# Shimano Introduces BB30 for 2013!



## Scott in MD

Not really. Made you look, though ... right?

Seriously ... anybody have any idea why Shimano has no BB30 crank? Forget for a sec which is better ... there are just a lot of BB30 bottom brackets out there.

(Shimano ... are you listening?)


----------



## dcorn

I hear a lot on this site about how super stiff the dura ace crankset is. Why change a good thing I guess? Do the adapters hurt anything when setting up the bike? 

Not saying they shouldn't do the upgrade, but maybe they are just waiting for a standard size to take shape. With BB30, OSBB, BB386 and BBright (etc) out there, why not wait to build their new DA model to the next industry standard?


----------



## cs1

dcorn said:


> I hear a lot on this site about how super stiff the dura ace crankset is. Why change a good thing I guess? Do the adapters hurt anything when setting up the bike?
> 
> Not saying they shouldn't do the upgrade, but maybe they are just waiting for a standard size to take shape. With BB30, OSBB, BB386 and BBright (etc) out there, why not wait to build their new DA model to the next industry standard?


Why not wait until Shimano *sets* the new standard? It seems they have with just about everything else.


----------



## Scott in MD

BB30 is a quarter pound lighter ... well over 100 grams. The weight advantage is lost when you add the adapters. BB30 is stiffer across the crank axle, because of 30mm diameter rather than 24mm, and adapters can't make a difference on this. And BB30 provides more clearance for ankes (precents heels rubbing on the crank center). The extra clearance is given back with the adapters. 

I won't draw the conclusion for anyone else ... but for me, BB30 is better.


----------



## RkFast

Scott in MD said:


> BB30 is a quarter pound lighter ... well over 100 grams. The weight advantage is lost when you add the adapters. BB30 is stiffer across the crank axle, because of 30mm diameter rather than 24mm, and adapters can't make a difference on this. And BB30 provides more clearance for ankes (precents heels rubbing on the crank center). The extra clearance is given back with the adapters.
> 
> I won't draw the conclusion for anyone else ... but for me, BB30 is better.


And with all that, the DA7900 cranks are STILL considered the "Gold Standard" in terms of stiffness and shifting performance and their Hollowtech II bearings, should you have a frameset with a threaded BB, could not be simpler to maintain if you tried. Oh...and they are dead quiet. Ever see a Shimano BB with a creaking problem that cant be solved with a little bit of grease and a few turns of a wrench? Yeah, me neither. 

The rep I spoke to at my LBS said Shimano has zero interest in oversize BBs at the moment, citing the reasons I list above.

For the record...I have a 2012 frame with an oversize BB (Spesh OSBB).


----------



## PJ352

*Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better..*



Scott in MD said:


> BB30 is a quarter pound lighter ... well over 100 grams. The weight advantage is lost when you add the adapters. * BB30 is stiffer across the crank axle, because of 30mm diameter rather than 24mm*, and adapters can't make a difference on this. And BB30 provides more clearance for ankes (precents heels rubbing on the crank center). The extra clearance is given back with the adapters.
> 
> I won't draw the conclusion for anyone else ... but for me, BB30 is better.


That's not a given. Standard 24mm spindles are generally chromoly, while BB30's are aluminum. But beyond that, design/ manufacturing methods also enter into the equation. 

If you want to convince the skeptics among us, provide some independent studies proving BB30 is stronger. I bet we'll have a long wait.


----------



## Scott in MD

I have bikes with all three designs of bottom brackets. Inboard (1998 Bianchi Campione); Threaded/integrated (2008 Spesh Tarmac) and BB30 (2010 Cannondale Slice tri bike. Threaded/integrated cranks are plenty stiff for me. Hell, all 3 are plenty stiff for me. I really want a Shimano BB30 because I need the ankle clearance. And I am not alone in appreciating a 100 gram weight reduction.

Shimano makes, in my opinion ...the best cranks in the world. I think they would be even better in a BB30 or PF30 design. Threaded/integrated was designed to reverse integrate into a 40 year old crank and bottom bracket standard. BB30 was designed from scratch to utilize new manufacturing and materials.

As I mentioned "I won't draw the conclusion for anyone else .... but for me, BB30 is better." If you think threaded/integrated is better, then good on you! (I don't care which you like better.) My opinion: Bigger does not necessarily mean better.... but lighter, stiffer, and more ankle clearance means better. For me, clearance is the most important factor. But ankle clearance is only important if you need it ... check the inboard heels on your shoes and see of they are significantly scuffed .... if so, maybe you would benefit from BB30.

Regarding objective and independent assessments ... ("provide some independent studies proving BB30 is *stronger*"

The February, 2012 Slowtwitch article by Dan Empfield (ever heard of him?) is probably the best independent review of all the bottom bracket standards. Excerpt: " The most important take-away here is that these new bottom bracket standards, like BBRight and BB90, are designed to make bike frames lighter,* stronger*, stiffer. Add to that the additional press fit standards, like SRAM's BB30 press fit, and you have some really exciting new achievements in bike construction ideas. "

My note: BB90 uses SHimano 24mm axles ... and the stiffness results from the extra frame width to work with. But stiffer is stiffer.

Here is some other third party insight on the crank designs, since you asked ...

"...referring to the suggestion that external bottom brackets somehow sap appreciably more energy than BB30 ones. Though there is a difference, it's been shown by others to be minimal. The real advantage is reduced weight in most cases." James, Huang, Technical Editor, BikeRadar and CyclingNews.com, 2010

ALSO

"The advantages: lighter weight and a narrower stance width, matched with the oversize spindle and stiffness of outboard-bearing systems. A 30mm-diameter spindle (most external-bearing setups use 24mm) is said to be stiffer. The crank is lighter overall, too. " - Bicycling Magazine, 2010

ALSO

"BB30 is stiffer than standard bottom brackets – delivering more power to the pedal, nearly 20% lighter – and offers substantially more ankle clearance – no more discomfort while riding. " - SRAM 2012 Technical bulletin (SRAM makes both threaded/integrated and BB30 cranks ... you'll have to decide if that is independant enough for you, but it is independant enough for me).

ALSO 

"BB30 is LIGHTER: By eliminating the BB cups and using an aluminum spindle, the weight of the crank and BB assembly can be reduced by up to 12%. BB30 is NARROWER: With the bearings inside the BB shell, the crankset can be made narrower in this critical area, increasing ankle clearance. BB30 is STIFFER: Confirmed by new EFBe testing, the BB30 design increases the stiffness of the crankset." - FSA, 2012. (FSA also makes integrated/threaded as well as BB30). 

ALSO

The VeloNews comparison of crank designs in 2009 found that while the stiffness of the BB30 crank and the threaded/integrated crank were nearly the same (although BB30 was in all cases tested, stiffer) the 1cm wider BB shell at the frame resulted in stiffer frames with the benefit of more ankle clearance. And "in all cases, stiffer" is in fact stiffer. Again, you'll have to decide if this is independent enough for you. 

I don't think any modern crank axles are chromoly, but I don't know this for sure. Are you sure Shimano is making Chromoly 24mm axles? You are probably right ... you have a lot more rep power than me.

One thing for sure ... SPesh and Cannondale and Cervelo and Blue, and a lot of other bike makers, sell a lot of bikes with BB30 cranks, and so Shimano is giving up market opportunity by not using BB30.


----------



## PJ352

Point taken re: ankle clearance. 

However...

Save for a _reference to_ EFBe testing (but no data supplied) all you've posted are excerpts from articles published by a variety of mags/ 'experts'. Still, _no data to back up claims_.

Weight differences are simple to verify (and have been), but I've yet to see proof that BB30 is 'better' in any measurable way. 'Market speak' or variations of it, but _no proof._

My opinion is that no matter the BB design, BB frame shells can be made adequately stiff that there's no real need for 'improved' BB designs. But to sell bikes, technology and 'new improved' designs have to be offered.

As far as Shimano not getting into the BB30 market, there may be good reason. I've seen and heard about more problems with BB30 set ups that with any previous BB technology. Trek couldn't afford to keep replacing frames to correct for BB play, so they offered shims. Specialized seems to fare better with frame technology, but keeps changing their specs on some OSBB installs (depending on crankset).

Far be it for me to change your mind (or you mine), so I'm not motivated to expend a lot of time/ energy trying to do so. But FWIW and IMO, BB30 is a needless bit of technology that some are willing to buy into. Further, the few that _can_ flex a BB area of a bike would be hard pressed to say with any certainty just where the flex originates.


----------



## Scott in MD

Point taken re: simple, elegant, creak-free, maintenance- friendly design of threaded/integrated. I also believe that the shifting performance of cranksets is what differentiates them more than any other factor ... and Shimano has, IMO, the inside lane on this.

Point also taken re: BB30 set up problems. I have some backgound in rotating component mechanical design (airplane turbines), so I draw the assumption that Spesh and FSA and others are moving towards PF30 style press-fit inserts in frames that hold bearings because of the very real potential to damage an expensive frame with improper pressing of BB30 bearings directly into the frame shell. Nearly anyone can change a threaded/ integrated bottom bracket without screwing anything up, and with a little Phil grease and the right torque, it will almost never (i.e. it won't) creak. I can imagine someone banging bearings into a BB30 and mis-aligning from true perpindicular, but not realizing and then riding for the rest of the bottom bracket's life with increased bottom bracket friction. Or not changing bearings, because of the neeed to special tools (bearing press or headset press) and same result: more bottom bracket friction.

And also, re: flex. Agree. There are some good reasons to prefer BB30, but stiffness is not one of them. (I wasn't trying to imply this with OP ... mostly I was attempting to make the point that since so many frame-makers are using BB30 now, including one that I have, I'd really like to see Shimano offer a 30mm design.)


----------



## leo_NM

will shimano 9000 (RD and FD) work with other cranks like the hollowgram SLSI ??

thanks.


----------



## OldChipper

I, for one, would NEVER EVER buy a frame with press-in BB bearings. Period. Guaranteed to creak eventually, especially for a bigger/stronger rider like me. Shimano's current system is plenty stiff & light for ANY non-pro (and probably for all pros too). New (and especially more complicated) isn't necessarily better - and (as has been observed) especially when new requires new toolsl and is harder to maintain.


----------

