Quantcast

30mm BB92 options?

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,927
5,830
UK
Shite because Sram
No. They still manage to design some other things pretty well.
And are no way as dickish as Fox in regards to tooling requirements to actually work on their products.
 

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,927
5,830
UK
although massively longer than you'd typically expect the same BB to last on an mtb ridden in Scotland. On a fair weather use roadbike it's not exactly time to be blowing a fanfare just yet.
 

scrublover

Turbo Monkey
Sep 1, 2004
2,997
6,488
have used GXP adapters in non-GXP BBs and not died.

have used PF92 DUB BB with similar results.

caveat: i'm a small mammal @ roughtly 165# dressed up to ride, don't tend to ride in slop, and am a spinner more than a masher.

YMMV
 

Kurt_80

Monkey
Jan 25, 2016
491
420
Perth, WA.
although massively longer than you'd typically expect the same BB to last on an mtb ridden in Scotland. On a fair weather use roadbike it's not exactly time to be blowing a fanfare just yet.
Yeah, that's exactly why I'm a bit iffy about the whole GXP in an mtb thing.

I want to be a dyed-in-the-wool 24mm threaded BB guy, but there's not many options. Unless @Leafy tries those Aliexpress Ti cranks and survives, in which case I'll get them too.
 

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,927
5,830
UK
they don't work very well without the other arm .

but do crack on if just ONE works out for ya.
 

Kurt_80

Monkey
Jan 25, 2016
491
420
Perth, WA.
Hehe, banter.

Shimanos are good. It's more that I'm looking for ways to cut weight. The cranks I have right now (RF Aeffect) are pretty much on par with XTs, so no point swapping them. And new XTRs save only 100g, which I'd take, except that the asking price is around $600AUD.

I've started looking at older XTRs, and seeing if I can mount the ring on the outside of the spider to bring the chainline out (superboost frame).
 

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,927
5,830
UK
if it needs spaced loads he could always just run the one arm like jm_
 

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,927
5,830
UK
Why are you looking to save < 100g on (already fairly light) cranks for a bike that has superboost hub spacing?

PS. Cutting off the 3 largest cassette sprockets should reduce weight even MOAR plus sort any chain line issues

1644315816664.png
 
Last edited:

Kurt_80

Monkey
Jan 25, 2016
491
420
Perth, WA.
Why are you looking to save < 100g on (already fairly light) cranks for a bike that has superboost hub spacing?

PS. Cutting off the 3 largest cassette sprockets should reduce weight even MOAR plus sort any chain line issues

View attachment 171589
I'm an obsessive tinkerer basically. Bikes are one of those areas where there's a lot of room to avoid the bs and get, to my mind, an optimal solution. There's a lot of bs these days...

FWIW, I agree about the gearing situation. Current setup is a 30t front with an 11-46 (I think) rear 11 speed. Total over/underkill for MTB over here. I've found some good condition 2nd hand parts and going back to 10 speed, 11-36 on the back. Not sure about the front, maybe a 32, maybe a 34. That will still get me under a 1:1 ratio in 1st, which is a bit of a luxury, but dump a bunch of weight and make the gears more usable.

On a related note, I've spent a bit of time pulling my hair out trying to find 7-8 speed hubs, which, with a superboost rear end, would make for basically an indestructible light wheel with a useful gear range. Not much exists, which is a shame, but not surprising given the industry... errr... wrong thread?? hahaha
 

Andeh

Customer Title
Mar 3, 2020
1,087
1,046
Optimal solution is to ditch the bike with 2 stupid standards (PF92 and SuperBoost), and get something sensible.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,231
6,224
borcester rhymes
Haha PF92 is crappy truly, but superboost means I can switch wheels between DH bike and all round/enduro bike.
I don't think BB92 is bad anymore...it's just that 30mm is better than 24mm, and you can't properly run 30mm in BB92. If you can settle for metal, shimano + BB92 is ok.
 

Andeh

Customer Title
Mar 3, 2020
1,087
1,046
My buddy and I both have eeWings, mine on BSA and his on PF92. He has nothing but headaches with the PF92 BB and 30mm spindle - bearings wearing out every few months. My only issues come when I wash the BB with soap too often. Given how awesome the cranks are, the PF92/30mm spindle headaches are enough to ensure that I will never buy a PF92 bike.

