# Campy Crankset on Specialized OSBB...Answers



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

What a tangled web would be putting a good spin on this whole debacle...more like a cluster-f##k for those with a technical background and there are quite a few on this forum. Thought I would start a new thread because Specialized most recent 'kluge' to get their OSBB's to work with a pleathora of different cranks is..best you describe the level of pain....an array of loctite, epoxy and adapters.

Since Cheapskate has written about all his creaking issues with Campy Power Torque and many report creaking with different cranks and difficulty installing Campy cranks on bikes with Spesh's narrow version of PF30 and conventional BB30..this thread will be relevant to both.
First relevance to Power Torque. Cheapskate, if you see this, this is another option to quiet your PT Campy crankset....which you should have abandoned a long time ago in favor of Campy UT.  Reason is Specialized has elected to re-engineer Campy's crank...pretty bold of them really...wonder if they asked Campy?....by suggesting removal of pressed on Campy bearings from Campy's crank and tossing them. In effect they are turning the Campy crank albeit with hirth joint into a more conventional 24mm spindle crank without bearings aka Shimano...Campy spindle being used with BB30 bearings instead and 'new' Specialized adapters. Cheapskate...you can tinker with axial preload all you want now...as Specialized provides their wave washers in replacement of Campy to fit right to the 24mm spindle and provided you put enough of them in line, you can achieve no lateral movement if you want...or line to line stack up.

If you guys want a good laugh, look at the ridiculous array of parts now comprising OSBB for users of Campy or Shimano cranks. Specialized recommends 'now' or de jour...epoxy of plastic bushings to the OSBB carbon shells...and loctite of BB30 bearings to insert molded alloy cups. Both epoxy which is quite invasive for bonding to virgin carbon shells and loctite are both the outgrowth of customer's complaining about creaking which Specialized should have discovered in their design reveiw process and durability testing which can easily could be reproduced in the laboratory.

Summary?...Specialized in an effort to maintain market diversity passes all this expense to the customer by performing design verification in the field. All of this is needless complexity. I run Campy on my Roubaix with threaded BB and it works perfectly....plug and play and no BS. Specialized should be ashamed for this proliferation...all to create a reason for the customer to spend more money on a 'higher performance frameset' that offers no performance or weight advantage for 'perception' of better?...market diversity to create a heirarchy of frames and suck more money out of their customers...all while their customers are their test subjects as they perfect their technology which can't be perfected because the root of pressed in bearings aka OSBB is a flawed design that can only be silenced by high tech glue. Has Campy or Shimano..the leading two groupset mfr's in the world relented on a crank design that works best with a threaded BB? Not one bit. This whole genesis of different BB's is both Insidious and a joke for those that design product for a living that know simple is best...and more complex is many times the result of creating a market for something the customer doesn't want or need. Yes Specialized is a great company steeped in technical talent and as with any great company flawed...many times more about greed than technical error...this is both. Consider the evolution of OSBB. OSBB procedures have morphed dramatically since its release...Cannondale invented PF30 and Specialied made theirs proprietary with thinner shell width...Trek originally did 'slip fit' with BB30...which evolved to press fit and then loctite to quiet creaky bearings...original product never worked right...years of bikes out in the field with flawed designs...hence constant design changes. Trust me when I tell you the vast majority of engineers on staff at Specialized if asked candidly about these designs would just shake their head...their voice squelched by their management at Specialized. I know because I have been there...figuratively. Good products at the core obfuscated by pursuit of the mightly dollar.
PS: is Campy clean on this? No. Their BB/PF30 kluge has been an abomination. Most have had best success by sleeving PF30 and regressing it back to a threaded BB. At least Specialized has made a better effort with Campy by removing Campy bearings. In effect, Spesh has turned a Campy crank into a 2 piece Shimano crank. It should work as well as Shimano cranks with OSBB which are better than most. Campy's 'press in' cups are basically a disaster in waiting as many will attest having gone there.

Lastly there is a sweet spot for Roubaix lovers. The Expert bike which is 10r carbon and also SL4 is available with threaded BB. No the paint jobs aren't as fancy as the Pro or Sworks bikes...but you will dodge the considerable bullet of loctite and epoxy if having to take the crank off annually for service if the bearings need to be replaced...and they won't creak.


----------



## kiekeboeboe (Sep 24, 2010)

C-Bear Bottom Bracket:
Campagnolo Race 2011 OSBB Bottom Bracket|C-BEAR.COM Ceramic Bearings 4 Bicyles
By the way, works also perfect for Power-Torque cranks :thumbsup:


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

kiekeboeboe said:


> C-Bear Bottom Bracket:
> Campagnolo Race 2011 OSBB Bottom Bracket|C-BEAR.COM Ceramic Bearings 4 Bicyles
> By the way, works also perfect for Power-Torque cranks :thumbsup:


Basically all C-bear does is devolve a Specialized frameset back to what it should have been in the first place...a threaded BB. Sad it has to come to this. Purchase a $100 part to make a Specialized frame what its lower level offerings still are...threaded BB...only with greater weight due to a redundant sleeve which could and is easily integrated into the carbon shell as with my 2012 Roubaix SL3 Pro frame.
Reports are the C-bear sleeves work excellent...and why shouldn't they? They eliminate the problem of pressed in bearings...especially BB30 bearings pressed into Delrin bushings aka 46mm carbon OSBB Sworks bikes...Specialized now recommending epoxy of Delrin bearings because their low modulus promotes working loose over time.
Btw, there are other alloy sleeves available as well that do the same thing...FSA and Sram make them as well.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> What a tangled web would be putting a good spin on this whole debacle...more like a cluster-f##k for those with a technical background and there are quite a few on this forum. Thought I would start a new thread because Specialized most recent 'kluge' to get their OSBB's to work with a pleathora of different cranks is..best you describe the level of pain....an array of loctite, epoxy and adapters....


Great post, RW. Pretty much sums up my feelings on the OSBB (et al) debacle - and illustrates why I stay with my 'low tech/ weighty' Shimano 105/ Ultegra Hollowtech ll cranksets/ BB's. 

Have in excess of 17k on the 105 version, and it still runs silent and performs like new. :thumbsup:


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

Imagine how I feel, having to spend $150 on the C-bear sleeve to stop the creaking on the Specialized crank that was made to fit in their special BB. 


On the campy issue, I guess the solution is buy a bike with a threaded BB. What's so hard about that?


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

It's interesting that Roadworthy seems to have come around to my line of thinking from about a year ago. At that time, I elected to buy a 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 with threaded BB rather than risk a mess with a SL4 and OSBB. Back then, Roadworthy had many bad things to say about me and my choice.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with Roadworthy (or anyone else)! I agree with him that the whole OSBB situation has been handled poorly by Specialized, and have a hard time understanding why they even introduced it, other than to sell more of their own cranksets.

I don't intend to stop using a threaded BB, and I definitely don't plan on using anything other than Campagnolo 11 speed. As I said a year ago (and Roadworthy also mentions this in his post), it's very interesting that neither Shimano or Campy has gone to BB30, or some other iteration of OSBB. Unless the whole industry moves to a standardized version of new crank/BB design, I don't see the point of using anything other than a threaded BB.

Normally I buy a new frame whenever Specialized updates the Tarmac. I guess it's a good thing that I really love my SL3, because I won't be replacing it until either a threaded BB is available, or the whole industry moves to a standardized crank/BB design that has been successfully tested and accepted.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

dcorn said:


> Imagine how I feel, having to spend $150 on the C-bear sleeve to stop the creaking on the Specialized crank that was made to fit in their special BB.
> 
> 
> On the campy issue, I guess the solution is buy a bike with a threaded BB. What's so hard about that?


What''s so hard about it is...if you want Specialized so called best framesets either Pro or Sworks for either Tarmac or Roubaix...now neither are available with a threaded BB.
So as you did, if you want a threaded BB...tack on another $150 to sleeve either frame with C-bear or equivalent. You just can't make this stuff up it is so weird.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

PJ352 said:


> Great post, RW. Pretty much sums up my feelings on the OSBB (et al) debacle - and illustrates why I stay with my 'low tech/ weighty' Shimano 105/ Ultegra Hollowtech ll cranksets/ BB's.
> 
> Have in excess of 17k on the 105 version, and it still runs silent and performs like new. :thumbsup:


Thanks PJ. Basically a small rant about the irony of how many take a feature like a BB and regress it back to a known solution. The only real benefit of BB30 or PF30 is Q-factor if you are narrow hipped. Crank arms can be placed closer together with bearings inside the BB shell versus outboard as with external bearing cranks. Another irony is, placing the bearings inside the BB also accelerates their wear because vertical torque on the bearings is increased having the bearings closer together...also promoting why the bearings tend to work loose and creak.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

tommyturbo said:


> It's interesting that Roadworthy seems to have come around to my line of thinking from about a year ago. At that time, I elected to buy a 2011 S-Works Tarmac SL3 with threaded BB rather than risk a mess with a SL4 and OSBB. Back then, Roadworthy had many bad things to say about me and my choice.
> 
> I'm not trying to pick a fight with Roadworthy (or anyone else)! I agree with him that the whole OSBB situation has been handled poorly by Specialized, and have a hard time understanding why they even introduced it, other than to sell more of their own cranksets.
> 
> ...


A bit more is known now about the lack of reliability of both Specialized versions of OSBB. Also in the context of Campy, Specialized had no solution and why I suggested moving away from a Campy crank if running Campy driveline...because those trying to make it work with OSBB failed. Times are a bit different now but still unacceptable really. Specialized has created an option for Campy which never existed and C-bear has come forward in effect turning OSBB back into a threaded BB with their sleeve offering. So now at least you can install a Campy crank on a top of the line Specialized bike like the S-works...albeit with needless complexity being the point of my rant.

Also with Roubaix the end of the world isn't as imminent...the Expert is still available with threaded BB and is 10r carbon and SL4 and a great bike...the bike I would buy. You would have to check the Tarmac bike to see if the Expert is available in threaded BB...it might be...I haven't looked. The Expert in either bike is really all the bike an amateur racer needs...especially SL4 iterations.

PS: quick look on Specialized website revealed that the 2013 Tarmac SL4 Expert with 10r carbon is NOT sadly available with a threaded BB unlike the companion Roubaix SL4 Expert bike. As mentioned...a tangled web...putting it nicely.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

roadworthy said:


> What''s so hard about it is...if you want Specialized so called best framesets either Pro or Sworks for either Tarmac or Roubaix...now neither are available with a threaded BB.
> So as you did, if you want a threaded BB...tack on another $150 to sleeve either frame with C-bear or equivalent. You just can't make this stuff up it is so weird.


Honestly, there is nothing wrong with improving through technology. Companies decided larger/wider bottom brackets with bigger bearings would make the BB stiffer and whatever, so they went for it. Makes total sense. 

What doesn't make sense is having all those bearings set in plastic pieces pressed into other plastic pieces. I believe that had they not going with the delrin cups and used some sort of aluminum adapter for each different crank setup, they would have been fine. It's like $140 from c-bear for a aluminum sleeve and ceramic bearings. I'm betting the bearings are most of that cost. Specialized could have easily thrown an aluminum sleeve in the carbon like they did on some of the pro models and they would have prevented all the creaking issues that they have with the carbon BB and delrin cups. If they also would make aluminum spacers to fit the campy crank and every other crank setup out there, which isn't all that many, people wouldn't have to go aftermarket. 

I think maybe they are trying to make something super light by using just carbon and delrin, which they did, but at the cost of reliability and happy customers. They probably think "people will buy our frames because they know we make good stuff and it's super light, and when they have issues, they can just to go some aftermarket company to solve the problem".


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

dcorn said:


> Honestly, there is nothing wrong with improving through technology. Companies decided larger/wider bottom brackets with bigger bearings would make the BB stiffer and whatever, so they went for it. Makes total sense.
> 
> What doesn't make sense is having all those bearings set in plastic pieces pressed into other plastic pieces. I believe that had they not going with the delrin cups and used some sort of aluminum adapter for each different crank setup, they would have been fine. It's like $140 from c-bear for a aluminum sleeve and ceramic bearings. I'm betting the bearings are most of that cost. Specialized could have easily thrown an aluminum sleeve in the carbon like they did on some of the pro models and they would have prevented all the creaking issues that they have with the carbon BB and delrin cups. If they also would make aluminum spacers to fit the campy crank and every other crank setup out there, which isn't all that many, people wouldn't have to go aftermarket.
> 
> I think maybe they are trying to make something super light by using just carbon and delrin, which they did, but at the cost of reliability and happy customers. They probably think "people will buy our frames because they know we make good stuff and it's super light, and when they have issues, they can just to go some aftermarket company to solve the problem".


Larger diameter bearings and larger diameter spindles does make sense. The rest doesn't however. First...bearings in BB30 and PF30 are closer together than with outboard bearing position. This is bad for bearing wear and support of the crank spindle and partly contributes to pressed in bearings working loose. Press in bearings...now succumbing to loctite and expoxy is a bad idea with cyclic thrust loading due to the pedal stroke. Shimano cranks work best for keeping bearings in place because of adjustable preload but wave washer cranks which include Specialized, Campy, Sram and many others...do not capture the bearings effectively. Honestly any mechanical engineer with 5 years product development experience would look at this design and never agree to it. I wouldn't. Also two bikes sold by the same mfr...Specialized...at the top of the food chain have radically different BB's...one with alloy cups insert molded into the carbon shell aka BB30 and the other with plastic bushing pressed into a full carbon shell. With such a radically different design, one is going to work better than the other. Guess which one? The lower level BB30...because alloy cups don't give like plastic bushings do. This makes no sense....to have the two best road bikes Specialized makes with completely different BB's. BB30 is certainly flawed but nothing like Sworks BB's with press in plastic bushings. All of this is needless. Weight saved is nebulous. Stiffness increase of 30mm spindles is not perceptible for anybody who doesn't put out 2000 watts in a sprint. So why? Marketing and a means to extoll more profit is the simple answer. A typical buyer may be a strong racer but with no technical background will never blink an eye when choosing a Sworks bike because he believes it to be the best. Its a great bike no question...but with needlessly high maintenance.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

roadworthy said:


> All of this is needless. Weight saved is nebulous. Stiffness increase of 30mm spindles is not perceptible for anybody who doesn't put out 2000 watts in a sprint. So why? Marketing and a means to extoll more profit is the simple answer. A typical buyer may be a strong racer but with no technical background will never blink an eye when choosing a Sworks bike because he believes it to be the best. Its a great bike no question...but with needlessly high maintenance.


Spesh is designing and engineering S-works bikes for pro racers. There is your answer. Those guys have mechanics that probably tear apart the BB and replace the delrin cups every race. Or they use C-bear BB shells (like the C-bear website shows haha). There is no way they are riding thousands of miles at a time and just lubing up the chain every once in a while like we do. 

The non-S-works bikes are technically designed for normal people like us, and that's why the maintenance is easier and the design is more durable and basic. 


Just look at high end sports cars like Ferrari and Lamborghini. Those things need maintenance and adjustment all the time and it costs a fortune. But they are basically road-legal race cars making absurd power. They design a race car, then the technology trickles down into the consumer market. It works 10x better, but requires more work to keep it working.


----------



## kiekeboeboe (Sep 24, 2010)

dcorn said:


> ...
> The non-S-works bikes are technically designed for normal people like us, and that's why the maintenance is easier and the design is more durable and basic.
> ...


Hmm, so a "S-Works Roubaix SL4 OSBB Frameset", needs more maintenance as a "Roubaix SL4 Pro Frameset" or a "Roubaix SL4 Expert" ?


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

kiekeboeboe said:


> Hmm, so a "S-Works Roubaix SL4 OSBB Frameset", needs more maintenance as a "Roubaix SL4 Pro Frameset" or a "Roubaix SL4 Expert" ?


The answer is...most likely yes...because Sworks bikes have carbon OSBB aka Specialized narrow version of PF30. They now suggest epoxy in the plastic bushings. Now...epoxy will help...no question. Basically the plastic which has much lower yield strength and modulus compared to either carbon or alloy BB30 cups...is bonded to the carbon shell. Plastic bushing therefore are much stronger because in effect bonding to the carbon creates carbon as a substrate. Problem before was...the delrin bushings which are inherently weak, would squirm and deform and become partly dislodged and make noise and bearings would move around. But...the whole problem here...is the whole design decision to go with plastic bushings in the first place. Plastic is a ridiculous choice of material to hold bearings under the tremendous force of a strong rider out of the saddle with in effect a lever arm aka crank arm levering the bearings. 
Alloy or carbon is a much better choice to hold the bearings in place.
Then...there is the issue of replacing the plastic bushings. With epoxy to virgin carbon BB shell, dislodging or replacing the bushings isn't clean and without doubt will disparage the carbon shell over time. If I ever were to purchase a Sworks frame in a weak moment of desparation, I would sleeve it and regress it back to a threaded BB...again...a completely pointless exercise.
FYI...Pro framesets are BB30 and do not have plastic bushings holding the outer race of the bearings. BB30 is inherently more reliable...but again really requires loctite to keep the bearings in their press. Who wants to loctite bearings to their bike?


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

dcorn said:


> Spesh is designing and engineering S-works bikes for pro racers. There is your answer. Those guys have mechanics that probably tear apart the BB and replace the delrin cups every race. Or they use C-bear BB shells (like the C-bear website shows haha). There is no way they are riding thousands of miles at a time and just lubing up the chain every once in a while like we do.
> 
> The non-S-works bikes are technically designed for normal people like us, and that's why the maintenance is easier and the design is more durable and basic.
> 
> ...


Point taken. But...lets be honest about why the Sworks frames exist. To sell to Joe six pack who wants to be Tom Boonen. Joe six pack likely may not even own a set of wrenches and rely on this local bike shop who have a 50/50 chance of not being able to tame a Sworks BB either. If there was even a hint of benefit of carbon OSBB I would conceed your point. But even strong riders...Boonen rode Campy cranks with threaded BB's for years....can't feel a difference in stiffness. I can't and I am 185# and weigh more than Boonen. The weight thing is nebulous...fairy dust. So lets be clear why the carbon OSBB exists...marketing with no value added. Look no further than the two biggest groupset mfrs...neither sell a BB30 specific crank which is an indictment that they believe BB/PF30 to be a passing fad...albeit both have languished for a while now.

Btw...to steal your automobile metaphor...most that want the performance envelope of a Ferrari both in acceleration and handling will buy a C6 ZR1 Corvette for half the price and twice the reliablility.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

roadworthy said:


> Btw...to steal your automobile metaphor...most that want the performance envelope of a Ferrari both in acceleration and handling will buy a C6 ZR1 Corvette for half the price and twice the reliablility.


lol, no they wont.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

dcorn said:


> lol, no they wont.


Sorry but sales volume nos. speak for themselves as does the performance data...not to mention price tag.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> Btw...to steal your automobile metaphor...most that want the performance envelope of a Ferrari both in acceleration and handling will buy a C6 ZR1 Corvette for half the price and twice the reliablility.


I think the Ferrari buyer has different sets of priorities (exclusivity/ prestige) than the Corvette buyer, but I do agree with your basic analogy. Similarly, Porsche's are high tech/ high performance and still enjoy high rankings in reliability. 

High performance and high reliability do not have to be diametrically opposed. 

Completely agree with your Joe six pack comments. FWIW back in '08 with Trek's intro to the new Madone, there were the same convo's going on in that forum. I know, because that bike was on my short list. Similar comments re: high maintenance were made re: their BB86/90 design. 

Bottom line (to me) is we (as consumers) speak with our purchases - how we spend our disposable income. I'm choosing to NOT buy into the XX30 quagmire simply because reliability is lacking and payback (IMO) is nil. Until that changes, my bikes will have threaded BB's.


----------



## kiekeboeboe (Sep 24, 2010)

dcorn said:


> ... Or they use C-bear BB shells (like the C-bear website shows haha)...


*Works *perfect for me, on my S-*Works*, my C-Bear Adapter


----------



## c-bearusa.com (Dec 7, 2012)

To bring some good news to this discussion: We have opened a US sales office for C-bear this week.
No more long shipping times from Belgium and local advise and support.

A webshop is under construction. Until that time, feel free to drop us a line.

[email protected]


----------



## natep (Jan 27, 2007)

I have been reading this thread with interest and while I am no expert on the Specialized OSBB, I saw earlier today that for 2013 Parlee will be manufacturing Campagnolo Ultra-Torque specific PF30 BB cups. Sorry I can't post a direct link due to my low number of posts but it's on Parlee's facebook page. Perhaps a better solution?

-Nate


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

natep said:


> I have been reading this thread with interest and while I am no expert on the Specialized OSBB, I saw earlier today that for 2013 Parlee will be manufacturing Campagnolo Ultra-Torque specific PF30 BB cups. Sorry I can't post a direct link due to my low number of posts but it's on Parlee's facebook page. Perhaps a better solution?
> 
> -Nate


Nate,
Please keep in mind if interested in adapting Campy cranks to conventional PF30 (Spesh's version of PF30 is 62mm across and their Delrin bushing width brings the BB overall width to 68mm)...that Campy already makes press in cups for std. PF30. Part of the outcry for those trying mount Campy initially (Pre C-bear sleevel)...was that Campy's press in PF30 cups would not work on Spesh Sworks carbon OSBB aka narrow PF30 because spacing was too narrow which created about 6mm of axial play. 

C-bear of course has come along and created a press in sleeve that effectively regresses Spesh PF30 to a threaded BSA BB which makes Campy plug and play with their reliable thread on cups...best solution really so far.

Further...and the reason I created this specific thread, is Spesh has now created their own adaptation of Campy cranks to their Spesh Sworks frames...see above...which ridiculous complexity and retention of both plastic bushings and BB30 bearings and requires removal of Campy press on bearings from their cranks. This method is essentially a replicate of how Shimano cranks are adapted to BB30/PF30 with Wheel Mfg. adapters.

So there are many ways to skin this complicated cat and honestly, this whole proliferation of BB complexity is a big waste and perpetrated by bike mfr's really to carve out market diversity and make their BB's more proprietary...Trek and Cervelo have their own versions for example.

The press in cups you reference for industry standard may or may not be better than Campy's PF30 press in cups which honestly aren't very good because they really don't have enough press length to keep in place without loctite.


----------



## 1Butcher (Mar 15, 2011)

FYI, I am using Parlee PF30 press in adapters and have had no issues with noises what so ever. I had to use Wheel Manufacturing shim [PF3.5-SPC] to get the Parlee cups spaced right. The extra length of the Parlee adapters seems to be the right answer for weight, cost, and ease of installation.


----------



## 1Butcher (Mar 15, 2011)

https://praxiscycles.com/product/conv-bb-campagnolo/

Finally.


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

PJ352 said:


> Great post, RW. Pretty much sums up my feelings on the OSBB (et al) debacle - and illustrates why I stay with my 'low tech/ weighty' Shimano 105/ Ultegra Hollowtech ll cranksets/ BB's.
> 
> Have in excess of 17k on the 105 version, and it still runs silent and performs like new. :thumbsup:


There's Nothing low-tech about these Shimano cranks.


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

It's only a matter of time finding a Praxis's weakness. The weakest part of the assembly will cause the whole setup to fail in its function. I'm not convinced about this product.


----------



## 1Butcher (Mar 15, 2011)

That's true with any product. I have seen Praxis other BB conversions and found them to be very robust. I do not see any reason why this would not be the same.

I might have even purchased that set up but due to production delays and their lousy web information, I elected to go with Parlee. I'm happy with the weight and lack of noise [so far].


----------



## tommyturbo (Jan 24, 2002)

I now have 3000 miles on my SW Tarmac Sl4 using the C-Bear threaded BB adapter. I think I can now confirm with certainty that this is a totally viable solution for the OSBB issue and Campagnolo. My SR crank remains solid as a rock and noise free, as it should, since the C-Bear sleeve essentially reverts the carbon shelled OSBB back to a threaded BB. 

I read somewhere that S is going to some type of alloy liner for the BB shell with the 2015 Tarmac to eliminate creaking, etc.


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

Consider some of the previous incarnations of the Tarmac. They had an alloy threaded sleeve bonded to the inner shell of the BB. Then they carved the BB out completely and left a virgin BB there called OSBB. Now it seems the spec wants to revert back again.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

Horze said:


> Consider some of the previous incarnations of the Tarmac. They had an alloy threaded sleeve bonded to the inner shell of the BB. Then they carved the BB out completely and left a virgin BB there called OSBB. Now it seems the spec wants to revert back again.


Pretty accurate but keep in mind that Specialized had a threaded BB as optional on the Sworks as late as 2011 and have had BB30 around now on many versions of the Tarmac for the past few years. In the next couple of months, we will learn precisely what the new Tarmac S-works is. It looks box stock BB30 but until one gets opened up to the public, this is unknown. But it does beg the question or fate of PF30 invented by Cannondale and Specialized has recently spoken and apparently rejected its benefits. Will see if other bike makers follow suit.


----------

