[BurlyShirley]

Well, that was a bad idea.

Bearings are chirping already and Ive maybe done 10 rides on the things. :mumble:

So I guess that settles that argument once and for all. It IS necessary. Going to get some raceface bearings this time around and have the BB faced, for sure.

 

[JRB]

I have not had an issue. I would just get a RF bottom bracket. I don't know if FSA cups will work with a shimano spacer, but if you find out they will, I will send you some.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Hehehehehe... Always nice to have hard evidence, but...

 

[Echo]

I have not had an issue.

What frame do you have though? Some high end frames come faced already.

 

[JRB]

What frame do you have though? Some high end frames come faced already.

They were on the Haro, and then Julie's K2, where they still reside. Is a Bullit not a high end frame??? I would have faced my Reign, but the tool was at the other store, 30 miles away. I still don't see how they can bind, if there are enough thread engaged. That is what is cool about RF cups. They have twice the threads on the drive side.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Ya can't negotiate with a roller bearing.

 

[JRB]

I still don't understand, since the bearings are inside of a cup that can't be adjusted. I don't see how anything can bind.

 

[Echo]

Is a Bullit not a high end frame???

I didn't say "all high end frames come pre-faced". I said "some high end frames come pre-faced".

The fact that your wife didn't ruin a bottom bracket and BurlyShirley did, well how about that? A 100 lb girl riding an XC bike twice a month caused less wear on the bike than a 175 lb guy riding a freeride bike several times a week? Wow.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Distortion - There's an old auto shop trick of adjusting an inside micrometer so it just supports itself in a cylinder bore and then squeezing the outside of the block with your hands - the mike falls out of the bore.

Bearings care about ten thousandths of an inch. If the shoulder of the housing is not flat and orthogonal to the center of the threads, the shape of the cup can be changed when it seats.

 

[JRB]

I didn't say "all high end frames come pre-faced". I said "some high end frames come pre-faced".

The fact that your wife didn't ruin a bottom bracket and BurlyShirley did, well how about that? A 100 lb girl riding an XC bike twice a month caused less wear on the bike than a 175 lb guy riding a freeride bike several times a week? Wow.

I know what you said. You, however, don't know how much I ran the BB, or how much Julie rides. She never rides now, but she's not 100 lbs either. I am saying that I rode them for a good while and now they are on her bike. I would still ride them if the arms were 175s. Whatever - I'm not arguing with you. I just want to know how something that doesn't seem like it can bind, does bind.

 

[JRB]

Distortion - There's an old auto shop trick of adjusting an inside micrometer so it just supports itself in a cylinder bore and then squeezing the outside of the block with your hands - the mike falls out of the bore.

Bearings care about ten thousandths of an inch. If the shoulder of the housing is not flat and orthogonal to the center of the threads, the shape of the cup can be changed when it seats.

Makes sense.

 

[DRB]

She never rides now, but she's not 100 lbs either.

Did you just call your wife fat?

 

[stinkyboy]

I won't say a word. Your Hone's are punishment enough.

 

[JRB]

Did you just call your wife fat?

Nope - over 100 lbs is not fat.

 

[Echo]

I just want to know how something that doesn't seem like it can bind, does bind.

Are you suggesting that all of the external BB makers got together and came up with a conspiracy to force everyone to take their frames to a shop with a BB facing tool?

I'm not trying to argue with you either. I just don't understand your contention that just because you got lucky and didn't ruin your parts by installing them incorrectly, that must mean installing them correctly isn't necessary.

 

[JRB]

How many manufacturers face anything before they build bikes??? My guess is on - none. I think you'll find a pile of folks that didn't face their bottom bracket shells and had no problem. Why are the cups on these any different than the old ISIS bb???

 

[JRB]

I do have a question - if it's that big a deal, why don't they just face them after paint??? Do you have to face an ano frame too???

 

[pixelninja]

I may look stupid here, but what exactly is "facing"?

I know that when I'm standing at the window by my cube, I'm "facing" west, but what does this have to do with bikes?

 

[JRB]

I may look stupid here, but what exactly is "facing"?

I know that when I'm standing at the window by my cube, I'm "facing" west, but what does this have to do with bikes?

Removing paint and metal to make a perfectly flat interface.

 

[Qman]

How many manufacturers face anything before they build bikes??? My guess is on - none. I think you'll find a pile of folks that didn't face their bottom bracket shells and had no problem. Why are the cups on these any different than the old ISIS bb???

Think about it a little more and it'll come to you.
Seat two cups against surfaces that aren't parallel (even if the runout is .001"-.010") then jam an axle thru the races and your bearings won't be running true to each other. Depending on use and just how crooked the cup(s) is/are, you will get premature wear. Think about it this way; as you tighten the cup down, if you stuck a .005" brass shim under one part of the cup and tightened it down, it would not be sitting flat relative to the other cup with no shim.
Same thing if you had more paint in one spot or a burr that didn't get cleaned up.

I've never run ISIS so correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's like a square taper cartridge and therefore I don't think anything actually seats up against the external surface of the frame there at the BB. It all threads inside and the 'cups' seat against the BB cartridge right? So two different issues.

Turner faces and reams (head tube) their frames before shipping. Still a good idea to check for burrs though and always a good idea to chase the BB threads before installing a bb. Esp. external bb.
On Turner frames, I've found that with Shimano external bb cranks, it works better for the chainline to put the one .5mm spacer on the non-drive side as opposed to the drive side.
My LBS says they've found that to be true of most bikes running external bb's.

 

[Qman]

I do have a question - if it's that big a deal, why don't they just face them after paint??? Do you have to face an ano frame too???

Extra labor=extra cost. One more post process=one more cost. One more tool to have on the floor and keep sharp=extra cost. Making sense yet?

Probably not as crucial to face an anodized frame but only if it was faced prior to anodizing. Still a good idea to do it though.

 

[Mackie]

Think about it a little more and it'll come to you.
Seat two cups against surfaces that aren't parallel (even if the runout is .001"-.010") then jam an axle thru the races and your bearings won't be running true to each other.

One one-thousandth of an inch!?! Less than .026mm? Wow!
What are the tolerances that a Park facing tool can reach? Within this range? Is the .001-.01 specified by the crank manufacturers?

 

[Qman]

What are the tolerances that a Park facing tool can reach? Within this range? Is the .001-.01 specified by the crank manufacturers?

Good question. Down to .001" probably not but .010" is quite a bit when you're talking about bearings. Not sure about Park but I'd bet the Chris King facing tool is pretty close to the lower end of that range if not tighter.
Whether or not doing everything correctly gets it that tight is something I don't take the time to check. I was just trying to make the point that even .001" out isn't parallel.
Obviously it made sense.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Facing anodized frames would probably dull cutters pretty quickly unless the blades were carbide...

 

[JRB]

Qman - ISIS does go on the outside of the shell, just like the cups on octalink. I understand what you are saying about the differences in surfaces, but I don't see how you can twist the cup, that is inside the threads, because there is a slight intolerance in the outside of the shell. I am all for facing, if there is an easy way to do so, but don't think it is a show stopper to not be able to do it. Just like chasing threads. If the cups thread in, why bother??? I agree that the tolerances are likely not so tight on a used Park tool.

 

[DRB]

Facing anodized frames would probably dull cutters pretty quickly unless the blades were carbide...

Only if the frame was hard anodized, I don't think normal anodization has that much affect on hardness.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Any anodization creates Al2O3 (aluminum oxide, a ceramic) on the surface.

I would suspect that anodization on a bike frame would be hard for durability.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I am all for facing, if there is an easy way to do so, but don't think it is a show stopper to not be able to do it. .

I think this thread is proof enough that it is a show stopper. Perhaps you got lucky with your frame, but ruining the bearings so quickly as I did should DEFINITELY be a concern to anyone installing some new bearings. I would say that I am probably more abusive to bikes than most people, but the problem still exists...

 

[johnbryanpeters]

...I would say that I am probably more abusive to bikes than most people, but the problem still exists...

We weren't discussing your mating habits, boy...

 

[Echo]

I like how at least two knowledgable people have provided precise explanations about the engineering concepts behind why facing is the right thing to do, but loco is still saying "it didn't happen to me, so I don't see why it's recommended".

 

[JRB]

I like how at least two knowledgable people have provided precise explanations about the engineering concepts behind why facing is the right thing to do, but loco is still saying "it didn't happen to me, so I don't see why it's recommended".

Search it in DH and see how several people have had no issues. You think it may be the bearings from Shimano, jackass???

Not to mention - do you see me asking questions and trying to learn??? Why must you be such a vacuum of suck???

 

[Echo]

Calm down little man...

 

[JRB]

Calm down little man...

That's your answer??? You can do better than that.

*I just smashed my keyboard, while screaming in German.

 

[DRB]

That's your answer??? You can do better than that.

*I just smashed my keyboard, while screaming in German.

So you're a Nazi too. That explains a lot.

 

[Qman]

Qman - ISIS does go on the outside of the shell, just like the cups on octalink. I understand what you are saying about the differences in surfaces, but I don't see how you can twist the cup, that is inside the threads, because there is a slight intolerance in the outside of the shell. I am all for facing, if there is an easy way to do so, but don't think it is a show stopper to not be able to do it. Just like chasing threads. If the cups thread in, why bother??? I agree that the tolerances are likely not so tight on a used Park tool.

Thanks for clearing that up. I went straght from square tapers to external so I missed interacting with a couple designs in the middle there.

I think what you're missing is that threads are not necessarily a solid locking interface. (NPT threads might be depending on who you talk to) When threads are machined, they are cut/formed/rolled to different tolerances. Every thread has a range of starting hole sizes and the bigger the hole, the less tight the threads. Thread a cup in a bit and you'll see that you can still wobble it around a little. It isn't the threads that position the cup, it's the mating surfaces. The torque settings recommended by Shimano are enough to cock the cup if the seating surface of the cup hits a burr or lump of paint on the frame. I wouldn't be surprised if the cup distorted a bit as well. Also, if you have a .001" difference at the mating surfaces, it will be greater than that the farther away you get from it. Think of a triangle.

Since most bikes are mass produced, the BB threads are one area that seem to either get overlooked in QC and/or might be one of the places the frame gets hung from during painting. Those threads are pretty fragile ones. I spoke with Ellsworth reps the other day and they admitted to a run of Moments that had a dull thread milling tool they didn't catch so one side of the bb had shallow threads. Some places, like Beyond, didn't chase and threaded the cups in anyway. (Happened to a buddy of mine so I know as close to first hand as I'm going to get.)
They couldn't get the cup threaded in all the way and it still didn't clue them in. He blew thru his bb bearings in less than a year and said it always felt like it was too tight. When the LBS was fixing the problem, they were sweating bullets wondering if the frame was going to be ok and from the effort involved in turning that wrench. It seems that BB makers have done their homework and make those cups out of softer aluminum than the frame so the cup takes the damage. It was completely threadless when it came out but all the material was gacked up in what there was of threads in the frame. The LBS says they chase every bike they build now because of that experience on more than one Moment.
I had a similar problem on a Turner frame recently. The last few threads (way in there) on the frame were gacked but I didn't notice. When the cup got ~9/10 of the way in, it stopped and wouldn't turn without severe effort. That's also when I realized the chainline would work better with no spacer on the drive side. When I turned it out, the first few threads on the cup were gone and piled up in the frame threads. Fortunately the cup was salvageable and a chase cleaned up the threads well.

 

[Echo]

That's your answer??? You can do better than that.

I could do much better... but I'm supposed to try to be nice. Since my questioning your logic caused you to throw a tantrum and start calling me names, I'm gonna leave it at that.

 

[DRB]

Thanks for clearing that up. I went straght from square tapers to external so I missed interacting with a couple designs in the middle there.

I think what you're missing is that threads are not a solid locking interface. When threads are machined, they are cut/formed/rolled to different tolerances. Every thread has a range of starting hole sizes and the bigger the hole, the less tight the threads. Thread a cup in a bit and you'll see that you can still wobble it around a little. It isn't the threads that position the cup, it's the mating surfaces. The torque settings recommended by Shimano are enough to cock the cup if the seating surface of the cup hits a burr or lump of paint on the frame. I wouldn't be surprised if the cup distorted a bit as well. Also, if you have a .001" difference at the mating surfaces, it will be greater than that the farther away you get from it. Think of a triangle.

Since most bikes are mass produced, the BB threads are one area that seem to either get overlooked in QC and/or might be one of the places the frame gets hung from during painting. Those threads are pretty fragile ones. I spoke with Ellsworth reps the other day and they admitted to a run of Moments that had a dull thread milling tool they didn't catch so one side of the bb had shallow threads. Some places, like Beyond, didn't chase and threaded the cups in anyway. (Happened to a buddy of mine so I know as close to first hand as I'm going to get.)
They couldn't get the cup threaded in all the way and it still didn't clue them in. He blew thru his bb bearings in less than a year and said it always felt like it was too tight. When the LBS was fixing the problem, they were sweating bullets wondering if the frame was going to be ok and from the effort involved in turning that wrench. It seems that BB makers have done their homework and make those cups out of softer aluminum than the frame so the cup takes the damage. It was completely threadless when it came out but all the material was gacked up in what there was of threads in the frame. The LBS says they chase every bike they build now because of that experience on more than one Moment.
I had a similar problem on a Turner frame recently. The last few threads (way in there) on the frame were gacked but I didn't notice. When the cup got ~9/10 of the way in, it stopped and wouldn't turn without severe effort. That's also when I realized the chainline would work better with no spacer on the drive side. When I turned it out, the first few threads on the cup were gone and piled up in the frame threads. Fortunately the cup was salvageable and a chase cleaned up the threads well.

Who the f' are you and why are you bringing relevance and useful information here? Are you some sort of spy?

 

[Westy]

I could do much better... but I'm supposed to try to be nice. Since my questioning your logic caused you to throw a tantrum and start calling me names, I'm gonna leave it at that.

You could ban him.

Pretty please.

 

[Qman]

Any anodization creates Al2O3 (aluminum oxide, a ceramic) on the surface.

I would suspect that anodization on a bike frame would be hard for durability.

It's a bit harder on cutters than bare aluminum or paint but it's not very thick and not a huge issue in the long run. Especially with this tool:
http://www.chrisking.com/tools/tls_cutting.html

 

[JRB]

Qman - I do see your point, and have made it make sense in my mind. What's funny is that even with all of this talk, RF, FSA, and Truvativ all use plastic spacers. They certainly can be as inconsistent as paint, so it confuses me a little. I see how the alignment can get whacky though. I don't know what frame works with mtn BBs with a spacer on the drive side. It took me 0 seconds to see that they needed the spacers on the non-drive side.

echo - you immediately discounted my comments, contrary to BS's, just because it was me. If you didn't notice your condescending, you certainly might not notice nice. Whatever....