Press-Fit Fuckitude.
There are a few bicycle frame innovations I like.
For instance, tapered headsets. For a fatty like me that bring a put a lot of force on the headset in a sprint, that extra stiffness is noticeable and appreciated. It's not a large difference, especially if the fork itself is well designed, but it is noticeable. Plus, I think it looks better, and that's what matters.
At the top of the list of "innovations" I hate are press-fit bottom brackets. I just don't buy the justifications thrown out there for them.
I prefer a good old English threaded bottom bracket. They're easy to install and replace by a ham-fisted mechanic, generally don't creak until they're worn out, and are stiff enough that your average amateur racer will never know the difference. If the crank spindle is the same diameter in the press-fit and threaded bottom bracket, then the only difference is in the bearing size. If you can tell the difference between the two, then you can probably feel a pea under forty mattresses and likely are a princess.
Another reason I hate press-fit bottom brackets is that three of my power meters will not fit around the oversize bottom bracket shell, limiting where I can install them. My SRMs are limited to standard threaded bottom brackets and my S975 Quarq can't fit around a press-fit housing (but is compatible with a Trek BB90 bottom bracket). The only power meter that will fit on the Storck is the Quarq RIKEN, so I recently bought another one off of eBay for future-proofing. Well, that's what I tell myself. As I see it, the only up-side for a press-fit bottom bracket for me as a consumer is that it gave me an excuse to buy a fifth power meter. Because I need it.
When I got the Storck, I bought all of the special tools to install and remove the BB86 bottom bracket correctly. I watched several YouTube videos and followed the instructions. Without fail, the bottom brackets I've installed have ended up creaking after a month or two of relatively non-abusive use. I'm not impressed with their durability. They're also more expensive than a threaded bottom bracket, which is another big strike against them.
In an effort to get a little more life out of a bottom bracket and potentially avoid waste, I ordered a Wheels Manufacturing BB86/92 Angular Contact BB for 24/22mm (SRAM) Cranks. I'm hoping the metal bearing housing will keep the bearings aligned longer and the angular drive-side bearing will last a little longer than the basic BB86 bottom brackets I've been using. It costs twice as much as a standard BB86 bottom bracket and about three times as much as a threaded bottom bracket, so it better give me a solid return on my investment.
I think my next frame is going to have to be custom to cater to all of my likes and dislikes. There's a strong chance it will end up replacing the Storck, because it's been a proving ground for every "innovation" I've come to hate.
Maybe titanium is the way to go...
For instance, tapered headsets. For a fatty like me that bring a put a lot of force on the headset in a sprint, that extra stiffness is noticeable and appreciated. It's not a large difference, especially if the fork itself is well designed, but it is noticeable. Plus, I think it looks better, and that's what matters.
At the top of the list of "innovations" I hate are press-fit bottom brackets. I just don't buy the justifications thrown out there for them.
I prefer a good old English threaded bottom bracket. They're easy to install and replace by a ham-fisted mechanic, generally don't creak until they're worn out, and are stiff enough that your average amateur racer will never know the difference. If the crank spindle is the same diameter in the press-fit and threaded bottom bracket, then the only difference is in the bearing size. If you can tell the difference between the two, then you can probably feel a pea under forty mattresses and likely are a princess.
Another reason I hate press-fit bottom brackets is that three of my power meters will not fit around the oversize bottom bracket shell, limiting where I can install them. My SRMs are limited to standard threaded bottom brackets and my S975 Quarq can't fit around a press-fit housing (but is compatible with a Trek BB90 bottom bracket). The only power meter that will fit on the Storck is the Quarq RIKEN, so I recently bought another one off of eBay for future-proofing. Well, that's what I tell myself. As I see it, the only up-side for a press-fit bottom bracket for me as a consumer is that it gave me an excuse to buy a fifth power meter. Because I need it.
When I got the Storck, I bought all of the special tools to install and remove the BB86 bottom bracket correctly. I watched several YouTube videos and followed the instructions. Without fail, the bottom brackets I've installed have ended up creaking after a month or two of relatively non-abusive use. I'm not impressed with their durability. They're also more expensive than a threaded bottom bracket, which is another big strike against them.
In an effort to get a little more life out of a bottom bracket and potentially avoid waste, I ordered a Wheels Manufacturing BB86/92 Angular Contact BB for 24/22mm (SRAM) Cranks. I'm hoping the metal bearing housing will keep the bearings aligned longer and the angular drive-side bearing will last a little longer than the basic BB86 bottom brackets I've been using. It costs twice as much as a standard BB86 bottom bracket and about three times as much as a threaded bottom bracket, so it better give me a solid return on my investment.
I think my next frame is going to have to be custom to cater to all of my likes and dislikes. There's a strong chance it will end up replacing the Storck, because it's been a proving ground for every "innovation" I've come to hate.
Maybe titanium is the way to go...
Comments
Post a Comment