WAO's implementation of SB is good, and I'd be OK with that. I wouldn't buy it with the wider BB though.
 

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,927
5,830
UK
Tear your hair out no longer..
An 8 speed hub is the same thing as a 9, 10 or 11.
Shimano HG standard only changed from 7 to 8 and for road 11.

I hear from folically challenged friends Turkey is the place to go.
 
Last edited:

Kurt_80

Monkey
Jan 25, 2016
491
420
Perth, WA.
Rejoice brothers, for our problems may be resolved through more purchasing.


Serious question, has anyone tried this? A 40x30 bearing seems a better option than 37x30 - apparently the usual size.

I've only seen one longish term review in the comments on Hambini's page. Good so far, but not enough to make a decision on.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
19,273
9,914
AK
Rejoice brothers, for our problems may be resolved through more purchasing.


Serious question, has anyone tried this? A 40x30 bearing seems a better option than 37x30 - apparently the usual size.

I've only seen one longish term review in the comments on Hambini's page. Good so far, but not enough to make a decision on.
Better question, this vs. the dual-row no-cup bearings?
 

Kurt_80

Monkey
Jan 25, 2016
491
420
Perth, WA.
Better question, this vs. the dual-row no-cup bearings?
Edited for clarity...

Do you mean 37mm OD double row vs 40mm OD single row?

If so, according to my one angry source of information (Hambini), double row of 37/30 bearings makes sweet FA difference compared to a single row. Maybe in the neighbourhood of 25% improvement.

He would have it, generally speaking, that bigger balls produce much better longevity. He's a bit suspicious about the 40/30 bearing in particular though.
 
Last edited:

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,231
6,224
borcester rhymes
So I'm revisiting this as I am searching for 165mm road cranks and options are surprisingly sparse. I see some cheap chinese cranks available with a DUB spindle and I'm wondering how people are doing with bb92 or bb86 and DUB bottom brackets. I don't doubt the crapiness of chinese bearings but this won't be a high-torque foul weather monster either.
 

6thElement

Schrodinger's Immigrant
Jul 29, 2008
16,284
13,560
My wife's road bike is press fit 41mm ID and has had this installed for 3 years thus far without issue using Force AXS cranks. Not ridden in the wet too much at all, but no issues from it.

 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,231
6,224
borcester rhymes
My wife's road bike is press fit 41mm ID and has had this installed for 3 years thus far without issue using Force AXS cranks. Not ridden in the wet too much at all, but no issues from it.

Is that SRAMish for BB86? I think it is. That's good to hear- I read through the earlier part of this thread remembering that somebody had mentioned DUB was partially designed to use bigger bearings in the BB86 shell. Not sure if it worked or not.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,231
6,224
borcester rhymes
The obvious answer is DUB.

People seemed to gloss over and get all fired up about the 28.999 thing but Sram actually did something neat on this. Instead of a cartridge bearing pressed into a shell that gets pressed into your bb they integrated the outer race of the bearing into the shell.
ah, did a little bit of research, and it turns out this isn't true at all. SRAM just added a plastic spacer on the inside of a 30mm bearing to add their seal. So you get a plastic shell on the outside and inside and a bottom bracket that's not compatible with anything else. Same bearing size as BB92/30mm sizes. woof.
 

Flo33

Turbo Monkey
Mar 3, 2015
2,089
1,319
Styria
ah, did a little bit of research, and it turns out this isn't true at all. SRAM just added a plastic spacer on the inside of a 30mm bearing to add their seal. So you get a plastic shell on the outside and inside and a bottom bracket that's not compatible with anything else. Same bearing size as BB92/30mm sizes. woof.
Classic SRAM I reckon
 

Lelandjt

adorbs
Apr 4, 2008
2,551
890
Breckenridge, CO/Lahaina,HI
So is Sram dub wide just a dub bottom bracket with a different spacer on the outside?
Yes. I think the crank has a longer spindle. They're labeled as DUB 55 (as in 55mm chainline). If I wanted to put a regular crank on a new frame that comes specced with a 55 crank I'd dial the preload ring all the way out, see how thick a spacer I could fit on the right, then check the chainring to chainstay clearance. I bet it works, epsecially if you use a 32 or smaller ring (pussy).
 
Last edited: