these standards in the future and there will be winners and losers. I don't want to end up with a frame on the wrong side of that. At least for threaded there were only 2 major standards (English and Italian), and that came down to just English on the vast majority of bikes.

From an inter-operability point of view choosing a new BB shell and BB standard is one thing, but changing the crank standard is another. Shimano hasn't changed its crank standard yet, I think when it does we will have a better idea of what the industry will morph towards in the BB area.


----------



## tommyturbo

Whew! As I mentioned, I am not an engineer but it seems you need to be just to sort out all of the various iterations of new BB design. I have no interest in making the move until I am forced to and/or there is one PROVEN standard. 

From my posts, you can tell that I am with PJ on internal cables as well. There has been a lot of complaints about shifting degradation, and I am talking at the dealer level, not just on the forums. I'd like to wait on this as well to make sure it's sorted out. Actually, I must be one of the few who doesn't even like the way internal cables look.

FWIW, I am curious as to what kind of FTP or max sprinting wattage you think is necessary to "feel" the additional stiffness that a BB30, etc system provides?


----------



## PJ352

tommyturbo said:


> FWIW, I am curious as to what kind of FTP or max sprinting wattage you think is necessary to "feel" the additional stiffness that a BB30, etc system provides?


...and that assumes that BB30's (and similar) actually _do_ provide additional stiffness. To date, I've seen no reliable documentation that backs that claim.


----------



## tommyturbo

That's what I was hinting at. I remember several articles about BB30 vs. threaded, and don't recall any talk of a noticeable increase in stiffness. 

When I asked someone at Specialized if a rider could feel the new S-Works Tarmac SL4's increase in "torsional rigidity" the answer was, "Well, a machine can measure it, but I doubt anyone could feel it."

Machines can tell you how much stiffer a 30mm alloy spindle is than a 24mm steel spindle. I guess we would have to have a "Coke vs. Pepsi" blind test to see if people can feel it

People like Tom Boonen seemed to be doing pretty well with threaded BB's (Specialized bikes with Campy Ultratorque) when competing against riders with BB30. 

It's all about marketing, especially in the land of diminishing returns.


----------



## roadworthy

tommyturbo said:


> That's what I was hinting at. I remember several articles about BB30 vs. threaded, and don't recall any talk of a noticeable increase in stiffness.
> 
> When I asked someone at Specialized if a rider could feel the new S-Works Tarmac SL4's increase in "torsional rigidity" the answer was, "Well, a machine can measure it, but I doubt anyone could feel it."
> 
> Machines can tell you how much stiffer a 30mm alloy spindle is than a 24mm steel spindle. I guess we would have to have a "Coke vs. Pepsi" blind test to see if people can feel it
> 
> People like Tom Boonen seemed to be doing pretty well with threaded BB's (Specialized bikes with Campy Ultratorque) when competing against riders with BB30.
> 
> It's all about marketing, especially in the land of diminishing returns.


No...it isn't all about marketing even though you think so. Can you or I feel the difference?
Maybe not. Can a larger diameter 30mm spindle be made stiffer and lighter? Yes...physics/section modulus/moment of inertia/bending stress.
Heck, you could ride square taper and not feel a difference. Most of us did just fine with square taper...1 inch steerers, steel frames, 2500 gram wheel sets...a long list. Is the level of improvement of BB30 vast? No, but its real even if you can't feel it.


----------



## tommyturbo

Roadworthy,

I couldn't agree with you more. My point is that we are seeing more creative "marketing" now that bicycles are so good that it's hard to improve them. In other words, I think some of the improvements are a little overstated.


----------



## tommyturbo

On my ride today I did some thinking about this discussion and the word "improvement." It seems that what it comes down to is about compromise and that is an individual thing. Everybody has to make their own decisions as to what is most important. 

I used a lightweight carbon handlebar for a long time, up until I saw one crack into two pieces after a walking speed parking lot "crash." Even though I had experienced no problems with my bar, I've used alloy bars every since.

I just returned a super lightweight seatpost that was supposed to be carbon rail friendly. With a recommended clamp torque of 12 N-m I was having a hard time believing that claim. I just didn't want to take a chance of a failure.

For my purposes, I don't want to risk experiencing some of the problems I have read about concerning OSBB reliability/durability. Even if there is just a tiny chance that I will have to have BB bearings replaced every time I get a new chain at 2000 miles; well, that's a deal breaker for me. I go through five chains a year, and I don't do much of the work on my bikes, so this would be a major PITA. If I rode 2000 miles a year, potential BB bearing issues wouldn't be that big of a deal to me.

As I rode along, I did a mental review of every single part on my bike, including the frame. S-Works Tarmac frames are light, but are by no means the lightest available; however, I don't see myself riding a lighter frame. Not to denigrate other manufacturers, but I just happen to really trust Specialized when it comes to engineering frames. I'm confident as I ride down the road (or trail on my Epic).

Sorry for the rambling!


----------



## roadworthy

tommyturbo said:


> On my ride today I did some thinking about this discussion and the word "improvement." It seems that what it comes down to is about compromise and that is an individual thing. Everybody has to make their own decisions as to what is most important.
> 
> I used a lightweight carbon handlebar for a long time, up until I saw one crack into two pieces after a walking speed parking lot "crash." Even though I had experienced no problems with my bar, I've used alloy bars every since.
> 
> I just returned a super lightweight seatpost that was supposed to be carbon rail friendly. With a recommended clamp torque of 12 N-m I was having a hard time believing that claim. I just didn't want to take a chance of a failure.
> 
> For my purposes, I don't want to risk experiencing some of the problems I have read about concerning OSBB reliability/durability. Even if there is just a tiny chance that I will have to have BB bearings replaced every time I get a new chain at 2000 miles; well, that's a deal breaker for me. I go through five chains a year, and I don't do much of the work on my bikes, so this would be a major PITA. If I rode 2000 miles a year, potential BB bearing issues wouldn't be that big of a deal to me.
> 
> As I rode along, I did a mental review of every single part on my bike, including the frame. S-Works Tarmac frames are light, but are by no means the lightest available; however, I don't see myself riding a lighter frame. Not to denigrate other manufacturers, but I just happen to really trust Specialized when it comes to engineering frames. I'm confident as I ride down the road (or trail on my Epic).
> 
> Sorry for the rambling!


Tom,
Your comments are fraught with countradictions. I really don't think you can unlearn your bias as no doubt it is life long....perhaps learned at your daddy's knee. Nor will I share my design background publicly. You mention you don't work on your bikes much. I believe this maybe at the core. 
Here are few items:
- Carbon handlebars are as strong as carbon fiber frames. If they weren't mfr's would get constantly sued and go out of business. Myself and many of my racing buddies ride carbon fiber handlebars. No failures. If you crash carbon fiber be it frame or handlebar, thoroughly inspect it. If you are conservative by nature, replace it.

- There is no real good reason to ride a carbon railed saddle. A hollow Ti rail saddle is about as light and as strong but Ti has better abrasion resistance. Both Toupe and Romin are offered with Ti rails and are outstanding saddles.

- BB30 bearings don't wear out faster than any other BB bearings. Myth. Poor BB30 bearings are crap right out of the box. Good BB30 bearings are better and last longer than poor external bearing crank bearings. ABEC-1= crap ABEC-5-7 = good. ABEC-5's have better metallurgy and tolerances, are quieter with lower rolling resistance and last a long time. A BB30 crank can go 15,000 miles with good bearings and last just as long as your Campy UT...with bearings much easier to replace and cheaper for the same level of quality.

- Chains: general rule of thumb with average maintenance =2500 miles...2000 miles under normal riding conditions is a bit premature.

- Lastly, your comment about uber light frames. It doesn't matter how light the frame is. For a top company like Specialized...or Trek...or Giant etc, they subject their frames to rigorous robotic testing well above the test bogie and typically to fatigue failure at much higher loads than will be experienced on the road with worse case rider weight. This is based upon both DVPR and DFMEA's which are internal documents which establish correlation between labatory and road testing which also includes RLDA...road load data acquistion which is recording of strain gauge data over worse case load conditions...very heavy riders jumping the bike over large drop offs etc. This level of rigor is required in the event of a field failure and or lawsuit aka liability. Specialized will not put a frame out there that is dangerous, independent of weight. It is too high a risk for the company. Nothing sinks a company faster than lawsuits and recalls.

Finally, you say you trust Specialized to produce safe frames but you don't trust them with their specification of BB-30. This is silly. BB30 is outstanding and why it exists in one form or another on virtually all high end bikes sold, from Cervelo to Trek to Giant to Bianchi...virtually every top manufacturer. Ten of thousands of BB30 bikes are produced each year and for good reason, it is an outstanding design in spite of some grumbling by those uniformed on the internet.


----------



## wetpaint

tommyturbo said:


> For my purposes, I don't want to risk experiencing some of the problems I have read about concerning OSBB reliability/durability. Even if there is just a tiny chance that I will have to have BB bearings replaced every time I get a new chain at 2000 miles; well, that's a deal breaker for me. I go through five chains a year, and I don't do much of the work on my bikes, so this would be a major PITA. If I rode 2000 miles a year, potential BB bearing issues wouldn't be that big of a deal to me.


For anyone that gets super low mileage out of BB bearings, it is likely an improper install or defective bearings to begin with. One of my bikes has almost 22,000 miles on BB30 bearings and they are still as smooth as the day I got the bike. Another one has over 10,000 on the BB30 bearings and its the same thing, smooth.


The thing with the internet is that the very small percentage of people with problems will post on here not the thousands that have zero issues with BB30.


----------



## EMB145 Driver

15,000 miles in 20months on my Tarmac BB30 bearings and they are perfect and dead silent. It takes 5 minutes to change the bearings when needed, as long as you have the right tools.


----------



## tommyturbo

Roadworthy,

WTF are you talking about? "A bias learned on my daddy's knee?" I repeat; WTF are you talking about? I assume by "countradictions" you mean contradictions? What do you mean by that? You never say. Who cares about your "design background?" Aren't we all talking about riding bikes?

Just to refresh your memory, I didn't start this discussion. It was started by somebody with OSBB "clicking," bearing, and crankshaft play issues. For some reason, you have turned your posts into some kind of personal thing you must be bothered about. Here are some quick responses, and then I'm done addressing your comments. If this thread is going to continue, can we please get back to the original theme?

I don't do much more than routine maintenance on my bikes because I have four of them and I would rather ride them than work on them. Just how does that relate to anything?

Carbon handlebars: Who said anything about them being bad? I'm not using them anymore because of personal preference, and nothing more. It seems a lot of the big name pros feel the same way. Strength is one thing; not being able to see a crack under bar tape is another. I've read that some pros are more comfortable getting back on a bike with an alloy bar after a 40mph crash. Alloy can fail, just not normally catastrophically like carbon can. Make sure to look under the tape the next time you crash in a Crit, or make the mistake of over-tightening a shifter clamp.

"There is no real good reason to ride a carbon railed saddle." Uh, do you have any other OPINIONS? FWIW, my new Toupe Pro with carbon rails is 50g lighter on my scale than the average of my four Ti railed Toupe saddles. "Ti has better abrasion resistance." To what? Sandpaper? 

Chains: neither I nor anybody else needs a maintenance interval recommendation from you. A properly maintained Campagnolo chain will not normally reach 1% elongation for 4000-5000 miles. That doesn't mean I can't change my chain out at 2000 miles and .50% because I want my bikes to run perfectly and my chainrings and cassettes to last a long time. Chains weaken laterally over time and that makes for less crisp shifting, and I want perfect shifting. That's just my preference.

Lightweight frames: forget all your mumbo-jumbo. Frames do crack and fail, and common sense would indicate that the lighter the frame, the more likely is the possibility for an issue. If you have access to any sources in the industry, check around about frame failures. If not, do a search and you will find some interesting posts. My preference (again, I am only talking about me) is to ride a lightweight frame manufactured by a very reputable company that doesn't base their entire marketing (and therefore, likely their design process) strategy on having the lightest frame offering at any cost.

I DO trust that Specialized makes great frames. I'm not sure of the point you were trying to make, but I never said that I don't "trust" them with their OSBB. My point is that BB30, etc, has not been a concept that has been executed as best as it could have been. When a common standard emerges with a reputation for very reliable and trouble-free operation, I'll have no problem with it. I just prefer to wait until that time, and judging by all of the comments in this discussion alone (including some of yours), we seem to be a ways from that occurring. Roadworthy, you said yourself that you prefer threaded BB's and just ordered a 2012 Specialized with one. Why can't others prefer threaded BB's as well?

I just read through this entire (long) thread. I still feel that there is too much potential for hassles with OSBB. Others feel differently. As I said before, everybody has to make their own decisions as to what is most important to them. I'm going for a ride.


----------



## roadworthy

Tom,
Lets distill it down shall we? Why on earth is a non technical person like yourself participating in a thread about OSBB? Is it because you feel you represent the average bike owner and therefore if you don't like it, in spite of no foundation, therefore it isn't as good as a BSA BB? To get in the mud with you. You don't deserve a vote really. 
I mean WTF Tom?..lol. I have no doubt you can pedal your bike without falling over but honestly, you shouldn't be commenting on technical merit or lack thereof.


----------



## RkFast

Guys...come on.


----------



## tommyturbo

Hey idiot,

You are the one with the opinions, not me, and you are the one throwing the mud. And as for "non technical," I'm not sure what you mean about that. Send me a PM if you like and I will tell you what my qualifications are for joining a post about bicycles.

I will remind you again that this discussion was not started by me, and that the discussion was not started about whether BB30 is better than threaded BB's.

IMHO, you come across as an opinionated moron, and I am sick of you preaching to us all.

There-it's distilled. Over and out.


----------



## roadworthy

RkFast said:


> Guys...come on.


Sorry Rk. Didn't mean to sully your thread. I get mildly annoyed by guys who don't have a clue about bike design who wager their opinion on the internet.
You came here looking for the root cause of your issue and you were told what your issue was and have therefore resolved it. If a OSBB crank is properly set up, it works wonderfully well as you have no doubt discovered.
Cheers.


----------



## tommyturbo

I believe RK is getting a warranty replacement frame. Hopefully that does solve his OSBB problem.


----------



## roadworthy

Name calling is in violation of forum rules Tom. Please try to refrain if you would. I personally don't care what you write but try to maintain some decorum.

This is why it is ridiculous to engage with a guy like you. I am not opinionated other than defending Specialized for the designs they have released. I have no issue with carbon handlebars or CF saddle rails, light frames or OSBB's...'you do' based upon ignorance and wive's tales..lol. 
Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## tommyturbo

I rest my case. I think anyone who would go back and read your posts (and mine) would understand exactly what I am talking about. Not that anyone would or should care.

I am sorry about the name calling. It was provoked by your "daddy's knee" comment, as well as the other insults you directed my way.

I'll just close by saying that one thing I am not is ignorant when it comes to bicycles...and riding them.


----------



## roadworthy

tommyturbo said:


> I rest my case. I think anyone who would go back and read your posts (and mine) would understand exactly what I am talking about. Not that anyone would or should care.
> 
> I am sorry about the name calling. It was provoked by your "daddy's knee" comment, as well as the other insults you directed my way.
> 
> I'll just close by saying that one thing I am not is ignorant when it comes to bicycles...and riding them.


The daddy's knee wasn't meant to be an insult. We learn a lot from our fathers both good and bad was the point. Hard to know where you come by your foibles about carbon handlebars and saddle rails...light frames etc. Of course there is a risk when riding carbon fiber. Ask Hincappie. That still doesn't stop many from riding with a carbon steerer tube although a guy like you would likely extrapolate that they are bad due to a reported failure even though you likely put about 1/2 the torque into the handlebar that big George does. This thread was about OSBB clicking. You started your diatribe about all kinds of ill founded bike related issues that don't even obtusely relate. You don't even work on your own bikes. Anybody with an ounce of know how does. It takes less time to spin a wrench on the bike than it does to take it to a shop and wait for it. Further it is more expensive. You have no vote on OSBB. No you can't spin other ill founded heresay with any veracity. It doesn't wash.


----------



## tommyturbo

Not an insult???

You just don't know when to quit do you? I've given you every opportunity to just stop and save some face, and you just won't take it. Let me be perfectly clear: I have absolutely no "foibles" about carbon handlebars, saddle rails, or anything else. You must not have very good reading comprehension, because you sure don't get what I or many others in this discussion have been talking about.

Any you don't even know what you are talking about when you are talking about things other people have written!

If you are going to spout off, at least get it straight. The Hincapie incident you are referring to occurred at Paris-Roubaix. His ALLOY steer tube broke when he was not" putting the torque" into his handlebar. He was riding on the tops in a straight line and the part failed. End of story.

I choose not to work on my bikes, and once again, what does that have to do with anything at all? No wait; don't answer, please just stop.


----------



## roadworthy

Its really hard to engage you as mentioned without insulting you. 
'Your' words say it all:
_On my ride today I did some thinking about this discussion and the word "improvement." It seems that what it comes down to is about compromise and that is an individual thing. Everybody has to make their own decisions as to what is most important. 

I used a lightweight carbon handlebar for a long time, up until I saw one crack into two pieces after a walking speed parking lot "crash." Even though I had experienced no problems with my bar, I've used alloy bars every since.

I just returned a super lightweight seatpost that was supposed to be carbon rail friendly. With a recommended clamp torque of 12 N-m I was having a hard time believing that claim. I just didn't want to take a chance of a failure.

For my purposes, I don't want to risk experiencing some of the problems I have read about concerning OSBB reliability/durability. Even if there is just a tiny chance that I will have to have BB bearings replaced every time I get a new chain at 2000 miles; well, that's a deal breaker for me. I go through five chains a year, and I don't do much of the work on my bikes, so this would be a major PITA. If I rode 2000 miles a year, potential BB bearing issues wouldn't be that big of a deal to me.

As I rode along, I did a *mental review *of every single part on my bike, including the frame. S-Works Tarmac frames are light, but are by no means the lightest available; however, I don't see myself riding a lighter frame. Not to denigrate other manufacturers, but I just happen to really trust Specialized when it comes to engineering frames. I'm confident as I ride down the road (or trail on my Epic).

Sorry for the rambling! _

Ok...let me respond more in your terms. You use the term rambling. I tried to explain to you why you are misguided technically. Of course it went over your head. You can't even set up a derailleur. What you write is complete rubbish is the point. Further, it has nothing to do with the OP or OSBB clicking...another subject you know nothing about. Do you like cycling? No doubt you do. Do you have anything to add to a technical thread? Nothing. In fact you detract with your disinformation.
Do us all a favor and stay out of technical threads. Your 'mental review' is pure comedy. You don't understand the concept of section modulus, which is the foundation of strength of materials, any more than your 7th grade algebra class you struggled with..


----------



## tommyturbo

I apologize to any forum followers who might still be reading this, and I promise to ignore offensive posts in the future and keep my comments to myself. This is my last response.

Roadworthy: Who says I can't set up a derailleur? I used to build my bikes from the frame up. How am I misguided technically? Because I don't care about all of the stuff you have preached about? All my "words say" is that every rider makes their own choices, something you seem to want to prevent. I've been careful to be clear that I was only expressing my opinions, which I believe is what most posters do on forums like this.

I just went back and re-read my posts in this discussion, as well as your posts, which would be easier if you used paragraphs occasionally. I stand by what I have said previously. You come across as a know it all. How do you know that "Most bike shops don't take the time or have the skill to set up a crank properly." I'm not the only one you have insulted. Saying other posters have "flawed logic" as you tell them that they are wrong is offensive. Over and over, you express your opinions as if they are gospel and must be accepted by all.

You write, "Many are just like the OP...they don't have technical training and are being led by bike shops who are equally clueless." How do you know what training RkFast has or what his bike shop is like? Are you omniscient? Rk's response to this comment likely refers to you, "And I'm happy to share my learnings with others, as long as they are correct!!!!"

In response to an opinion expressed by me, you wrote, "BB30 issues are only real for those that don't understand them. There is no issue for an enlightened owner or tech." Sorry, but that is out of line, and implies that all who have posted with issues are incompetent.

Other posters are also clear that they are expressing opinions such as, " Ultimately, it's an individual's money, and each has to decide for themselves how and where to spend it." Why can't you just let others express their opinions without ripping them apart with a bunch of techno babble?

My next to last post before you went on the assault was, "Roadworthy, I couldn't agree with you more. My point is that we are seeing more creative "marketing" now that bicycles are so good that it's hard to improve them. In other words, I think some of the improvements are a little overstated." Notice the words "I think." In my last post before you ripped into me I said, "It seems that what it comes down to is about compromise and that is an individual thing. Everybody has to make their own decisions as to what is most important." I went on to describe some of the choices I have made without any expectation or implication that others would feel the same.

Your response was to insult me and lecture me while boasting of your vast knowledge. You didn't voice any opinions, you just told us all what we should do: when we have to replace a chain, not to use carbon railed saddles (even though carbon anything else is OK), care about DVPR and DFMEA's that according to you "are internal documents which establish correlation between labatory and road testing which also includes RLDA." You go on to tell me I'm silly and don't trust Specialized. ???

I regret that I engaged you this way after your comment of, " I really don't think you can unlearn your bias as no doubt it is life long....perhaps learned at your daddy's knee."That PO'd me, but I should have known better than to try and reason with a preacher like you.

Oh, and by the way, in a battle of wits you are unarmed.

Over and out.


----------



## ukbloke

OK, guys. Let's bring this to a close now. You've both had an opportunity for one final post. Please agree to disagree on this subject, and move on.

There's useful information in this thread and I don't want to get it locked. Thanks!


----------



## tommyturbo

Done.


----------



## roadworthy

ukbloke said:


> OK, guys. Let's bring this to a close now. You've both had an opportunity for one final post. Please agree to disagree on this subject, and move on.
> 
> There's useful information in this thread and I don't want to get it locked. Thanks!


Absolutely. I regret the acrimony and my apology to the forum and Tom for any remarks that lowered board decorum.
Kind Regards


----------



## RkFast

Anyone up for a drink? Yeeeesh.


----------



## Geiomed

RkFast said:


> [x post from Components/Wrenching]
> 
> Got a new S-Works Tarmac with about 1500 miles on it and my BB30/OSBB bottom bracket has an intermittent click (not creak) going on with it.
> 
> First, Ive done all the isolation work and confirmed 100% its the BB.
> 
> The click noise appears when applyingf pressure to the pedals, on smaller hills or when standing, but only for a few pedal revolutions and it then goes away. Sometimes Ill hear it on a specific climb, at a specific speed, climbing a specific way. Fifteen minutes later under the same exact conditions (my midweek AM rides include a few laps of a short loop in a park) the noise will not be there.
> 
> Sometimes it will click a bit when launching from the first few stoplights on a ride and then wont be heard from again for the rest of the ride.
> 
> Oh, and this is new....sometimes will will go click click click when just soft pedaling along for about three revolutions of the crank....and then go away.
> 
> When off the bike, I can grab the crank and rock it back and forth and it will go click click click. Ill then rotate the crank a few times backwards, try to rock the crank again, and there is no noise at all.
> 
> There is about 2-3 MM of play in the bb/crank assembly. From what Im told by my LBS, who checked with Spesh...this is normal.
> 
> Best guess I can come up with is that its a bearing thats bad with perhaps one or two of the balls in the bearing assembly out of whack or broken... so that it only causes the noise when the faulty balls (heh) are at a certain position in the bearing assembly. These are ceramic bearings that came with the bike. Im thinking if something was loose in the cranks or the delrin cups the bearings are seated in, the noise would be consistent. Ive had the BB broken down and regreased twice so far. That keeps everything silent for about 150 miles, then the condition comes back.
> 
> [seperate rant-like comment] I am LESS than impressed with the quality of this bike. The paint around the head tube has bubbled and flaked off on me, Ive had issues with the headtube not being milled straight requiring I put more spacers under the headset cap to compensate, and now Ive got a chronic issue with the BB. The ride, when everything is right, is sublime. But in a few short months Ive had one issue after the next with what is suppossed to be Spesh's "top of the line" bike. This is starting to look like its going to be my first and last Specialized bike.[/rant]
> 
> Thoughts/feelings/advice/insults?


I'm having EXACTLY the same problem with RkFast. I mean the OSBB clicking sound. Mostly if not exclusively on hard pedalling/stanidng. Greasing seems to dampen bit nover totally eliminate it. Have you managed to sort it out after all? It's driving me nuts. 
2 months old SL4 Sworks frame with SWorks crankset.
Lots of thanks. 
George


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> I'm having EXACTLY the same problem with RkFast. I mean the OSBB clicking sound. Mostly if not exclusively on hard pedalling/stanidng. Greasing seems to dampen bit nover totally eliminate it. Have you managed to sort it out after all? It's driving me nuts.
> 2 months old SL4 Sworks frame with SWorks crankset.
> Lots of thanks.
> George


Greasing the bearings of a Sworks narrow PF30 although important for maintenance, has nothing to do with quieting common creaking. Creaking is due to improper installation if the bearings are in good shape. If you aren't mechanical, take it to a good shop that understands Specialized specifications for installation. A properly set up carbon OSBB aka PF30 is dead quiet.
Specialized spec's a low shear epoxy for the Delrin cups to the carbon BB shell.


----------



## Geiomed

Sounds really useful. I'll get back to the LBS and suggest them to use some Loctite onto the BB cups....


----------



## goodboyr

Just to be clear, Specialized specs an epoxy as RW states. Plain loctite, or even loctite gap filler are both insufficient and not to specialized spec.


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Sounds really useful. I'll get back to the LBS and suggest them to use some Loctite onto the BB cups....


not Loctite...Epoxy...see below:


----------



## Geiomed

There are various epoxy glues brands, 3M, Loctite, Permatex, I assume any of these will do the job....


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> There are various epoxy glues brands, 3M, Loctite, Permatex, I assume any of these will do the job....


Just as with the multitude of different grades of Loctite available which are developed to specific applications and serviceability...same with what Specialized spec's for the epoxy they recommend based upon their testing. The stuff they suggest has a low shear strength by design. Reason is, there isn't a lot of shear stress on the Delrin bushings and you want to get it apart at some point. I would say when most people hear the word epoxy they think a permanent bonding but that isn't accurate in this case...or shouldn't be. A low shear strength epoxy used in conjunction with a relatively lubrice acytel like Delrin developed by Dupont equals a product that won't creak aka creep under cyclic loading but is easy to get apart with a dowel and tapping with hammer around the periphery once the bushings become worn over time. Btw, for those intesested, there are a lot of premature Delrin bushing failures throughout the industry because the bushings were not staying in place. Once they start to move/squirm they begin to distort and fail. By bonding to the very stiff carbon frame they become much stiffer and stronger in effect acting like a composite. Practice to knock out the Delrin bushings is in fact no different than knocking out Loctited BB30 bearings. So I would say many epoxies will work, but you have to be careful about strength if you want to get it apart easily.

A side note about the future of PF30...as it relates to Specialized narrow version they use on their S-works bikes. Apparently they have addressed carbon abrasion and potentially noted creak issues with their 2015 Sworks frames. Word is...haven't seen one yet...that Specialized has sleeved their S-works 46mm ID carbon hole with an alloy sleeve not unlike BB30 only I presume a uniform bore of 46mm ID. I presume the same press in Delrin bushings are used. Will be interested to learn if they spec an adhesive like Epoxy or Loctite for bushing attachment...will learn shortly when they publish their installation spec. Carbon has many great qualities which makes it such a great frame material but abrasion resistance isn't one of them and why they have gone to an insert molded alloy sleeve...and likely to control the tolerancing of bore size/alignment.


----------



## carbonLORD

My 2013 S-Work Venge and 2013 S-Works cranks have never had an issue. The cranks do not use bushings nor do they use a wave washer. They are simply two Ceramic Speed bearings pressed in, with one drive side race and a non drive side preload spacer. I have 5,000 miles and have only taken the cranks off twice to clean out any grime from foul weather riding and re-lube the bearings with ceramic grease (the blue stuff in a syringe). My thoughts are the older crank design pre-2013 is the weak link. You should not need to use any Loc-Tite or epoxy when running a 2013-current generation S-Works crank. You only need use these remedies when speccing a Shimano crank AFAIK. I have no play in my cranks. Anyone with these issues should remove the wave washer and order a preload washer to replace it.


----------



## roadworthy

carbonLORD said:


> My 2013 S-Work Venge and 2013 S-Works cranks have never had an issue. The cranks do not use bushings nor do they use a wave washer. They are simply two Ceramic Speed bearings pressed in, with one drive side race and a non drive side preload spacer. I have 5,000 miles and have only taken the cranks off twice to clean out any grime from foul weather riding and re-lube the bearings with ceramic grease (the blue stuff in a syringe). My thoughts are the older crank design pre-2013 is the weak link. You should not need to use any Loc-Tite or epoxy when running a 2013-current generation S-Works crank. You only need use these remedies when speccing a Shimano crank AFAIK. I have no play in my cranks. Anyone with these issues should remove the wave washer and order a preload washer to replace it.


No. Sorry to disagree but dead wrong. Type of crank be it DA or Specialized or any crank has nothing to do with it. Epoxy is relevant to all years of what Specialized coins carbon OSBB aka 61mm wide PF30 which they employ on Sworks bikes. Epoxy or Loctite is NOT spec'ed between the bearings...only Loctite for BB30 which Specialized also sells on their Expert and Pro level frames. Epoxy is spec'ed between the Delrin bushings and virgin carbon hole on Sworks bikes. The reason yours hasn't creaked is because your Delrin bushings aren't moving. Doesn't sound like you have even had your Delrin bushings out of either frame. Quite possible Specialized used an adhesive on your Delrin bushings at the factory which is how they shipped their complete bikes and Sworks framesets in 2014 to keep them in place.
Hope this makes sense.
PS: this is a bit advanced, but a good way to think of epoxy for carbon OSBB is...a bit belt and suspenders. Why the redundancy? Its an insurance policy again the left side of the bell curve of tolerance stack up. Parts vary and btw so do riders in terms of their weight and watt output. If you get a high side carbon BB 46mm ID shell hole size and low side Delrin bushings...or Delrin bushings with 10K miles on them with a powerful rider, they will start moving and making noise. Epoxy takes this out of the equation and lowers Specialized warranty in particular.


----------



## carbonLORD

Sorry but I'm not speaking on the Expert or Pro frames. I am talking about the difference in design between the pre and post 2013 S-Works cranks. And I do have experience installing both as well as the FC-9000 DuraAce cranks (which creak, due to the adapter cups and epoxy, as recommended by Specialized).

Wave washers are a bad idea, which is why they are no longer specced on S-Works cranks in favor of a 3 point system preload washer.

I have also removed the Ceramic Speed bearings on the 2014 S-Works Tarmac SL4 to replace them when re-installing a 2013 S-Works crank as my client was over the issues using his prior adapted. epoxied DuraAce FC-9000 crank which resulted in no more noise.

Could be that the difference in width on an OSBB system just works better with a Specialized made crank. I've never found adapters of any sort to be perfect.

Beyond the placement of the bearing race to the frame shell would constitute a warranty if in fact there were defects ion workmanship. That said, no one is removing the bonded sleeve of which, on my 2013 S-Works Venge appears to be a 3K carbon shell and not anything resembling Derlin but again, beneath the shell issues require warranty and go well beyond any services a LBS should perform.

In the end, I have found the best results are to A: use a Specialized OSBB crank with an OSBB frame and B: Stay away from adapters, epoxy or alternative fitments.


----------



## roadworthy

carbonLORD said:


> Sorry but I'm not speaking on the Expert or Pro frames. I am talking about the difference in design between the pre and post 2013 S-Works cranks. And I do have experience installing both as well as the FC-9000 DuraAce cranks (which creak, due to the adapter cups and epoxy, as recommended by Specialized).
> 
> Wave washers are a bad idea, which is why they are no longer specced on S-Works cranks in favor of a 3 point system preload washer.
> 
> I have also removed the Ceramic Speed bearings on the 2014 S-Works Tarmac SL4 to replace them when re-installing a 2013 S-Works crank as my client was over the issues using his prior adapted. epoxied DuraAce FC-9000 crank which resulted in no more noise.
> 
> Could be that the difference in width on an OSBB system just works better with a Specialized made crank. I've never found adapters of any sort to be perfect.
> 
> Beyond the placement of the bearing race to the frame shell would constitute a warranty if in fact there were defects ion workmanship. That said, no one is removing the bonded sleeve of which, on my 2013 S-Works Venge appears to be a 3K carbon shell and not anything resembling Derlin but again, beneath the shell issues require warranty and go well beyond any services a LBS should perform.
> 
> In the end, I have found the best results are to A: use a Specialized OSBB crank with an OSBB frame and B: Stay away from adapters, epoxy or alternative fitments.


Forgive me, but I believe you are flat wrong. In fact, I try to find a single thing you wrote that I agree with but can't find anything. I really don't want to debate it any further honestly because based upon what you wrote, I don't think we are on the same page. Your derision of wave washers or not getting adapted cranks to play nice with OSBB is as common as water in the ocean but has not a single thing to do with the hardware but rather the guy installing it. In fact, the whole throw BB/PF 30 under the bus conversation begs a much larger issue. If the average guy can't install them properly...and even the majority of bike shops, then how robust is the design?
Best not to have your Ferrari tuned by the local gas station mechanic. As a hobby, I fix a lot of the high end bikes in my riding club and work on pretty much all makes and variations of BB30 and PF30 as well as 90mm variants. I can get them all quiet including all the DA and Campy adapted cranks...Campy cranks are the least adaptive.
So it comes down to the guy setting up the bike, and not the hardware.


----------



## carbonLORD

In your... "debating" with everyone online you must have forgotten that I am an authorized Specialized dealer that has trained at their headquarters in Morgan Hill CA.

There are arm chair mechanics with engineering degrees and there are people with real world experience.

I'll leave it at that.


----------



## roadworthy

carbonLORD said:


> In your... "debating" with everyone online you must have forgotten that I am an authorized Specialized dealer that has trained at their headquarters in Morgan Hill CA.
> 
> There are arm chair mechanics with engineering degrees and there are people with real world experience.
> 
> I'll leave it at that.


The problem is there is no way to debate you because your generalities are let's say qualitative in nature in spite of your so called training. I know who you are. You just aren't a real smart guy when it comes to tech...its obvious...whether you run a Specialized shop or not...doesn't matter. I fix a lot of bikes that come out of Specialized shops with trained mechanics. In other words you have a lot of company. Lots of creaky OSBB's out there...the web abounds with them in fact and I have helped countless owners quiet theirs down.

Here is a simple...let's call it a theorem. If bearings are bonded and aligned properly which btw takes a correct progression of assembly, AND there is adequate preload on the crank be it wave washer or expanding spacer, any crank..pick a brand, can NOT creak. 
If you have other experience, then you are doing it wrong which is much more common than doing it right.
Have fun.


----------



## carbonLORD

Given your age and the cycling club you frequent, I do not imagine you or your crew are pushing 400W on a 38 mph sprint after a CAT 3 crit race. Seeing that me and my crew do, is it any wonder why we would experience any type of creaking on aftermarket fitments? You don't ride hard enough, plain and simple. You can preach all day about how you fix your bikes for the local ride over to Cafe Roubaix for an espresso. If I soft pedaled everywhere I doubt my bikes would ever require servicing.

We are not the same animal. We don't even own the same equipment.


----------



## goodboyr

Here we go..............


----------



## Geiomed

Why even debating since Specialized own instructions (see page 2) clearly recommend epoxying the OSBB cups into the frame?

<cite class="_Ee">service.*specialized*.com/collateral/ownersguide/new/.../IG0338_revC.pdf</cite>


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Why even debating since Specialized own instructions (see page 2) clearly recommend epoxying the OSBB cups into the frame?
> 
> <cite class="_Ee">service.*specialized*.com/collateral/ownersguide/new/.../IG0338_revC.pdf</cite>


Exactly.


----------



## roadworthy

carbonLORD said:


> Given your age and the cycling club you frequent, I do not imagine you or your crew are pushing 400W on a 38 mph sprint after a CAT 3 crit race. Seeing that me and my crew do, is it any wonder why we would experience any type of creaking on aftermarket fitments? You don't ride hard enough, plain and simple. You can preach all day about how you fix your bikes for the local ride over to Cafe Roubaix for an espresso. If I soft pedaled everywhere I doubt my bikes would ever require servicing.
> 
> We are not the same animal. We don't even own the same equipment.


No, we are far from the same animal...lol.
You believe a 38 mph sprint = 400 watts. We know you don't wrench on bikes but now you are revealing you don't even ride.


----------



## Geiomed

Having said that, even without epoxying, majority of BB will be dead quiet. That makes me think: Anything else going on here?


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Having said that, even without epoxying, majority of BB will be dead quiet. That makes me think: Anything else going on here?


I explained it above. If you have any questions, let me know.


----------



## carbonLORD

I yawn in your direction.

I also do not use a power meter or charts to determine what my actual wattage is... though Strava does tell me what my "Estimated average power" is and not my peak wattage as your chart suggests.

But, I do race what I own, podium on what I race and service my own equipment and have no issues.

Seems to me you have no solutions. Anyone can reiterate the bike frames specifications and read the chart.

Again, real world experience...


----------



## Stumpjumper FSR

goodboyr said:


> Here we go..............


Well at least we had a week without all the DRAMA!


----------



## roadworthy

carbonLORD said:


> I yawn in your direction.
> 
> I also do not use a power meter or charts to determine what my actual wattage is... though Strava does tell me what my "Estimated average power" is and not my peak wattage as your chart suggests.
> 
> But, I do race what I own, podium on what I race and service my own equipment and have no issues.
> 
> Seems to me you have no solutions. Anyone can reiterate the bike frames specifications and read the chart.
> 
> Again, real world experience...


But your problem is your anecdotal accounts do not comport with the manufacturer you supposedly represent. Apparently you slept through that part of the class at Morgan Hill...or gasp, you didn't grasp what was taught resulting in your obtuse leap of judgment regarding different combinations known to work throughout the industry and not just parochial to Specialized. Translation? You have very limited understanding of the industry. 
Now get out there an work on those 400W 38 mph sprints and beware of wave washers and that 3K weave liner inside of carbon OSBB's and especially Loctite and Epoxy spec'ed by your company...lol. I bet you are a heck of a counter man and can relate well to your typical customer.


----------



## RkFast

carbonLORD said:


> In your... "debating" with everyone online you must have forgotten that I am an authorized Specialized dealer that has trained at their headquarters in Morgan Hill CA.
> 
> There are arm chair mechanics with engineering degrees and there are people with real world experience.
> 
> I'll leave it at that.


With all due respect, sometimes the factory training aint worth squat. 

I went round and round with the "new" cap with the three small screws you can adjust. It consistently got loose over time. I then went BACK to the wave washer and used a few small spacers to increase the bearing preload the wave washer inserts into the assembly. Guess what? Dead quiet and has been for years.


----------



## carbonLORD

Actually I am the top grossing salesperson for the entire midwest, but again, you already knew that.

You ever wonder why you argue with everyone, on nearly every thread you post?

Come to think of it, you probably don't.

I meet people like you on almost every forum. Just because you post a novel of a response and cite unrelated past experiences means nothing. No one cares about a motorcycle or Ferrari comparison. Unless you own and use the parts in question you response is invalid.

Now enjoy your SL3 with 100mm stack height and go grab a late for me old timer.

Like I said, when using a 2013 current generation S-Works OSBB crank, you do not need to epoxy anything. We're not talking about anything beyond that, no derlin, no wave washers, no adapter cups and no Ducati's and Ferrari's.

I know it is difficult for you not to get the last word in so go ahead and make some snide off base remark as your rebuttal. In fact, I'm sure we all look forward to another one of your long rants on almost every forum you frequent...


----------



## roadworthy

carbonLORD said:


> Actually I am the top grossing salesperson for the entire midwest, but again, you already knew that.
> 
> You ever wonder why you argue with everyone, on nearly every thread you post?
> 
> Come to think of it, you probably don't.
> 
> I meet people like you on almost every forum. Just because you post a novel of a response and cite unrelated past experiences means nothing. No one cares about a motorcycle or Ferrari comparison. Unless you own and use the parts in question you response is invalid.
> 
> Now enjoy your SL3 with 100mm stack height and go grab a late for me old timer.
> 
> Like I said, when using a 2013 current generation S-Works OSBB crank, you do not need to epoxy anything. We're not talking about anything beyond that, no derlin, no wave washers, no adapter cups and no Ducati's and Ferrari's.
> 
> I know it is difficult for you not to get the last word in so go ahead and make some snide off base remark as your rebuttal. In fact, I'm sure we all look forward to another one of your long rants on almost every forum you frequent...


Not close to a rant...you even misconstrue that. Its a public service to guys like you putting out disinformation. Of course you are good salesman. I have no doubt you are even a decent CAT3 which is a good but common rider at my club. I will also share a bit more. Good salesman and even most real good bike riders I know have a lousy technical grasp. I put you in that camp. In fact, ability to sell product actually aligns with that because you really don't know the difference between reality and fantasy when it comes to the physics behind the products you sell. This is actually a good thing for you because you simply spout some cliché marketing baloney about the products you push and is convenient for everybody. Nobody can be all things. For example, I wouldn't want to be a salesman...lol. Its not heavy enough. I am a strong recreational rider but yes, no longer young but ride with CAT 3's all the time. But each of us have some level of talent...well most of us. And my talent is the stuff that bikes are made of including working with Dupont on specific grades of Delrin I developed for different engineering applications. But lets be clear here. You are a salesman and perhaps a good one, but that is light years away from really understanding the tech involved in well engineered machines.


----------



## roadworthy

Stumpjumper FSR said:


> Well at least we had a week without all the DRAMA!


You got the floor Stumpy. So far, your contributions in this thread have been enlightening. Out of respect for the forum, I am out for the thread.


----------



## Dunbar

Slight off topic but hasn't Specialized gone back to an alloy BB shell on the 2015 S-Works Tarmac? That's what my local shop told me when I was looking at their floor models.


----------



## Rashadabd

Dunbar said:


> Slight off topic but hasn't Specialized gone back to an alloy BB shell on the 2015 S-Works Tarmac? That's what my local shop told me when I was looking at their floor models.


I am pretty sure that's what I heard as well. I remember them answering that in one of the videos or in the online ad, but I can't recalll if alloy was the material. What I can say for sure is that they are claiming that they addressed the BB issue on the 2015 Tarmac.


----------



## roadworthy

Dunbar said:


> Slight off topic but hasn't Specialized gone back to an alloy BB shell on the 2015 S-Works Tarmac? That's what my local shop told me when I was looking at their floor models.


Not sure what you mean by going back. If you mean that Specialized has eliminated Delrin bushings for Sworks bikes for 2015, the answer appears to be yes. Both English threaded and BB30 bikes previously sold by Specialized have all been alloy sleeved FWIW. BB shells are carbon fiber of course...just to get the nomenclature right. 

So Specialized has spoken for 2015. They are done with their version of carbon OSBB sold exclusively on their flagship S-works bikes apparently. Enough fussying with epoxy to keep Delrin bushings from distorting and creaking under load. Question is...has Speicalized basically devolved their BB on Sworks bikes to what they run on their more routine Pro and Expert series which is 68mm garden variety BB30? This obviously creates a marketing downside for Specialized because their S-works frames are now less exclusive which was no doubt part of the calculus of carbon OSBB aka narrow PF30 in the first place. It may not be verbatim BB30 however in the traditional sense....depends if snaprings are employed. Even though preliminary information is vague, the carbon BB shell for Sworks bikes is clearly alloy sleeved and bearings press directly into the frame a la BB30. So the industry continues to evolve and only time will tell if other companies will abandon Delrin bushings pressed into virgin carbon BB shells as apparently Specialized has.

I put together a picture comparison illustrating the difference. Note the lip on a SL4 Sworks bike which use Delrin bushings and the absence of same on the new SL5 where BB30 bearings are pressed directly into the frame.
Will know more when SL5 Sworks bikes become more available whether Specialized has gone to an industry standard BB30 for their S-works. Will also be interesting to see if they follow suit for their other Sworks bike offerings like the Roubaix for 2015.


----------



## Duke249

Just a little to add to this thread...I have a 2012 Venge and a current (2013) S-Works crankset. I had recently developed a dreaded bottom bracket creak. I purchased the bicycle from an S-Works dealer, had the crankset installed at this dealer per the Specialized instructions. The cups were installed with epoxy as I watched the mechanic do the procedure. (he's a friend). The crankset does not have wavy washers and the three bolts on the adjustment piece were properly adjusted. The bearings are the OEM Ceramic Speed and are in excellent condition. 

After removing/inspecting/reinstalling everything the creak was still there. 

Back to the workstand to inspect chainring bolts, the spider an...AHA! THE SPIDER!

The Spider was slightly loose from the crankarm causing the noise. After removing the spider for inspection and applying locktite to the spider threads, it was reinstalled and I'm happy to say that solved the problem. No more noise!

Be sure to check the spider if you're having BB noise.


----------



## roadworthy

Duke249 said:


> Just a little to add to this thread...I have a 2012 Venge and a current (2013) S-Works crankset. I had recently developed a dreaded bottom bracket creak. I purchased the bicycle from an S-Works dealer, had the crankset installed at this dealer per the Specialized instructions. The cups were installed with epoxy as I watched the mechanic do the procedure. (he's a friend). The crankset does not have wavy washers and the three bolts on the adjustment piece were properly adjusted. The bearings are the OEM Ceramic Speed and are in excellent condition.
> 
> After removing/inspecting/reinstalling everything the creak was still there.
> 
> Back to the workstand to inspect chainring bolts, the spider an...AHA! THE SPIDER!
> 
> The Spider was slightly loose from the crankarm causing the noise. After removing the spider for inspection and applying locktite to the spider threads, it was reinstalled and I'm happy to say that solved the problem. No more noise!
> 
> Be sure to check the spider if you're having BB noise.


A good post and will add further as good as Specialized cranks are with much heralded hirth joint which I am a big fan of, to me Specialized shoots themselves in the foot with a removal spider and why I would never own a Specialized crank...and if I bought a bike with one, it would go right to ebay. Of course they have this design for the versatility of being able to accommodate different BCD's but the result is what you experience...plus takes a special tool to torque it to spec. Further, there is a subtext that allows to not have separate tooling for different BCD cranks which saves the company money...the true reason they exist. For this reason both Campy and Shimano never embraced a removal spider however for 2014/2015 have found a way to have a common crank accommodate all different chain ring sizes without having a removal spider which I believe is a much better design and the way the industry is moving including FSA with 4 arm design.


----------



## Geiomed

Similar story here. Same noise, down to a bloody chainring bolt after all. Spider also found to be loose! OSBB fine and NOT epoxied.
Question to roadworthy: Will an upgrade to an SL5-type BB become ever available?


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Similar story here. Same noise, down to a bloody chainring bolt after all. Spider also found to be loose! OSBB fine and NOT epoxied.
> Question to roadworthy: Will an upgrade to an SL5-type BB become ever available?


If you are asking, can the precise geometry and material of the new SL5 BB be replicated on the SL4 or SL3 bikes with carbon OSBB aka Delrin bushings, the answer is likely no. But will give you some very good news. The creative aftermarket has recognized the weakness or lets call it set up sensitivity of Specialized narrow version of PF30 which caused them to dump it for 2015 and as a result, you have many fine options to retrofit your SL3/SL4 Sworks BB to be rock solid...so no reason for despair if you really like your earlier Sworks but are struggling with a pesky creaking BB.
A further note for guys that have tested the new SL5. With all the marketing bluster of the new bike, many say the ride quality and performance of the SL5 is indistinguishable from the SL4..no reason to rush out and so called upgrade.


----------



## Geiomed

Great news indeed. Now, are u referring to Rotor-like solutions?


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Great news indeed. Now, are u referring to Rotor-like solutions?


There are many as it turns out now. Praxis with expanding collet design recently released for Campy but has a very elegant captured bearing design for Shimano as well are two of my favorites. To me, an expanding collet design is perhaps the most elegant BB I have seen to date and works effectively with both BB30 and Specialized narrow PF30 aka carbon OSBB. Many for example press a threaded BSA sleeve into BB30 bikes effectively regressing them to outboard English threaded BB which make both Campy and Shimano cranks plug and play. All are rock solid.

Do you have a model number of the Rotor solution you mentioned?


----------



## Geiomed

Many riders locally use 3d+ with 2 spacers and run free and smooth for thousand miles. The problem with praxis is they should sooner or later release a crankset.


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Many riders locally use 3d+ with 2 spacers and run free and smooth for thousand miles. The problem with praxis is they should sooner or later release a crankset.


You didn't say, but I presume you are referring to Rotor's PF 4630 BB....46 stands for 46mm BB ID and 30 stands for bearing ID of 30 mm's. See below pic. While it removes potential dislocation of the bearing to Delrin bushing interface common with Specialized carbon OSBB it just isn't as robust as the Praxis BB for the simple fact that the Praxis BB connects both bearings together and also has mechanical preload so it can't move unlike the Rotor BB which has a similar press to Delrin bushings. So the Praxis PF30 integrated bearing BB is vastly better in design.

But yes, many run the Rotor BB without issue. As to Praxis making cranks...not sure how that's relevant to discussion here other than no doubt they have the technical expertise and would be a good marriage to their excellent chainrings.


----------



## Geiomed

Not relevant, you're right. Just trying to exploit your expertise. You buy a super frame (SL4 sworks), you get a bb30 with ceramic bearings, you then buy the sworks crankset which is amongst the best in the market and them you run into all sort of problems. I own the praxis rings. Our of topic, but, pros and cons included, how would you marry them to get the optimal in weight stiffness and stay trouble free?"


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Not relevant, you're right. Just trying to exploit your expertise. You buy a super frame (SL4 sworks), you get a bb30 with ceramic bearings, you then buy the sworks crankset which is amongst the best in the market and them you run into all sort of problems. I own the praxis rings. Our of topic, but, pros and cons included, how would you marry them to get the optimal in weight stiffness and stay trouble free?"


I am curious why you believe the S-works crank is among the best on the market? I would argue with removable spider, the S-works crank is part of the problem as reflected by a couple of owners above. But being careful to not throw the S-works crank too far under the bus, if vigilant about spider torque, it is a good crank design and in fact I would argue a better crank than Campy Power Torque or even Over Torque which require specific proprietary tools to service the press fit of splined spindle to left crank arm. But mentioning Campy, I still believe Campy makes one of the three best cranks on the market and may in fact take over the no. 1 spot in 2015 with their 4 arm redesign which retains the hirth joint and checks all the boxes for reliability, stiffness, weight AND importantly serviceability. In your shoes, I just wouldn't be wed to a Specialized crank. I would prefer a Campy Ultra Torque crank or a Dura Ace crank and maybe even a Rotor 3D+ crank.

Praxis chainrings which I agree are great can be adapted to many cranks and a popular conversion. But in my experience, both Campy and DA chainrings are excellent. Specialized chainrings as you know have been under a bit scrutiny for a couple of years now...perhaps addressed with latest offerings...due to their flex under load by strong riders.

Today there are a boat load of options to work around just about any problem including Specialized struggle with narrow PF30 which they recently abandoned.

Below is such a solution and my favorite for adapting a Campy crank...or Shimano crank to Specialized BB30/narrow PF30:

PS: looks like Praxis is going to fulfill your wish with their crank design:
Praxis Works BB/PF30 conversion bottom bracket for Campagnolo - BikeRadar


----------



## Geiomed

Let me disagree. The cranks are awsome. Super stiff and light. It's all the concept that's simply doesn't do justice


----------



## roadworthy

Geiomed said:


> Let me disagree. The cranks are awsome. Super stiff and light. It's all the concept that's simply doesn't do justice


Well then, you have to be more clear in your disagreement.


----------



## Horze

Threaded BB is still the best answer for any alloy frame. The only issue is how to work any form of threaded/alloy insert into a carbon shell. Even if the insert is a threaded insert there's no escpaing the dreadful Loctite.


----------



## roadworthy

Horze said:


> Threaded BB is still the best answer for any alloy frame. The only issue is how to work any form of threaded/alloy insert into a carbon shell. Even if the insert is a threaded insert there's no escpaing the dreadful Loctite.


Loctite isn't dreadful. If that is your paradigm, then that is in question. Loctite and adhesives will continue to replace mechanical fasteners moving forward. On an automobile for example, Loctite is spec'ed likely in over 200 applications. In the right hands Loctite and many other adhesive are perfectly reliable. Adhesives are simply the polar opposite of lubricants which are universally accepted.


----------



## Dunbar

roadworthy said:


> Not sure what you mean by going back. If you mean that Specialized has eliminated Delrin bushings for Sworks bikes for 2015, the answer appears to be yes.


I mean the carbon OSBB on the S-Works Tarmac SL4 was/is a bare carbon fiber BB shell. The standard OSBB setup on the regular (non S-Works) Tarmac SL4 has an alloy shell.


----------



## Dunbar

According to this link the 2015 S-Works tarmac does have an alloy shell:

_"Team mechanics, on the other hand, are likely more excited about the new aluminum interface for the bottom bracket shell, which should provide a more precise fit and greatly reduce the chance of creaking long-term – a key feature for a bike that will be cleaned with a pressure washer almost daily and whose bearings will be replaced relatively frequently._."


----------



## roadworthy

Dunbar said:


> According to this link the 2015 S-Works tarmac does have an alloy shell:
> 
> _"Team mechanics, on the other hand, are likely more excited about the new aluminum interface for the bottom bracket shell, which should provide a more precise fit and greatly reduce the chance of creaking long-term – a key feature for a bike that will be cleaned with a pressure washer almost daily and whose bearings will be replaced relatively frequently._."


Where you threw me is...Specialized never abandoned the alloy OSBB aka BB30 alloy sleeved carbon shell. It was and is sold on the vast majority of Specialized bikes. S-works bikes are really a small percentage of what Specialized makes even though their flagship model is focused upon in reports and media. It is only the S-works framesets that used what they call the carbon OSBB which used press in Delrin cups. For 2015, yes, Specialized 'went back' to the alloy sleeve in S-works bikes apparently as reported. This probably wasn't easy for them because they gave up a measure of exclusivity for the S-work frame but apparently there were too many issues as has been reported all over the web. For those that study the lineage of Specialized now defunct carbon OSBB...they went through an evolution relative to installation in their service manual. Initially Delrin bushings were installed with grease. This worked for a few miles but Delrin squirmed, distorted, creaked and failed and why they went to epoxy. I always found it curious that both the S-works and Pro framesets used a completely different BB. Most with a tech background found this curious as well. No question that radically different BB designs have completely different performance and/or reliability and in this case they did. It isn't clear the exact internal configuration of alloy sleeve used on the new S-works bikes...if it has snap rings for example like industry standard BB30, but it may indeed be identical to what is offered on Pro and Expert level framesets. We will know shortly.


----------



## packetloss

roadworthy said:


> A good post and will add further as good as Specialized cranks are with much heralded hirth joint which I am a big fan of, to me Specialized shoots themselves in the foot with a removal spider and why I would never own a Specialized crank...and if I bought a bike with one, it would go right to ebay. Of course they have this design for the versatility of being able to accommodate different BCD's but the result is what you experience...plus takes a special tool to torque it to spec. Further, there is a subtext that allows to not have separate tooling for different BCD cranks which saves the company money...the true reason they exist. For this reason both Campy and Shimano never embraced a removal spider however for 2014/2015 have found a way to have a common crank accommodate all different chain ring sizes without having a removal spider which I believe is a much better design and the way the industry is moving including FSA with 4 arm design.


It also allows them to be compatible with multiple power meters.


----------



## salesguy

I'll add my 2 cents to this thread as I just picked up a 2014 roubaix expert last week.

The BB/crank area did click just like described here, which I was fearing with some trepidation. I removed the crankset and added grease between the washers & bearings and crankset. Apparently there was a shortage of grease when the shop built up the bike, but that is another story.

After torquing to spec it's been dead silent.


----------



## roadworthy

salesguy said:


> I'll add my 2 cents to this thread as I just picked up a 2014 roubaix expert last week.
> 
> The BB/crank area did click just like described here, which I was fearing with some trepidation. I removed the crankset and added grease between the washers & bearings and crankset. Apparently there was a shortage of grease when the shop built up the bike, but that is another story.
> 
> After torquing to spec it's been dead silent.


Actually your issue has little relevance here and really captures the pervasive misunderstanding about the BB's on these bikes. I would say the vast majority of bike owners throw grease at the problem and generally it either doesn't work or last. BB30 what you have is different than the BB used in S-works bikes and installation isn't the same. In any event I am glad it doesn't click and hope it stays that way.
But let me give you some peace. The BB you do have on your Expert is one of the most popular BB's used on race bikes on the planet and if set up properly, it can't creak...but taking it apart and packing it with grease is generally an ill fated practice.


----------



## salesguy

Ok so I'm confused - assuming the factory sets up the BB property - how was it the BB made noise out of the box? 

Assuming the earlier post about 90% of the build being done at the factory, I don't see how this bike would have made noise - like others have mentioned here, until additional grease was applied and crankset reinstalled. I would assume that right out of the box it would be setup correctly?


----------



## roadworthy

salesguy said:


> Ok so I'm confused - assuming the factory sets up the BB property - how was it the BB made noise out of the box?
> 
> Assuming the earlier post about 90% of the build being done at the factory, I don't see how this bike would have made noise - like others have mentioned here, until additional grease was applied and crankset reinstalled. I would assume that right out of the box it would be setup correctly?


A bit of false assumption as it turns out. There is a lot of opportunity for improper BB installation coming out of the factory. The procedure to properly set up BB30 is pretty straight forward but if any step is missed or improperly executed, it will creak. This btw is not just specific to BB30...can affect outboard bearing cranks and even way back to square spindle. We also don't know of the specifics of this particular bike...whether the crank is adapted aka Ultegra crank on BB30 or the crank was changed.


----------



## Horze

roadworthy said:


> Loctite isn't dreadful. *If that is your paradigm, then that is in question.* Loctite and adhesives will continue to replace mechanical fasteners moving forward. On an automobile for example, Loctite is spec'ed likely in over 200 applications. In the right hands Loctite and many other adhesive are perfectly reliable. Adhesives are simply the polar opposite of lubricants which are universally accepted.



Don't use Loctite. Particularly in a BB.


----------



## goodboyr

Horze said:


> Don't use Loctite. Particularly in a BB.


Lol. Wrong.


----------



## goodboyr

How about reading the instructions and documentation available for various bb's of the BB30/PF30 variety, then get back to us...........or don't.........just don't insult when you don't know.


----------



## tyrich88

Put a shimano crankset on there. Probably won't have as many issues haha


----------



## crit_boy

I did not read through this entire thread, but I have a 2014 Venge (11 spd ultegra version). I have had it for about 11 months and a few thousand miles. The BB clicking started about a month ago. Now it clicks and creaks. LBS is going to redo the epoxy later this week. Hopefully, that fixes it. 

Just an FYI that problem was not completely solved for MY 2014.


----------



## c-bear

In case you do not know c-bear, when your osbb clicking does not go away, you may have another option to consider. C-bear bottom bracket (with ceramic bearings) has a solution to "MY 2014".


----------



## tommyturbo

I am using a C-Bear BB with a Campy Super Record crankset in my 2014 SW Tarmac. I also have a C-Bear ceramic BB on my 2012 SW Epic MTB. Both have performed flawlessly.


----------



## c-bear

Thanks #tommyturbo for your testimonial. C-bear is the first to come out with an once-and-for-all no-noise solution since 2011 to fit osbb customed pf30 bb shell with different cranks including campagnolo - alum precisioned cnc cups (instead of plastic), no adds-on, no loctite. Many on this forum like tommyturbo, navyboy, sablony, Mads, cycling dan, big mac... just to name a few, trusted c-bear with their hard-earned money and are happy with the result. Recently, Dave even took the trouble to make the installation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoGVYUhCqWE. Just another option to consider.


----------



## 1Butcher

Now that you have some competition with Praxis, maybe you can market it a more reasonable price. It is kinda steep.


----------



## roadworthy

1Butcher said:


> Now that you have some competition with Praxis, maybe you can market it a more reasonable price. It is kinda steep.


Being careful to not throw C-bear under the bus because many have had good results with the press in sleeve, to me the game changer is the Praxis sleeve...either for Campy UT or Shimano with integrated bearings. The reason aside from cost is the Praxis sleeve is way less invasive...there is no lateral press through the carbon BB shell as with the C-bear BSA threaded sleeve. Instead the Praxis sleeve is expanded with a collet after in position. This is a revolutionary design for BB/PF30 and have stated before to me it deserves design of the year awards for its innovation.

The whole BB discussion is quite involved and good news is there have never been more choices and Specialized made a dramatic philosophical change for 2015...no more narrow PF30 aka carbon OSBB BB's for the top of the line S-works bikes. All Expert, Pro and S-works bikes will be BB30 which in my opinion is strategically the best decision because it removes 1 out of 2 press interfaces and the reality is an alloy surface is a stronger bearing bore than an Acetal. Plus bore alignment is better ensured with BB30. For those that own BB30 bikes and there are a lot of them because current Expert and Pro Specialized bikes are BB30, now there even more options. If one doesn't want to toil with Loctite and BB30 which to me there is no reason to avoid....now if you want to go the C-bear route, there are press fit BSA sleeves, Sram sells one for $30 if you must have a BSA external bearing threaded crank. If deviating from BB30 in favor of an external bearing crank, Praxis still makes the nicest BB and if a Campy lover, to me its the best way to go because if you decide to sell the frameset, removing a Praxis BB takes 2 minutes and doesn't compromise the BB30 bores as does a press fit sleeve like C-bear which some and perhaps not all believe to be a 'permanent' solution.

So with the array of different solutions out there, its a lot about choices and personal preference and good to have a large menu to pick from.

I will tell you that I am glad Spesh adopted BB30 for their S-works bikes and makes me more interested in a S-works frameset...especially with a Praxis UT BB and Campy crank since I prefer Campy which makes Campy plug and play and rock solid.


----------



## boogermin

Numerous thumbs up for the Praxis BB adapter. I have a 2014 SW Tarmac SL4 which I rode with the stock SW cranksets for a bit, but decided to swap them out for DA 9000. After doing a lot of research, I decided to go with the Praxis BB solely based on their design. All I have to say is that the BB is rock-solid, smooth, and quiet. No issues thus far.

I also appreciated how "hands on" Praxis was. I had a ton of questions, and the person I was working with at Praxis was very helpful/reassuring.


----------



## roadworthy

boogermin said:


> Numerous thumbs up for the Praxis BB adapter. I have a 2014 SW Tarmac SL4 which I rode with the stock SW cranksets for a bit, but decided to swap them out for DA 9000. After doing a lot of research, I decided to go with the Praxis BB solely based on their design. All I have to say is that the BB is rock-solid, smooth, and quiet. No issues thus far.
> 
> I also appreciated how "hands on" Praxis was. I had a ton of questions, and the person I was working with at Praxis was very helpful/reassuring.


Agree. Only issue with the Praxis BB solution for Shimano is...the bearings are integrated into the BB sleeve and therefore not serviceable. I believe this will be fine for the great majority of riders who don't do a lot of service on their bikes anyway...or as much as they should for the bearings...and integrated bearings offer good weather protection. But this does increase cost over say a DA thread in BB cups with integrated bearings which are priced well below.

Also Rotor is in the game as well with a nicely designed BB that converts BB30 to an integrated external bearing 24mm spindle diameter that works for Shimano and other cranks that use the long 24mm spindle.
Here's a look:
Rotor BB30-24 Converter Mountain Bike Bottom Bracket - Stainless | Backcountry.com


----------



## c-bear

1Butcher said:


> Now that you have some competition with Praxis, maybe you can market it a more reasonable price. It is kinda steep.


To clear the misconception that c-bear price is steep. C-bear only offers ceramic bearings. Praxis ceramic bearing bb is 195usd. Therefore apple with apple, c-bear price is within range. Some weight conscious cyclists (actually one of whom pointed this out on this forum) decided for c-bear. C-bear has a uniform 2 year warranty as all components are from c-bear. Praxis has a different warranty policy. We have much respect for Praxis for coming out with their own design. We understand the amount of efforts, dedication, creativity and risks involved. If I may point out another difference that maybe of interest. Talking about proliferation, one development in BB30 , a variation is a permanent ridge/lip instead of the circlips. In that setup, c-bear also has a solution. 

Anyway, as RW mentioned " its a lot about choices and personal preference", to truly help others to decide what suits them best, it is important to express one's opinion/preference but also to present choices. I think that is what the forum is about sharing info.


----------



## roadworthy

c-bear said:


> To clear the misconception that c-bear price is steep. C-bear only offers ceramic bearings. Praxis ceramic bearing bb is 195usd. Therefore apple with apple, c-bear price is within range. Some weight conscious cyclists (actually one of whom pointed this out on this forum) decided for c-bear. C-bear has a uniform 2 year warranty as all components are from c-bear. Praxis has a different warranty policy. We have much respect for Praxis for coming out with their own design. We understand the amount of efforts, dedication, creativity and risks involved. If I may point out another difference that maybe of interest. Talking about proliferation, one development in BB30 , a variation is a permanent ridge/lip instead of the circlips. In that setup, c-bear also has a solution.
> 
> Anyway, as RW mentioned " its a lot about choices and personal preference", to truly help others to decide what suits them best, it is important to express one's opinion/preference but also to present choices. I think that is what the forum is about sharing info.


A counterpoint to your comments about ceramic bearings is...Praxis also sells their Shimano BB-30 BB with steel bearings. Me personally? No way are ceramic bearings worth a 100 dollar price penalty. So many will appreciate a BB underneath $100 versus around $200 and something for C-bear to consider...to offer a more cost effective option to ceramic.
Praxis pricing:
https://praxiscycles.com/conversion-bb/

Then it comes down to how much a bike owner wants to pay for a press in BSA threaded sleeve. Without bearings, Sram makes one for $25 from Pricepoint...and married to an inexpensive Ultegra BB i.e. threaded cups with integrated bearings about $30 you now have mounted Shimano cranks for many thousands of miles of trouble free performance for only a few dollars. So C-bear has tough competition from a price standpoint and also an uphill climb technically competing with the clever Praxis expanding collet BB explained in the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eory8iw2BqU

And then there is the notion of purely staying with BB30 which is the intent of bike manufacturers...at least at the present time. For $5 per bearing for an ABEC 3-5 quality BB30 bearing and a bottle of Loctite 609, any competent mechanic can tame one. Simple steps and those who know how to install them will have no issue for thousands of miles.


----------



## rcb78

C-Bear,, I am very interested in your BB30 outboard bearings for a Rotor 3D+ crankset. I have a question though, when the cups press into the frame, do they press in until they seat against the frame or until they contact the internal C-Clips?
I ask because the C-Clip position is a precision measurement, and the face the BB shell is not. If the cups locate of the BB shell face how is bearing alignment dealt with?
For a carbon frame with a bonded in BB30 shell/sleeve I'm sure the face alignment is decent, but what about welded Al, Steel, and Ti frames where the faces are likely distorted slightly.


----------



## 1Butcher

@C Bear. Just to make it clear about any misinterpretations that I may have said, a C Bear Campy Specialized BB conversion OSBB Campagnolo Race Ultra Torque, Over Torque Bottom Bracket|C-BEAR.COM Ceramic Bearings 4 Bicyles is 139 Euro (185 $US). The Praxis conversion https://praxiscycles.com/product/conv-bb-campagnolo/ is 85 $US. The Parlee Parlee Cycles - PARLEE News & Events - Introducing the PARLEE PF30 Ultra Torque Bottom Bracket! is 90 $US.

I did not check for the best deals. Just apples to apples comparison [Suggested list cost]. I believe you are a bit out of the ball park with the pricing. That is why I did not buy a C Bear. I did not buy a Praxis [although I did purchase one for a person that could not get one to Belarus]. I did purchase a Parlee (90 $US). 

As far as I'm concerned, for my bike, the Parlee has won. Cheaper, Lighter, and works. That is all I wanted. Yes, I would have paid more, bought one that was heavier, but would never have bought one that did not work. Both C Bear and Praxis failed when it came for me to purchase something that worked. 

You mentioned bearings, why would I buy yours when I'm happy with the factory ones that came with my SR crank? Maybe, if you offered a set without bearings, it would have fit my budget. If you do, then I did not find it and maybe your marketing dept would make that easier to find on the website.

Before anyone gets all bunched up, I never indicated that C Bear had a bad product nor to throw them under the bus.


----------



## roadworthy

1Butcher said:


> @C Bear. Just to make it clear about any misinterpretations that I may have said, a C Bear Campy Specialized BB conversion OSBB Campagnolo Race Ultra Torque, Over Torque Bottom Bracket|C-BEAR.COM Ceramic Bearings 4 Bicyles is 139 Euro (185 $US). The Praxis conversion https://praxiscycles.com/product/conv-bb-campagnolo/ is 85 $US. The Parlee Parlee Cycles - PARLEE News & Events - Introducing the PARLEE PF30 Ultra Torque Bottom*Bracket! is 90 $US.
> 
> I did not check for the best deals. Just apples to apples comparison [Suggested list cost]. I believe you are a bit out of the ball park with the pricing. That is why I did not buy a C Bear. I did not buy a Praxis [although I did purchase one for a person that could not get one to Belarus]. I did purchase a Parlee (90 $US).
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, for my bike, the Parlee has won. Cheaper, Lighter, and works. That is all I wanted. Yes, I would have paid more, bought one that was heavier, but would never have bought one that did not work. *Both C Bear and Praxis failed when it came for me to purchase something that worked.
> *
> You mentioned bearings, why would I buy yours when I'm happy with the factory ones that came with my SR crank? Maybe, if you offered a set without bearings, it would have fit my budget. If you do, then I did not find it and maybe your marketing dept would make that easier to find on the website.
> 
> Before anyone gets all bunched up, I never indicated that C Bear had a bad product nor to throw them under the bus.


Butcher...in bold above...can you explain why either C-bear's or the Praxis BB would not work for your bike? Doesn't seem to make sense.

Also, C-bear's point about justifying his cost is...his BB comes with ceramic bearings. You and I may not want to pay the premium for ceramic bearings but it does account for some of the cost difference. Yes, agree, could provide one without to improve cost effectiveness. But still, Sram makes a BSA threaded sleeve for $25 and Campy Record threaded cups can be purchased for $40...so still a long way to go to $185.

Do you have a link to your Praxis BB? I would like to see what you installed.
Thanks


----------



## 1Butcher

C Bear, too expensive and came with bearings. The complexities of getting it and if there was a warranty issue. 

Praxis was not available and I was not willing to wait until they were. I did that with Metrigear and you know how long that took. Praxis became available 2 months after I completed the build. If I had faith with marketing, I would have picked them. Since the main objective in marketing, is getting my money, I passed.

With the research that I did, it appears the biggest issue with Campagnolo's adapter was that the pressed in portion was not long enough to hold in place. By making that portion longer, there would be enough friction to hold it into place. Simple answer to a simple problem. Specialized answer is to glue/locktite it in place.

So Parlee was simple, weights less than all of them, and for me, it works. 

My other option would be to use a different crank, well I'm impressed with Campagnolo's stuff and that was not going to happen. I have used Campagnolo since the late 70's.

My recommendations right now would be, for weight, use Parlee, for reliability use Praxis.


----------



## roadworthy

1Butcher said:


> C Bear, too expensive and came with bearings. The complexities of getting it and if there was a warranty issue.
> 
> Praxis was not available and I was not willing to wait until they were. I did that with Metrigear and you know how long that took. Praxis became available 2 months after I completed the build. If I had faith with marketing, I would have picked them. Since the main objective in marketing, is getting my money, I passed.
> 
> With the research that I did, it appears the biggest issue with Campagnolo's adapter was that the pressed in portion was not long enough to hold in place. By making that portion longer, there would be enough friction to hold it into place. Simple answer to a simple problem. Specialized answer is to glue/locktite it in place.
> 
> So Parlee was simple, weights less than all of them, and for me, it works.
> 
> My other option would be to use a different crank, well I'm impressed with Campagnolo's stuff and that was not going to happen. I have used Campagnolo since the late 70's.
> 
> My recommendations right now would be, for weight, use Parlee, for reliability use Praxis.


Yup...surprising really that Campy didn't go with a longer press like Parlee which is available for both UT as you have and also for Shimano cranks with integrated bearings into the cups.
Is your Spesh bike BB30 or narrow PF30? Did you use any Loctite or other paste between the Parlee cups and BB shell?
Good yours has stayed quiet...


----------



## c-bear

rcb78 said:


> C-Bear,, I am very interested in your BB30 outboard bearings for a Rotor 3D+ crankset. I have a question though, when the cups press into the frame, do they press in until they seat against the frame or until they contact the internal C-Clips?
> I ask because the C-Clip position is a precision measurement, and the face the BB shell is not. If the cups locate of the BB shell face how is bearing alignment dealt with?
> For a carbon frame with a bonded in BB30 shell/sleeve I'm sure the face alignment is decent, but what about welded Al, Steel, and Ti frames where the faces are likely distorted slightly.


Basically, c-bear has a bb designed for specific combination, rather than one size fits three (BB30,PF30,OSBB) bb structure (just different concept, diff. structure). In the case of bb30 shell with a rotor 3d+ (30mm crank)
1. for BB30 variation using circlip : C-bear bb precision cnc alum cups press in and fit securely in the bb30 shell. The circlip is rendered redundant.

2. for BB30 variation with a protruding ridge/lip instead of the use of the circlip, c-bear bb will sit securely in the bb shell, without interfering the ridge/lip. Whereas a sleeve that takes the length of the whole bb shell will not work in this bb30 permanent ridge/lip internal structure.

In addition, we designed the bb so that c-bear CERAMIC bearing sits next to the crankarm, providing maximum stiffness and optimal power transfer.

Hope we answer your question.


----------



## c-bear

1Butcher said:


> @C Bear. Just to make it clear about any misinterpretations that I may have said, a C Bear Campy Specialized BB conversion OSBB Campagnolo Race Ultra Torque, Over Torque Bottom Bracket|C-BEAR.COM Ceramic Bearings 4 Bicyles is 139 Euro (185 $US). The Praxis conversion https://praxiscycles.com/product/conv-bb-campagnolo/ is 85 $US. The Parlee Parlee Cycles - PARLEE News & Events - Introducing the PARLEE PF30 Ultra Torque Bottom*Bracket! is 90 $US.
> 
> I did not check for the best deals. Just apples to apples comparison [Suggested list cost]. I believe you are a bit out of the ball park with the pricing. That is why I did not buy a C Bear. I did not buy a Praxis [although I did purchase one for a person that could not get one to Belarus]. I did purchase a Parlee (90 $US).
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, for my bike, the Parlee has won. Cheaper, Lighter, and works. That is all I wanted. Yes, I would have paid more, bought one that was heavier, but would never have bought one that did not work. Both C Bear and Praxis failed when it came for me to purchase something that worked.
> 
> You mentioned bearings, why would I buy yours when I'm happy with the factory ones that came with my SR crank? Maybe, if you offered a set without bearings, it would have fit my budget. If you do, then I did not find it and maybe your marketing dept would make that easier to find on the website.
> 
> Before anyone gets all bunched up, I never indicated that C Bear had a bad product nor to throw them under the bus.


It is getting late over here, hope I got the following right this time and put things into perspective.

osbb 46x61 + campagnolo crank bb
C-BEAR with c-bear ceramic bearing 139 Euro (185 $US)
Praxis with no bearing 85 $US
Parlee with no bearing 90 $US
Like everything, some are ok with it, some are not. We understand your point. For those who share the same opinion, email us and put in your instruction in the order remark. 

osbb 46x61 + shimano crank bb
C-BEAR with c-bear ceramic bearings 119 Euro (159.5 $US)
Praxis with ceramic bearings 199 $US


----------



## 1Butcher

roadworthy said:


> Is your Spesh bike BB30 or narrow PF30? Did you use any Loctite or other paste between the Parlee cups and BB shell?
> Good yours has stayed quiet...


Carbon OSBB [narrow PF30]. I chose not to use any locktite just to see what would happen. Not enough time to prove one way or another, but it does not make noise and does not appear to have moved either.


----------



## 1Butcher

c-bear said:


> We understand your point. For those who share the same opinion, email us and put in your instruction in the order remark.


Just to clarify, are you indicating that you possibly would sell the BB conversion without the bearings? And if that is the case, could you guess on the amount that would be taken off?

I can see your point too. Most people are not stupid enough to spend the money Campagnolo wants to get the SR components. So if you are going to buy the BB conversion, it could be a selling point. Since I am that stupid, I found it to be a waste of money to buy another set of ceramic bearings. I have 3 SR cranks and have yet to wear out any of those bearings. I honestly feel, I probably never will so I could not even justify having a spare backup set.


----------



## Dunbar

c-bear said:


> osbb 46x61 + campagnolo crank bb
> C-BEAR with c-bear ceramic bearing 139 Euro (185 $US)
> Praxis with no bearing 85 $US
> Parlee with no bearing 90 $US


The $85 Praxis adapters include Ultegra level bearings. I know because I have one installed on my bike.


----------



## 1Butcher

Dunbar said:


> The $85 Praxis adapters include Ultegra level bearings. I know because I have one installed on my bike.


But we are talking about Campagnolo and their bearings.


----------



## Dunbar

1Butcher said:


> But we are talking about Campagnolo and their bearings.


I didn't realize Campagnolo cranks require additional bearings beyond what is included in the Praxis adapter.


----------



## 1Butcher

Campagnolo bearings are pressed into the crankset spindle. I'm not knowledgeable about Shimano but I think the bearings are usually in the BB assembly.


----------



## Dunbar

Ah, got it. Don't decent bearings run like $20/pair though?


----------



## 1Butcher

I'm not picking on you, but obviously there is no such thing as a $20 Campagnolo part. But you would think it would be about that much.


----------



## Dunbar

LOL, well it *is* an $800 crank so you gotta pay the vig I suppose. I know with BB/PF30 you can buy good quality Enduro bearings for $10/ea.


----------



## roadworthy

c-bear said:


> Basically, c-bear has a bb designed for specific combination, rather than one size fits three (BB30,PF30,OSBB) bb structure (just different concept, diff. structure). In the case of bb30 shell with a rotor 3d+ (30mm crank)
> 1. for BB30 variation using circlip : C-bear bb precision cnc alum cups press in and fit securely in the bb30 shell. *The circlip is rendered redundant.
> *
> 2. for BB30 variation with a protruding ridge/lip instead of the use of the circlip, c-bear bb will sit securely in the bb shell, without interfering the ridge/lip. Whereas a sleeve that takes the length of the whole bb shell will not work in this bb30 permanent ridge/lip internal structure.
> 
> In addition, we designed the bb so that c-bear CERAMIC bearing sits next to the crankarm, providing maximum stiffness and optimal power transfer.
> 
> Hope we answer your question.


For no. 1 can you explain why the circlip is rendered redundant? It is either used as an alignment stop as it is with BB30 bearings...or it is not and you use the bore and shell bore faces for alignment. Perhaps you meant the circlip is rendered unnecessary and circlips can in fact be removed.


----------



## rcb78

Ok, so if I assume that the circlip is NOT used, and the face of the shell is used as the stop, then is the press fit of the bore what aligns the bearings and when the cups are pressed all the way in, it is 'theoretically possible' for the lip to not sit evenly all the way around if the shell face is not exact?
Basically, I like the idea. I just want to make sure that bearing alignment issues like if you press in a headset and the head tube faces are not not parallel aren't an issue.


----------



## roadworthy

rcb78 said:


> Ok, so if I assume that the circlip is NOT used, and the face of the shell is used as the stop, then is the press fit of the bore what aligns the bearings and when the cups are pressed all the way in, it is 'theoretically possible' for the lip to not sit evenly all the way around if the shell face is not exact?
> Basically, I like the idea. I just want to make sure that bearing alignment issues like if you press in a headset and the head tube faces are not not parallel aren't an issue.


In the C-bear design, there are two datums just like with BB30. Only difference is the datums are different. This is not of any consequence to BB function. The principle datum(s) are the bores themselves. They determine BB alignment i.e. bearing centers being the same across the BB. The outboard bore faces are the second datum and are used for bearing position in replacement of the circlips. In the case of BB30 the bearings are pressed inside the bore and bearings pressed against circlips held to a high tolerance relative to bore centers... therefore one can not locate off the external BB shell face to ensure the BB is installed straight. 

There is nothing wrong with the C-bear method of locating bearings off the external bore faces...it is a common practice for many aftermarket BB's...even if the shell bore faces aren't perfectly orthogonal to the machined BB30 bores which are the principle datum that dictate bearing centers being very close to the same. Yes, the external BB shell face may have slightly more tolerance in terms of lack of perpendicularity as compared to the circlip grooves machined at the same time the bores are, but it largely doesn't matter as with a longer press interface, bore alignment plus relatively well machined outboard bore faces..and they are...BB30 alloy cup/cylinders are insert molded into the carbon BB shell and machined as a unit with several machining operations...will pose no problem if you decide to go with C-bear or one of many alternative cost effective options like Parlee BB that Butcher has had success with..which also has a longer press.
Hope that helps.

PS: as a side note, with Campy UT in particular, I would never install separate BB halves like one version of C-bear, Parlee, Campy cups etc. I just don't believe in the design for press bores where the bearings reside outside the bores where lateral/vertical pedal forces try to dislodge press in cups. This is a design decision on my part and in fact the whole purpose of both the threaded BSA sleeve that C-bear developed and still sells and includes the innovative Praxis design with expanding collet. With both the press in sleeve and expanding collet style BB, there is a positive regression back to an English threaded BB in that, the bores/bearings can not peel away from the BB...the bearings are connected internally across the BB. This is perhaps the most important ingredient in a stable BB.


----------



## rcb78

Parlee and Praxis aren't options for me, actually there are VERY few available for a BB30 frame. Most are designed for PF30. I run a Rotor 3D+ which for all intents and purposes is a BB386EVO, actually 386EVO is about 2mm wider so anything that works for it, works for the Rotor as well.
I really like the idea of having the bearings right next to the crank, even if it's just a placebo effect. But my frame is Al, and in all my experience, that means the faces of the BB shell will be distorted next to the welds as the material shrinks. This is evidenced with BSA shells and head tubes that have not been faced and are warped, the bearings drag 90% of the time until the facing is corrected. What I've seen is that the nicer the bearing, i.e. higher tolerance, the more the misalignment presents itself. So if I were to spring for the C-Bear setup or something similar, THM, Lightning & Extralight, how will they fair? I don't mind spending the money if they have a reasonable lifespan.
I guess I just want to know if they (C-Bear) has anyone riding on this and what the service life has been like.


----------



## roadworthy

rcb78 said:


> Parlee and Praxis aren't options for me, actually there are VERY few available for a BB30 frame. Most are designed for PF30. I run a Rotor 3D+ which for all intents and purposes is a BB386EVO, actually 386EVO is about 2mm wider so anything that works for it, works for the Rotor as well.
> I really like the idea of having the bearings right next to the crank, even if it's just a placebo effect. But my frame is Al, and in all my experience, that means the faces of the BB shell will be distorted next to the welds as the material shrinks. This is evidenced with BSA shells and head tubes that have not been faced and are warped, the bearings drag 90% of the time until the facing is corrected. What I've seen is that the nicer the bearing, i.e. higher tolerance, the more the misalignment presents itself. So if I were to spring for the C-Bear setup or something similar, THM, Lightning & Extralight, how will they fair? I don't mind spending the money if they have a reasonable lifespan.
> I guess I just want to know if they (C-Bear) has anyone riding on this and what the service life has been like.


As you know there is personal preference to this and each of us and you in particular kind of hem yourself in with your self imposed boundary conditions or constraints you set for yourself. Each of have our preferences which shapes our decisions of course.

To summarize, you have BB30 and a long spindle 30mm diameter crank aka Rotor 3D+ and you like your bearings right next to the crank arms for maximum stability of the spindle. So be mindful, you have created for yourself a particular scenario. I wrote before how much pressed in bearings outside the BB shell goes against my grain and were never the design intent of BB30 or PF30...because of load path...press fits work better with bearings inside the BB shell bores.

So what to do in your case? Something simple, effective and cost effective?

1. Purchase a Sram BSA theaded sleeve sold by Pricepoint. $25. This is similar to what C-bear sells for much more money..and C-bears as discussed comes with ceramic bearings that you may not want or need. If you want to break the bank get the C-bear BSA sleeve.

2. Here's the important part and what commonly isn't done. Clean your BB30 thoroughly with alcohol and also the BSA sleeve and when dry apply Loctite 609 to just the outboard bore interfacing surfaces of the sleeve and then press the sleeve in...similar to the video shown by C-bear. Let it set up over night. Now you have regressed your BB30 shell to an English threaded BB and btw, using Loctite 609 makes it reversible...you can press the sleeve out without issue but I personally wouldn't even if selling frame as many prefer an English threaded BB.

3. See below. Campy in an effort to compete with Rotor and FSA have their version of the Rotor 3D+...its called OverTorque. In an effort to make this crank as universal as possible, Campy adapted a similar theme to UltraTorque and have available thread in cups only instead of traditional Campy size bearings used for UltraTorque, they use BB30 bearings to fit the 30mm crank spindle and BB30 bearings are cheap and easily replaced.

So now you have satisfied all your requirments:
1. you keep the bearings right next to your crank arms for maximum spindle stability
2. you keep your long spindle Rotor 3D+ crank (btw, Rotor may also sell BB30 threaded cups...I just haven't seen them)
3. It won't creak because you don't have bearings outside press bores trying to peel away from the BB.

I believe with the conditions you have set forth, above is the most viable solution.

HTH


----------



## rcb78

Interesting,,, I knew it was possible but hadn't given it any thought. My CX bike is a steel BSA frame and I'm using a 386EVO crank in much the same manor. I just hadn't connected the dots yet.


----------



## roadworthy

rcb78 said:


> Interesting,,, I knew it was possible but hadn't given it any thought. My CX bike is a steel BSA frame and I'm using a 386EVO crank in much the same manor. I just hadn't connected the dots yet.


Below is a picture of the FSA 386EVO BB that mounts the long 30mm spindle FSA crank to an English Threaded BB. FSA also makes a ceramic version for $120 with ceramic bearings that is virtually indistinguishable in performance for almost 3 X's the cost. So unless somebody gives me ceramic bearings, I am not going to pay for them. Beauty of your style of crank on both your bikes is, including the Rotor 3D+ and Campy OverTorque...is versatility...can even be mounted to an English threaded BB as well as most of the wide shell derivatives of BB/PF30.

But when it comes to your particular adaptation of BB30 to Rotor 3D+ if you really want the bearings outboard of the BB, now you have to get more creative like I explained above. The press in sleeve is a good solution in terms of robustness, its just invasive...especially when pushing a 46mm OD version of a BSA sleeve into a PF30 virgin carbon BB shell.
As a matter of philosophy, I tend to not try to be too rigid and sticking with a given crank for a given frame BB. I try to marry the two I believe to be most compatible in most cases.
In any event there are a lot of solutions out there and some work better than others and you have some ideas.


----------



## c-bear

The purpose for c-bear voice in this thread is merely to inform those who still have osbb clicking problem to consider various options and make informed decision. 
@rcb78 if you are open to ceramic bearings and 2x cups, then c-bear design is another option to consider. The principal is similar to c-bear osbb with rotor 3D+, Lee also from the forum decided that our principle makes sense and gave us a try and is happy with the result to send us the photos for our posting. Hope this is helpful.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.368648466598184.1073741830.126424857487214&type=3


----------



## darwinosx

I have a 2015 Tarmac and the sleeve or whatever that ring is on the outside is metal instead of plastic now.


----------



## crit_boy

crit_boy said:


> I did not read through this entire thread, but I have a 2014 Venge (11 spd ultegra version). I have had it for about 11 months and a few thousand miles. The BB clicking started about a month ago. Now it clicks and creaks. LBS is going to redo the epoxy later this week. Hopefully, that fixes it.
> 
> Just an FYI that problem was not completely solved for MY 2014.


New BB epoxied in by lbs. About 2 months and clicking is beginning again. Based on 1st round, it will get really annoying over the next few weeks. 

So, I am considering a conversion BB and a gxp or 24mm crankset.


----------



## sund

As stated above, the new Tarmac has aluminum cups. I've had mine for nearly a month now and no creaking. I also happened to buy a set of these for my Venge, but never got around to installing it as I sold it. PM me if you need a set.


----------



## crit_boy

sund said:


> As stated above, the new Tarmac has aluminum cups. I've had mine for nearly a month now and no creaking. I also happened to buy a set of these for my Venge, but never got around to installing it as I sold it. PM me if you need a set.


I don't think a month is long enough. My venge did not start clicking for the first 8 months (although 3 of those months Dec, Jan, and Feb, the bike only saw limited time on rollers). The fix only lasted about 2 months (1200-1300 miles - sad, work family, etc). 

I thought - and very possible that I am wrong - that the alloy cups were permanently epoxied/bonded to the frame. Not sure I want to go that route. There is a history of creaky alloy parts inside carbon BB shells. I may try the praxis route. Not permanent and good reviews.


----------



## Horze

crit_boy said:


> New BB epoxied in by lbs. About 2 months and clicking is beginning again. Based on 1st round, it will get really annoying over the next few weeks.
> 
> So, I am considering a conversion BB and a gxp or 24mm crankset.


Try replacing your bearings once again. After that pay very close attention to how much you torque the crank with preload. Don't overdo the preloading torque.


----------



## crit_boy

Horze said:


> Try replacing your bearings once again. After that pay very close attention to how much you torque the crank with preload. Don't overdo the preloading torque.


I had no part of the Bb replacement. My lbs did the entire thing. FWIW, I consider the shop as one of the best I have been to (freshbikes in Arlington, VA). I have no doubt they did the work properly. Once it gets bad again, I'll go back in and see what they think. However, I am not too keen on replacing the bb 2 times each year.


----------



## Horze

crit_boy said:


> I had no part of the Bb replacement. My lbs did the entire thing. FWIW, I consider the shop as one of the best I have been to (freshbikes in Arlington, VA). I have no doubt they did the work properly. Once it gets bad again, I'll go back in and see what they think. However, I am not too keen on replacing the bb 2 times each year.


You shouldn't. Neither am I.
My last set of threaed Shimano BB lasted over 15,000 miles and was still going strong without any issues. This is the way it should be.
There's no place to be babying a BB like some of the BB30 stories we hear. It should be fit and forget.


----------



## nis240sxt

rcb78 recommended this awhile back and it's worked for me. Use Loctite 609 with primer 7649. Just make sure your contact surfaces are extremely clean. I've used this on my Allez and S-works Venge and have not had a creak since. I ride them weekly for about a year now.


----------



## Horze

.....


----------

