north of 600g with chainring.
xtrs are just under 500g without chainring.
no idea on race face, their cranks aren't something i'd consider.
north of 600g with chainring.
xtrs are just under 500g without chainring.
no idea on race face, their cranks aren't something i'd consider.
No. They still manage to design some other things pretty well.Shite because Sram
10,000km, mostly dry ridingTBF pretty much all modern BB standards are pretty poor at stopping that
this
what sort of weather and mileage are you heralding as "OK"?
Yeah, that's exactly why I'm a bit iffy about the whole GXP in an mtb thing.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.
Bb spacer not an option?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).
One of each kind. That’s how I roll. Nothing wrong with a RF on one side and an X01 on the other.if it needs spaced loads he could always just run the one arm like jm_
Not sure whether there would be enough spindle to space it out AND have the other crank arm grip the spindle properly. Might work. Willing to give it a go on cheaper older cranks.Bb spacer not an option?
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...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
Haha PF92 is crappy truly, but superboost means I can switch wheels between DH bike and all round/enduro bike.Optimal solution is to ditch the bike with 2 stupid standards (PF92 and SuperBoost), and get something sensible.
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.Haha PF92 is crappy truly, but superboost means I can switch wheels between DH bike and all round/enduro bike.
Better question, this vs. the dual-row no-cup bearings?Rejoice brothers, for our problems may be resolved through more purchasing.
The Magic Bearing!
Discover how we're resolving 4030 bicycle bearing issues at BBInfinite. We discuss what initiated this bearing and how we went about the design process.www.bbinfinite.com
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.
Edited for clarity...Better question, this vs. the dual-row no-cup bearings?
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.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.
Sram PressFit DUB BB86.5 Road Bottom Bracket
Sram PressFit DUB BB86.5 Road Bottom Bracket :: From $46.00 :: Sram Press Fit Bottom Brackets - 41mm at Insertionwww.universalcycles.com
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.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.
Classic SRAM I reckonah, 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.
Which is exactly what Shimano did with 24mm HTII BBsSRAM just added a plastic spacer on the inside of a30mmbearing to add their seal.
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).So is Sram dub wide just a dub bottom bracket with a different spacer on the outside?