Results 1 to 26 of 26
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936

    Saved 21 grams on my BB - using steel

    Granted - I'm going from 4 bearing to 2 bearing but bearings are replaceable spindles are not so easily replaceable and I would not want to damage myself or my crank arms if my token scandium would have failed.

    195 grams to 174 including bolts. Plus I can save more by using some Alloy bolts which sounds crazy but I could just pack one Ti bolt in my shirt when I ride incase I need it. Does that sound crazy?

    EDIT: I should say these are both 73/113.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Irrenarzt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    853
    Fairwheel, does Ralph still run that joint? Also, why use ptfe tape? Grease weighs less.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    I'm just a customer of Fairwheel - I have no other relation other than I post my bike on their forum.

    Tape was on the BB when it was new - should I take it off.

    To be honest - looking at my records the token without grease and loctite inside and outside of the spindle - it originally weighed 186 so my savings are NOT what I said earlier. They are closer to 12 grams. Sorry.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Irrenarzt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    853
    Cool, go with grease I'd say.

  5. #5
    Get your freak on!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,697
    Go with Tape and grease.. if the fit in the BB is tight, then just use grease.

    As for carrying a Ti bolt with you just incase your alloy fails - that is stupid! The cranks are pressed on anyway.. install the cranks with steel bolts, remove and thne install the Alloy - Done


  6. #6
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    off-center!

    most ISIS BBs will make your cranks stay off-center on the Scale! the Scale has 73mm BB shell AND E-Type derailleur which makes the BBs sit to the right.no big deal really but not really ideal.

    so far there's just FSA and Truvativ doing special BBs for 73 and E-type derailleurs.those are both around 190-200g though.

    what i did when i run my Race Face ISIS cranks:

    i used a 108mm roadie ISIS BB. the scandiums i have weigh just 139g and come now with a thicker axle just like the one on the MTB version. since it is supposed to go on 68mm BB shells only it would be really offset to the right. however i shaved off that lip on the right side cup and now it can be installed in the middle of the BBshell. it worked great on my bike. no problems and even lighter.

    ok - i also run only 2 chainrings and the shorter axle gave me a better chainline as well. but by looking at the distances of the chainrings i guess also 3 rings would fit. the Powerarms have the rings a bit to the outside compared with other cranks.

    by the way: my 29t chainring weighs 19g / 42t weighs 49g...no inner chainring bolts...combined with my new titanium cassette (11-28=160g) this is about the lightest MTB worthy setup!

    there's definitely no need at all for ugly looking Claviculas!!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    Ah . . . this is interesting information I have never heard before that relates directly with my problems.

    It sounds like I need to buy yet another BB.

    I always install the BB from the drive side is there some way I can install it from the non drive side so that that side sticks out more?

    It seems like my only solution is getting a crank with an (semi) integrated spindle. The Claviculas would be perfect and my Power Arms would make great back up cranks (or vise versa) if I ever get them to work right with isis and Scale.



    BTW - I would be interested in an 06 scale but would rather not do the cable rerouting myself. Is 06 all sold out?

    ONE OTHER THING NINO - Concerning your solution above, you don't use an e-type front der so it is too bad you still have to make modifications. In my case, just guessing, it seems like if I could just get rid of the e-plate it would be much better. Drive side would shift inward, improving chain line, non-drive spindle would stick out more, solving my interference problem.
    Last edited by Slobberdoggy; 08-12-2006 at 05:50 AM.

  8. #8
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Slobberdoggy
    Granted - I'm going from 4 bearing to 2 bearing but bearings are replaceable spindles are not so easily replaceable and I would not want to damage myself or my crank arms if my token scandium would have failed.

    195 grams to 174 including bolts. Plus I can save more by using some Alloy bolts which sounds crazy but I could just pack one Ti bolt in my shirt when I ride incase I need it. Does that sound crazy?

    EDIT: I should say these are both 73/113.
    Don't worry about the Al crank bolts. As has been said earlier- just install w/the steel bolts, take steel bolts off, install Al bolts (I use Tokens w/my AC ISIS) and it's all good. Just get the Al bolts on nice and firm. There is no need to really reef on 'em because you already have the crankarms on tight with the steel bolts. I've run this setup without a hitch for three years. I'm still on my original Token Al crank bolts. The crankarms never work loose. BTW, pay attention to the torque specs on the BB. Too much and it won't roll easy. Too little and it will wear quickly. 25 to 30 lbs if I remember correctly. It's far more sensitive to torque then any shimano BB. FWIW, I'd order up a set of bearings now so that you have them when you need them. The bearing change is really pretty straightforward but is a pain in the arse. You'll know when you need new bearings- the BB will start to bark at you in a pleading fashion.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    Correct lbs and good advice. That's what I have been planning on doing with the Alu bolts but wasn't sure if that would attract some criticism.

    Do you know the bearing numbers off hand? I will be tearing it apart again today to see what else I can do about my "issues" with "off center" so I can probably get the numbers. AC might have them too. Did you get the popular ceramic bearings? LOL


    (Blast! My coffee tastes like soap today. )

  10. #10
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Slobberdoggy
    Correct lbs and good advice. That's what I have been planning on doing with the Alu bolts but wasn't sure if that would attract some criticism.

    Do you know the bearing numbers off hand? I will be tearing it apart again today to see what else I can do about my "issues" with "off center" so I can probably get the numbers. AC might have them too. Did you get the popular ceramic bearings? LOL


    (Blast! My coffee tastes like soap today. )
    AC sells them directly from their web site. The last set I bought were around 20 bucks. They advertise the new cartridge bearings as "stainless." This naturally leads one to wonder why they weren't stainless in the first place. I wasn't even aware a non-stainless bearing existed. BTW, I AM interested in ceramic bearings for the AC BB but was not aware this would be a viable option. I fully admit to being clueless about the whole cermaic bearing world. If they last longer then the crappy AC bearings I'm all over it. Do you have a source?
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    www.fairwheelbikes.com/shop/ has some there are also some places that just sell bearings that have them. You might try searching the wws' forum - it's been a popular and contentious topic. My guess is a top of the line Japanese bearing would be as good or better. Usually ceramic bearings are all about less friction which is where the debate begins - rather then durability or at least that is the impression I have gotten.

    As Nino eluded to - it looks like I will be buying another BB and this time a truely heavy one. I need a 73E x 113 bb. Emphasis on 73E. Otherwise I need to perform surgery to my frame bb shell by cutting it down to 68mm. I just love being the guinea pig / person left in the dark on these issues. And UPS is soo slow. . .

  12. #12
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    As Nino eluded to - it looks like I will be buying another BB and this time a truely heavy one. I need a 73E x 113 bb. Emphasis on 73E. Otherwise I need to perform surgery to my frame bb shell by cutting it down to 68mm. I just love being the guinea pig / person left in the dark on these issues. And UPS is soo slow. . .[/QUOTE]

    That sucks. But you saved alot w/the frame so another 40g isn't the end of the world and you'll have a durable BB, prolly. No need to fret over bearing sizes and replacement every six months. Curious: what were you using previously and why not go back to that assuming it worked?
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    No, this whole time I have been riding with this issue. My chain line was really messed up so I could be in the middle ring and biggest cog in the back. I basically worked from the middle ring and in the rear half way and smaller cogs - to shift up then I'd go into the third. On rare occasions I would go into my granny gear which was fine but I couldn't do middle big ring or 2nd to biggest in the back.

    On the other side -

    Like with this AC bb - the arm starts to get pressed on just a little as it approaches the bb cup. It's ridable - just. The token got really bad where it would be loose so I gooped on a bunch of loctite on the outside of the spindle to create some sort of a wedge.

    I would ride ride ride and when I got back it would need to be reworked. sometimes rotating the crank on the splines would create a better fit.

    I think the BB to get is FSA Pro-Ti 73x113 for e-type ders. cr4980 claimed weight 172 g w/alloy bolts.

  14. #14
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    73 E Bb

    Quote Originally Posted by Slobberdoggy
    No, this whole time I have been riding with this issue. My chain line was really messed up so I could be in the middle ring and biggest cog in the back. I basically worked from the middle ring and in the rear half way and smaller cogs - to shift up then I'd go into the third. On rare occasions I would go into my granny gear which was fine but I couldn't do middle big ring or 2nd to biggest in the back.

    On the other side -

    Like with this AC bb - the arm starts to get pressed on just a little as it approaches the bb cup. It's ridable - just. The token got really bad where it would be loose so I gooped on a bunch of loctite on the outside of the spindle to create some sort of a wedge.

    I would ride ride ride and when I got back it would need to be reworked. sometimes rotating the crank on the splines would create a better fit.

    I think the BB to get is FSA Pro-Ti 73x113 for e-type ders. cr4980 claimed weight 172 g w/alloy bolts.
    correct - that's the FSA i was talking about. that's made with off-center axle to compensate the added width of the E-plate.

    BUT why you guys don't do it like i did? just trim the right side cup on a regular BB so it can be threaded farther into the frame. this way the axle can be positioned in the middle right where it belongs. no big deal really. all you need is a BB with "inside tool" like isis has. with the Ameican classic it won't work as there you need that flange to istall it. see my shaved cup in the picture below and in the second picture alongside a regular, untouched BB. this was a 2 minute job and allowed me to use the lightweight 137g roadie BB with 68mm width on my 73mm Scale....that's a cheap fix!

    @ slobberdoggy: it would take only a couple of days from switzerland...a 1/15th of your planned investment and lighter as well
    Attached Images Attached Images

  15. #15
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    correct - that's the FSA i was talking about. that's made with off-center axle to compensate the added width of the E-plate.

    BUT why you guys don't do it like i did? just trim the right side cup on a regular BB so it can be threaded farther into the frame. this way the axle can be positioned in the middle right where it belongs. no big deal really. all you need is a BB with "inside tool" like isis has. with the Ameican classic it won't work as there you need that flange to istall it. see my shaved cup in the picture below and in the second picture alongside a regular, untouched BB. this was a 2 minute job and allowed me to use the lightweight 137g roadie BB with 68mm width on my 73mm Scale....that's a cheap fix!

    @ slobberdoggy: it would take only a couple of days from switzerland...a 1/15th of your planned investment and lighter as well
    Nino, Slob's prolly thinking scandium axels and 200lb riders don't play well together. I've seen the pictures of failed Sc axels and they send shivers down my spine. Let's not forget that your a 150lb rider and don't have to worry much about these issues.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  16. #16
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    different thicknesses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Axis II
    Nino, Slob's prolly thinking scandium axels and 200lb riders don't play well together. I've seen the pictures of failed Sc axels and they send shivers down my spine. Let's not forget that your a 150lb rider and don't have to worry much about these issues.
    i haven't seen any such picture from MTB scandium BBs. the ones i remember were those with the bigger M14 bolts. those have a 14mm inner hole compared to the one i showed above which has just a 12mm bore. those BBs weighed even less. they were just 121g and supposed to go on roadbikes ONLY! remember, the one i am talking about weighs 140g and it has a beefier axle.

    AND those failures occured because people thought they could save more weight by going with shorter, regular Al-bolts then those long ones that come with those scandium BBs. BUT these long bolts actually support the axle. so by swapping bolts they added stress.

    i would rate the scandium BBs with M12 bolts safe even for a 200lbs rider. there's no weight limit on them as well.

    -picture of the lightweight 121g BB (that's the one using M14 bolts)
    -M14 bolts for the 121g BB
    -comparison of the really thin scandium axle and FRM alloy axle
    -picture of the 139g BB together with the special M12 bolts that come with it.
    -M12 bolts
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by nino; 08-13-2006 at 05:53 AM.

  17. #17
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i haven't seen any such picture from MTB scandium BBs. the ones i remember were those with the bigger M14 bolts. those have a 14mm inner hole compared to the one i showed above which has just a 12mm bore. those BBs weighed even less. they were just 121g and supposed to go on roadbikes ONLY! remember, the one i am talking about weighs 140g and it has a beefier axle.

    AND those failures occured because people thought they could save more weight by going with shorter, regular Al-bolts then those long ones that come with those scandium BBs. BUT these long bolts actually support the axle. so by swapping bolts they added stress.

    i would rate the scandium BBs with M12 bolts safe even for a 200lbs rider. there's no weight limit on them as well.

    -picture of the lightweight 121g BB (that's the one using M14 bolts)
    -M14 bolts for the 121g BB
    -comparison of the really thin scandium axle and FRM alloy axle
    -picture of the 139g BB together with the special M12 bolts that come with it.
    -M12 bolts
    Got it. That makes sense regarding the longer crank bolt supporting the spindle. I've never seen such a long bolt as that that you have pictured. See, this is why I love this forum. One never stops learning.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    205
    just trim the right side cup on a regular BB so it can be threaded farther into the frame.
    Nino, isn't this flange needed to install the E-type deraileur? Otherwise this looks like the perfect way to have a lightweight bottombracket for my Scale.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    139
    Personally I've been running an AC 73x113 BB in my Genius (same issue as the Scale with a 73 shell and E-type mech, but absolutely no way I can see to run a normal front mech like Nino, so you're stuck with that). Have had that in since January. Yes the cranks are offset 2.5mm to the right, but that doesn't seem to be a problem. Certainly not enough to notice when pedalling, and my shifting all works fine.

    When I looked, the FSA 73 E-type BB was only available in 118 width, which would put the right crank out just as far anyway, and simply move the left crank out 5mm more - can't see how a 113 spindle would work shifted 2.5mm to the left, as the crank (at least my FSA carbons) would then foul on the BB cup.

    Obviously a flangeless right cup would be pretty useless to those of us running E-type mechs, unless anybody can suggest a different way of securing the plate?

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: karpiel666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,124
    What a brilliant idea! save weight on something than take the spare part along for the ride, just incase it breaks Dont mean to troll but I just find that to be a rediculous idea.
    Quote Originally Posted by Qatarbhoy
    I have to ask for them to do a "Number two" on my head

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    205
    It looks like we are lucky slobberdoggy. I just received this mail from Token. They produce the nicest bottombrakets I think and they can produce E-type bottombrackets.

    Dear Dennis,

    If you need E-Type Bottom Bracket.
    We can produce it. Please contact TOKEN Distributor.
    Company: MANUSPORT
    ATTN: Mr. Manu Lhoir
    TEL:+32 2 472 672834
    Email:manulhoir@edpnet.be

    Best regards,
    James Chang
    TOKENPRODUCTS INC.
    www.tokenproducts.com
    EUROBIKE 2006
    BOOTH# B3-407
    INTERBIKE 2006
    BOOTH# 5419

    I'm going to contact this guy and let you know.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    Sounds good - I guess.




    ¥ ´e ®´? œ?´®†¥¨ˆø?“‘«æ…¬???©ƒ?ßå??ç??˜µ??÷•¶§?¢£¢£™¡™£¢??– ºª•¶§?¢£

  23. #23
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    no need to secure the plate

    Quote Originally Posted by chris m
    Obviously a flangeless right cup would be pretty useless to those of us running E-type mechs, unless anybody can suggest a different way of securing the plate?
    there is no need to secure the e-type clamp. on one strike i built i used a Race face signature Ti ISIS BB which doesn't have the counter ring on the BB. so the cups are just plain threaded. the E-type plate would just go around.

    now i have a guy here that built his lightweight Scale using a regular 113mm KCNC BB and he used the simplest solution right away:
    he cut the E-plate so it would fit on the outer of the BB. it works great. the derailleur gets hold by the bolt above so the plate actually serves just to have the derailleur in the right place. he has no problems this way and can use whatever BB he likes. and the derailleur gets lighter as well
    Attached Images Attached Images

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,094
    So he's using that single little bolt to hold the front derailleur to the frame? That won't last long!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,094
    You may be thinking of a photo I posted. I don't weigh anywhere near 200 pounds but my FRM BB spindle was thicker as pictured & it failed (snapped in half). I don't think it was an alloy with scandium, but I doubt that matters much. The longer bolts on these probably do help, but I still don't think this is a good place for aluminum. Maybe if the axles were larger in diameter like Cannondale Si.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    now i have a guy here that built his lightweight Scale using a regular 113mm KCNC BB and he used the simplest solution right away:
    he cut the E-plate so it would fit on the outer of the BB. it works great. the derailleur gets hold by the bolt above so the plate actually serves just to have the derailleur in the right place. he has no problems this way and can use whatever BB he likes. and the derailleur gets lighter as well
    Looks a rubbish idea to me. That little bolt isn't designed to take all the load, and I really struggle to see how the whole thing wouldn't twist around in use. Has got to make it a lot less stiff and the shifting a lot worse if nothing else. Does prompt some thoughts on how to adapt one properly though...

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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