# UT Crank problems, side to side play once installed, need advice!



## bikesinmud (Jan 1, 2005)

Wilier Cento 1 frame, 
Installed my new '15 super record cranks earlier this year, wave washer on the NDS, perfect set up!
Just got a set of The new SRM campy cranks and after install I've got about 2-3mm of side to side play.
Tried to use a shim, tried 2 wave washers and still can't get ride of the slop at the BB, wtf? Spinning lightly is no problem but out of the saddle or harder efforts results in a horrible clunk as things shift. 
Done some internet searching and more spacers seems to be the only solution. Any experts out there who have solved the issue?


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Did you install the retaining clip on the DS, and make sure it was seated, before installing the NDS crank?

You have the symptoms of a poorly, or non-installed clip. It holds the crank in place.


----------



## bikesinmud (Jan 1, 2005)

Yup clip installed properly


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Let me guess, press fit BB?


----------



## bikesinmud (Jan 1, 2005)

No, not a press fit bb. The bearings on the cranks slide into the bb shell on the frame. I'm not sure of the spec, but it may be a bb86?


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Double check your retaining clip and wavy washer...double check the Ultra-Torque hirth bolt while you're at it, it needs *a lot of torque* to be to spec...Just saying, hope and pray that you were clumsy or air headed in your excitement of New Shiney...because you're not going to like this...



bikesinmud said:


> No, not a press fit bb. The bearings on the cranks slide into the bb shell on the frame. I'm not sure of the spec, but it may be a bb86?


Based on some reading it is probably BB386EVO, which is bizarro pressfit system...these were invented solely to save carbon frame makers money (it is cheaper to mold a hole, than to finely machine and insert a finely threaded sleeve), the upside of Wilier saving money this way is that these damn things are renowned for creaking and noise. Which is sad when you remember how much money you spent on that frameset. Your measuring play is indicated simply by the noise, as PF and PF-like BB systems will creak if there is any room for play whatsoever (10ths of a millimeter is enough)...in other words 99% of the time IRL due to IRL tolerances is machining as things only fit 100% perfect in CAD. And for PF to not creak, you need 100% perfection. A side effect of Ultra-Torque and all these ex-post-square-taper-cranset designs is that they too have no tolerance for out of tolerance BBs (as the axle width is fixed).

Did you follow the install instructions precisely​ WRT to loctite and grease? If not, do so. Again...hope and pray you didn't...




Now the odds are, unfortunately, you did follow said instructions otherwise you wouldn't be here...which if I had to guess over the internet means that probably the shell hole isn't molded/machined good enough. Take it to a shop. Any kind of spacers you propose doing are a kludge for poor molding on the part of the frame maker. Hopefully someone else has more ideas, because that is all I can think of as of this morning.


----------



## bikesinmud (Jan 1, 2005)

You can see it's not a 386 as on the newer Wiliers but the first gen Cento. That space between the spacer and the shell is what I'm trying to eliminate, didn't have this with the SR cranks. Snugged up to 60nm.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

I think OP has it more correct. It sounds like the TREK BB86 system where the bearing cup is molded into the frame. Campy UT and Shimano bearings have the same OD, so both will fit a TREK-type frame.

Problem is likely tolerances as Marc says.

Spacers may be the only solution to the side play.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

bikesinmud said:


> View attachment 307682
> 
> You can see it's not a 386 as on the newer Wiliers but the first gen Cento. That space between the spacer and the shell is what I'm trying to eliminate, didn't have this with the SR cranks. Snugged up to 60nm.


Whew, I like being wrong sometimes...well the good news is that your frame isn't crap...it's your crank semi-axles that are wrong (presuming the hirth interface is clean, and the right thrust washer). Either the bearings on them are wrong or the axles are just plain the wrong length, since a straight record crank works. The axle width is fixed, and anything you do to address it is a kludge at best. 

Email your seller, and probably CC Campagnolo. If you wanted to be scientific about it, pull out an accurate digital caliper and measure the axles and find out what is wrong. You have an SR crank laying around you're not using to compare it to, at least.


----------



## smokva (Jul 21, 2004)

Take new crankset out and measure the bearings and length of the hirth semi spindles. Than compare it to your old working UT cranks. 
Also check are the bearings on new semi spindles seated properly.
Since your old UT cranks worked perfect than it is some error in montage (more probable) or design error by SRM (less probable).
You can try to put your old right UT crank with new left one to eliminate\show error in new left crank. Do the same with new right and old left. You should be able to conclude something from all of this.
When you locate crank arm with error, compare it with working old one.
But before everything triple check how you installed retaining clip, washer and joint.


----------



## bikesinmud (Jan 1, 2005)

So.....here's whats happened....
I removed everything again, re-read the instructions yet again and a nice big finger full of grease inside the cups. Clip snapped in as it always does on the drive side, 1 wave washer and a 1mm spacer on the non drive side. However.......this time I installed the spacer in the bearing cup side and put the wave washer up against the bearing. The difference being on my first and second install/removal I had the wave washer near the cup and the plastic spacer up agains the bearing. I still have movement of about 1mm but I don't have any noise. No clunking or horrible sounds of my cranks shifting. This being after >500km, many many 1000+watts sprints and even riding 2.5hrs in the rain last night. Was it the orientation of the wave and plastic spacers? I don't know. I don't care. I'm gonna ride it 'till it f'n breaks. If it happens again before my new frame arrives next month I'm going to do what Smokva suggests.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

There should be no movement at all. Obviously the DS cup and clip location is not holding the crank in place as Campy intended. Since you have a 1mm spacer and 1mm of play, the logical location for the spacer is inside the DS bearing. The DS bearing is the one that needs to be retained.

The UT system is a good design that is subject to much misunderstanding and misinfomation.


----------



## bikesinmud (Jan 1, 2005)

If I put the spacer on the DS, I can't get the clip in.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

bikesinmud said:


> If I put the spacer on the DS, I can't get the clip in.


OK. But you get the point that the DS cup and retaining clip are supposed to hold the crank in place with no discernible play. As was said earlier, it's a poor tolerance issue with the frame. But if the clunk is gone, then that's good. And no damage is being done.


----------

