Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: toddre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,212

    BB shell standards

    What's everybody's thoughts on using PF30 with steel?
    What say you?
    Thanks

  2. #2
    Harrumph
    Reputation: G-reg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,583
    I've played with PF30 BBs for the purpose of using an EBB and having commercially available cutters to finish the shell. Can't really think of any other good reason to bother.
    Slowly slipping to retrogrouchyness

  3. #3
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,135
    No advantages, lots of disadvantages, nuts to that.

    -Walt
    Waltworks Custom Bicycles
    Park City, UT USA
    www.waltworks.com
    waltworks.blogspot.com

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,017
    I never used one and see no good reason to use one for my needs.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: toddre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,212
    Thanks guys for the input.... when I initially typed it, I was thinking with my wallet. I'm just going to stick with a standard shell.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    236
    I've played with one build. Wish I hadn't. Just wasted time and money to do what I could already do. I'd recommend staying with what is already a good system, and probably won't creak
    cheers
    andy walker

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    5
    FWIW I'm building a PF30 bike right now so I'll offer up a differing opinion. I like that the shell is larger and so provides a bit more real estate to attach the other tubes. I'm experimenting with a 29er that will have 1.5" ST and DT. This configuration would certainly be doable with an english threaded bb but looks a bit more pleasing to me with a bigger bb shell to match.

    As a mechanic I've come to like the PF30 system. Easy to maintain, not as finicky as BB30, cheap BB bearings and lighter than threaded to boot. Theoretically it should be stiffer too, but that's not necessarily a major factor for me.

    All of my previous bikes have been threaded so this is a departure for me that is still in the works... time will tell.

    Cheers.

  8. #8
    DWF
    DWF is offline
    Non Dual Bliss
    Reputation: DWF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,241
    PF30 = instant half-link EBB if you want to convert the bike to SS instead of using sliders or some of the other weighty adjustable drops.
    A man must have enemies and places he is not welcome. In the end we are not only defined by our friends but those against us.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    161
    I'm curious as to why people don't like or use PF30. Is it a frame building issue (eg facing the shell) or is it a general issue with PF30 in use?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    5
    I'm really not sure. I can see the issue of purchasing a pretty expensive reamer, but the benefits outweigh the negatives for me (at least in theory- I should reiterate I'm still building my first PF30 frame).

  11. #11
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,135
    I'll flip the question for you - what's the benefit? And don't say lighter stiff cranks - because you can just use thread-in outboard bearings to accept BB30 cranks anyway.

    I agree that:
    -Half-link EBB is nice
    -For aluminum or carbon or maybe ti, much easier to join big frame members

    Other than that, I don't see much point.

    -Walt
    Waltworks Custom Bicycles
    Park City, UT USA
    www.waltworks.com
    waltworks.blogspot.com

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    765
    I am not sure but I think PF30 gives potentially lower Q factor.

    From what I have heard people are not having any problems with PF30. For rare cases of creaking issues options like the PRAXIS threaded insert seem like they would make it work even with a bad ream job.

    My guess is that eventually it will be the "new standard". How often do we see French or Italian threaded bottom bracket shells. Eventually people buying cranks will likely find that cranks are build with 30mm spindles and if that happens it will become frustrating to have a bike that is locked into the old style 24mm spindle. It's like tapered vs. 1.125 forks. Eventually it just makes sense for things to move in the direction that is common provided it works well.

    The outboard bearings seem to be to be a hack.

    I used the PF30 style on my new frame and hope to get it back from powder this week. Right now I am planning to run a press fit bottom bracket but the ability to use half link EBB in a big plus for me.

    My guess is the next few years are going to see more of this but hopefully things will settle down eventually with a reasonable standard that works well enough for all cases. Unless there is a big plus that I have not considered for the threaded bb I don't see any reason why I would want to use it.
    Mark Farnsworth, Raleigh, NC
    http://farnsworthbikes.com

  13. #13
    Nemophilist
    Reputation: TrailMaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,745
    Dang;

    Craig Smith of Mendon Cycle Smith was talking about them the other day in a thread, on the Fatbike Forum I think, but I'll be darned if I can find it. He deals with them every day, and he is not impressed. NOT. N*O*T!
    Most people ply the Well Trodden Path. A few seek a different way, and leave a Trail behind.
    - John Hajny, a.k.a. TrailMaker

  14. #14
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,135
    Q factor has *nothing* to do with the BB, and you can run a 30mm spindle just fine in an English threaded shell. As for "hack", I don't know that I feel that outboard bearings are problematic inherently. Seems the current crop of outboard stuff has held up well for most people - which you certainly cannot say about the PF/BB30 stuff. Go talk to a shop rat and see how many bikes with creaky/seized/problematic pressed-bearing BBs they deal with on a daily basis...

    And I am far from a retro grouch, mind you!

    -Walt
    Waltworks Custom Bicycles
    Park City, UT USA
    www.waltworks.com
    waltworks.blogspot.com

  15. #15
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,041
    My interest in carbon molding tells me that some guy looking at a bill of materials, and asked, "Why don't we just mold the bearing cups into the frame, and skip the bill on the metal threaded insert and the epoxy used to bond it there?"

    It would skip some stuff, sure.

    If that's what it's for, I'd prefer to know, but doubt "they" would admit it.
    Latitude: 44.93 N

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flip D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    144
    It's like the guy talking about how he likes the BB92 on his Rocky Mtn Altitude because the BB is big and stiff, even though those two have nothing to do with each other. It makes sense for a company like Specialized who sell a lot of bikes to a lot of uninformed consumers. Its easy for a shop employee to point and say new standard and bigger=better. I imagine when you push the numbers bikes they do that any gimmick helps. For a real bike company for real riders, it doesn't make sense to introduce inevitable creaking and the extra expense of a PF BB($60+ BB verses a $15 set of bearings.)

    I personally have never seen a creaky threaded BB that I wasn't able to fix with a torque wrench to the crank set.

    It gives me hope that I've seen that some manufactures literature no longer show that the PF BB is a feature on its bikes. You have to look at the specs to see that it has it. Hopefully its gotten enough attention for what it really is that we go back to something better.

Similar Threads

  1. Too Many Bike Standards!!
    By TwoEars in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-14-2013, 01:08 PM
  2. headset standards rant.
    By FM in forum Tooltime
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-16-2013, 06:10 AM
  3. Helmet safety standards
    By mountainmatt in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-02-2013, 11:22 AM
  4. Hard shell or soft shell knee pads
    By Qubo_2408 in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-18-2012, 09:43 PM
  5. New BB 'standards' - which one would you choose?
    By Joe Nation in forum Frame Building
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-06-2011, 03:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •