Bicycle Mechanics - Square taper bottom bracket love?

Anyone still partial to square taper, or is everything external now? I was thinking that I've had really good mileage on my square taper stuff....and continue to use it on my daily ride.

I was debating an upgrade, but don't know if it's worth it.

I have several square tapered cranks and also octalink, isis and several external cranks. There are even 2 BB30's thrown in there. I think they all work fine. I really doubt you will find a big upgrade in cranks. You can lose some weight but for stiffness, look to the frame over cranks.

Parts is parts. Any good quality bottom bracket set up, loose ball, sealed bearing, square taper, whatever is functionally indistinguishable from the most expensive, newest external bearing BB. And yes, I ride a square taper BB.

I went from Square Taper to Isis ;) Guess I didn't really upgrade, but the price for the crank was so good, I couldn't help myself. :) Love Nashbar, and I can't complain, I got over 10,000 miles out of my triple before the middle ring started to show signs of wear.

Joe

Anyone still partial to square taper, or is everything external now? I was thinking that I've had really good mileage on my square taper stuff....and continue to use it on my daily ride.

I was debating an upgrade, but don't know if it's worth it.

It might be a replacement, but I don't think it'll necessarily be an upgrade.

I'm still riding square taper for the simple reason that not one of my original cup & spindle bottom brackets ever needed replacement. If and when they die, or if I build something new and don't have a choice I might try a more modern BB, but it'll be hard to beat life expectancies of 10+ years, and 10's of thousands of near zero maintenance, trouble free, all weather miles.

I've got enough chainrings and if need be replacement arms along with a serviceable BB that I suspect I will be buried with my square tapers. Can't see a real reason to replace it. It works. It works good. It works real good.... Nope, no reason to replace them.

new stuff seems like a take it or leave it fixed set, can't add a 3rd chainring and just switch out the BB
for one say 5mm longer on the right end
because the Arm and BB tube are a fixed set, so you have to buy the whole crankset.

:p

Anyone still partial to square taper, or is everything external now? I was thinking that I've had really good mileage on my square taper stuff....and continue to use it on my daily ride.

I was debating an upgrade, but don't know if it's worth it.

If they ain't broke, don't fix 'em.

However, it is broke, go with external. It's not the stiffness or the weight...good points in their own right... that makes external bottom brackets attractive, it's the ease of installation. The Shimano system is just about as idiot proof as any mechanism can possibly be. The Shimano bottom bracket/cranks do for the drivetrain what threadless headsets did for forks, i.e. makes installation simple. Total installation time is around 15 minutes and 10 minutes of that is finding the tools;)

Square taper = K.I.S.S principle.

How much easier does it get than tightening a bolt/nut?

Most of my bikes run square taper, including a brand new one I just finished building this week. There ain't much wrong with the system in my humble opinion.

Fair enough! I've really not had any issues either honestly. The way some folks talk it's like they're completely obsolete and no one uses them anymore!

I am one of the obsolete ones. There is no need for the new and improved BB's other than marketing.
The external bearings require that the BB be faced accurately or they fail. They are not serviceable, just throw away parts.

i agree with cyccomute. if it aint broke....... if your feet go round, and the bike goes forward, ya done good. keep your money and buy a cold one after your ride. that'll work.:thumb:

Yeah nothing wrong with square taper except you can get 10/11s compatible cranks with that interface. But other than that if you want to retro grouch go right ahead.

I am one of the obsolete ones. There is no need for the new and improved BB's other than marketing.
The external bearings require that the BB be faced accurately or they fail. They are not serviceable, just throw away parts.

Yeah, no square taper or octalink BB's needed to have the BB faced either. In fact those tools were entirely superfluous. I wasn't aware that all cartridge square taper BB's were serviceable. That's news.

Get with the times people.

I own one of each: ST on my cyclo build, and external on my Cross Comp. I cannot tell the difference on a 30 mile ride. If maintenance/replacement is needed, I'll go with whatever is least expensive in comparable quality. ST removal/installation is also a piece of cake.

I own one of each: ST on my cyclo build, and external on my Cross Comp. I cannot tell the difference on a 30 mile ride. If maintenance/replacement is needed, I'll go with whatever is least expensive in comparable quality. ST removal/installation is also a piece of cake.

Right, it's much harder to remove self extracting one bolt cranks for example, 10 speed sram. Stop grasping for advantages that aren't there.

Da Vlnci cranks, Phil Wood BB. Yup, I'm sticking with what I have. bk

After 'upgrading' to external bearing BB, I found that I could not get the low gears I needed for my setup (30t small ring was not low enough). Went 'back' to square taper and an XTR 900 crank so I could put a 24t small ring on it. Has worked well for me, and I can tell no difference in stiffness or any of the other 'advantages' of the external.

Another unrepentant square taper user here. I have square taper bbs on three bikes including a 10-speed Campy Chorus triple and have had excellent service life from all of them, both cup-and cone and cartridge.

Note to operator: Campy made several 10-speed compatible square taper bbs and cranks in Record down through at least Centaur versions. I expect they would work just fine with Campy 11-speed too.

I do have Octalink bbs on two bikes and they have been fine also but I see little to no performance difference between them and square taper.

I haven't made the move to an external cup bb and crank on anything yet since the old ones refuse to die.

Square taper = K.I.S.S principle.

How much easier does it get than tightening a bolt/nut?

Square taper doesn't equal K.I.S.S. To work on the crank you need: something to remove the dust cap, a 14mm socket or allen wrench (could be 6, 7, or 8 mm), a crank puller, and a bottom bracket extractor to match the flavor of bottom bracket you have. If you are using the old cup and cone system, you'll need a lock ring spanner, a pin spanner and a fixed cup tool. That's up to 7 different tools.

For an external bottom bracket crank, you'll need a bottom bracket tool and and allen wrench. Two tools. Much simpler. Like I said earlier, external bottom bracket does for cranks what threadless does from headsets.

Anyone still partial to square taper, or is everything external now? I was thinking that I've had really good mileage on my square taper stuff....and continue to use it on my daily ride.

I went from square-taper to Octalink... and now I'm back to square-taper. Sealed cartridge instead of cup & cone, though. My legs can't tell the difference.

Square taper doesn't equal K.I.S.S. To work on the crank you need: something to remove the dust cap, a 14mm socket or allen wrench (could be 6, 7, or 8 mm), a crank puller, and a bottom bracket extractor to match the flavor of bottom bracket you have. If you are using the old cup and cone system, you'll need a lock ring spanner, a pin spanner and a fixed cup tool. That's up to 7 different tools.

For an external bottom bracket crank, you'll need a bottom bracket tool and and allen wrench. Two tools. Much simpler. Like I said earlier, external bottom bracket does for cranks what threadless does from headsets.

Not to mention, with a square taper comes the risk of not torquing down the crank bolt, going for a ride, and rounding the formerly square taper. Or, you can be two beers in, decide to try half step gearing, and forget to remove the crank bolt washer, and tear the threads out of a crank, making removal a real chore.

All of my bikes have square taper, but that's just what's cheaply available, it has some issues.

I've done about 10 square taper BB replacements and each time it got easier. In fact, 2-10 were all the same: About 10 minutes total, and $15 worth of tools (purchased on sale of course).

And a trusty roll of teflon tape.

Square taper with cup 'n cone is Industrial Revolution age technology. The ball bearing was invented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bearing_%28mechanical%29#History)for the bicycle and up-market Edwardian bikes were advertised with 'balls all round.'

Square taper is said to be bettered for race use by larger diameter hollow spindles, which are said to be 'stiffer' and reduce flex. Standard cup 'n cone B/Bs are prone to water and mud ingress when combined with lack of maintenance.

But, for me, the square taper on my two humble bikes has yet to wear out, or break. Spares are available world-wide. :)

is simple and it works

is simple and it works
I don't know about the "simple" part as the number of specialty tools needed to install and remove even a cartridge square taper bottom bracket is significant and a cup-and-cone is even more involved and requires a fairly deft touch to adjust properly.

Works? It certainly does and has for decades.

Anyone still partial to square taper, or is everything external now? I was thinking that I've had really good mileage on my square taper stuff....and continue to use it on my daily ride.

I was debating an upgrade, but don't know if it's worth it.

Since the question is about an upgrade, I'd say no. I see no upside to the expense of a crank, bb, tools and effort to change one to the other.

how 'bout not love but indifference? Out of dozens of bikes in my stable, the vast majority have square taper & of those the majority are loose bearing cup/cone type. I got into wrenching on bikes after years of building/restoring & generally wrenching on semi-vintage (and not so much) sports cars, so there's nothing too complicated a bike is gonna throw at me other than finding the right tool from time to time. My experience of pulling 30+ year old bikes down to rebuild and finding perfect BB components that need nothing more than new grease (but probably also get new ball bearings) leads me to view the tech like I do the diesel engine....maybe a little messier to live with but provides great long-term economy and less waste 'cause it goes forever with moderate attention to maintenance. I tend to find dark humor in trendy assessments of technology in the cycling world. To hear some people talk you're lucky to get around on a bike with technology more than a few years old.

Let's not get carried away idolizing square taper BBs. As others have pointed out, they were generally heavier than many modern systems, and required more skill and tools to service, but the point is that they were serviceable, (excluding most cartridge models) and extremely durable.

It's basically a trade off between a solid durable workhorse design, or a lighter, more idiot proof, but more expensive and shorter lived design. For my part, I'll take the workhorse anytime. The skill is easily acquired, and the tools cost vastly less than the first replacement of the newer stuff.

As for the weight penalty, I'll gladly pay that in exchange of thousands of miles of carefree all weather riding.

[OP?] Upgrade to serve what purpose? the latest, just like the pros were sent out on this spring?
just to have what they were paid to ride?

worn down a chainring? bent a crankarm?

Such a highly trained Cat one racer that you bend stuff?

:popcorn

Kiss princible INCLUDES manufacturing.....

I must have some weird square taper crank,I can take mine all apart with 3 tools,1 more than the fancy outboard bearings.

I think the "innovation" from cups and lockrings to cartridges was a big one for square taper BBs. The change to external/outboard bearings not so much. That said, I REALLY like my Campy Ultra-Torque set.

Let's not get carried away idolizing square taper BBs. As others have pointed out, they were generally heavier than many modern systems, and required more skill and tools to service, but the point is that they were serviceable, (excluding most cartridge models) and extremely durable.

It's basically a trade off between a solid durable workhorse design, or a lighter, more idiot proof, but more expensive and shorter lived design. For my part, I'll take the workhorse anytime. The skill is easily acquired, and the tools cost vastly less than the first replacement of the newer stuff.

As for the weight penalty, I'll gladly pay that in exchange of thousands of miles of carefree all weather riding.

As you said, don't get carried away idolizing square taper BB. Are you sure that external is more expensive and short lived? There are lots of very inexpensive external BB cranks out there. Many that compete very favorably with square taper BB cranks and square taper BB (remember you have to buy those too.) I don't know if external BB cranks are short lived or not. They are a simple design and should have as much weather resistance and longevity as anything else.

Square taper = K.I.S.S principle.

How much easier does it get than tightening a bolt/nut?

True, but to get one off you need a crank puller and the hope that the crank hasn't seized to the spindle.

I don't think it's about square taper per se, though if kept tight the cranks did last forever, or until a crash. But the decades of proven BB life expectancy of the pre-cartridge BBs is something that modern systems don't come near matching.

I'm not a retro grouch and readily admit that many newer parts are improvements in terms of lower weight, or user friendliness, but comparing quality for cost, the older stuff tends to win out (inflation adjusted). Not everyone is racing, nor does everyone require additional gearing, so I'm somewhat disappointed that the OEMs keep insisting on the latest and greatest spec, even for bikes where more basic and durable hardware is more suited to the actual needs of the intended customer.

Kiss princible INCLUDES manufacturing.....

I must have some weird square taper crank,I can take mine all apart with 3 tools,1 more than the fancy outboard bearings.

K.I.S.S. only applies to manufacturing if you are making them. From the standpoint of a consumer, I don't care how complicated the manufacturing process is. I only care about how easy they are to install and set up. And there they are much simpler and easier to work on.

I'm not even sure that they are all that hard to make compared to square taper. There's more machining and assembly involved in square taper than in external with many more parts involved. More parts = more complexity which isn't really in keeping with K.I.S.S., is it?

You may be able to take your crank apart with only 3 tools but you have to use those 3 tools more often than I do to remove an external bottom bracket crank and bearings. You have to remove 2 bolts, two arms and the BB. And removing those arms isn't all that easy. It takes a lot of force to slide them off the axles.

Things I don't like about EXO:

1) My big complaint with the modern external bottom brackets is that they increase the number of parts interfaces. There are now pinch bolts, cups against the BB shell faces, the bearing adjustment bolt, wavy spacers... all of those are possibilities that something will squeak and click.
2) The EXO bearings are more exposed to the elements, despite having good seals, that constant exposure to road crap works into the bearings at a faster rate than with square taper setups.
3) The marketing baloney about stiffness is pretty lame. Unless you have a very stiff frame, the bottom bracket will be much stiffer regardless of the type you have. I actually notice more flex in my frame now with my EXO setup because the crank and spindle aren't flexing at all, but the overall flex in the system is about the same.

Things I like about EXO:

1) They install soooo easily.
2) Replacement parts are abundant.

Things I like about square taper:

1) Simplicity. Few interfaces.
2) Low maintenance. Low probability of noise.
3) Durable as hell. They last forever.

Are you a scientist AND a machinist? I've been a machinist for 40 years and I can tell FOR SURE which one is easier to make,but I give,you win.Your right,the more parts it has,the better it is......

Are you a scientist AND a machinist? I've been a machinist for 40 years and I can tell FOR SURE which one is easier to make,but I give,you win.Your right,the more parts it has,the better it is......

Have you looked at an external bottom bracket crankset? It has far fewer parts than a typical square taper crank and bottom bracket. Just look at the machining that has to be done to make the bottom bracket part itself. It has an axle, bearings bearing pressed on to the axle and pressed into the outer shell, some kind of retaining mechanism, an outer shell on the bottom bracket and cups to keep the bracket in place. Now add in the bolts to hold the crank arms on and the machining to put the tapers into the arms along with the machining to thread the extractor into the arm. Real simple system.

I don't have to be a machinist. All I have to be is observant...something that I've been trained to do and I'm pretty good at it. I've owned cranks from cup and cone to external bottom bracket. The external is far simpler, especially if I don't have to make it from scratch.

I don't think it's about square taper per se, though if kept tight the cranks did last forever, or until a crash. But the decades of proven BB life expectancy of the pre-cartridge BBs is something that modern systems don't come near matching.

I'm not a retro grouch and readily admit that many newer parts are improvements in terms of lower weight, or user friendliness, but comparing quality for cost, the older stuff tends to win out (inflation adjusted). Not everyone is racing, nor does everyone require additional gearing, so I'm somewhat disappointed that the OEMs keep insisting on the latest and greatest spec, even for bikes where more basic and durable hardware is more suited to the actual needs of the intended customer.

I don't race. But I certainly appreciate something that makes my life easier. I can adjust a threaded headset but I'd choose a threadless over a threaded any day. Why? Because it's less complicated and easier to work on. I can adjust square taper cup and cone cranks but I'd rather use a sealed bearing BB. Why? Because they are just easier to install and work on. I can tear a freewheel apart down to taking the bearings out and repacking them...not something I'd every suggest anyone try:eek:...but I'd take a freehub and cassette over a freewheel any day because it's just easier. I can tear a hub down, clean and repack the bearings but I'd take a cartridge bearing hub over cups and cones.

I was buying $50 Shimno DX single speed cranks and $22 UN-54BB for my IGH creations. Until recently it was the cheapest game in town. I hate the hassle of pulling off the cranks anytime I want to make any changes to chainline or add a chain guard or try a different frame. These days I see really nice used cranks with external BB for the same price. I'll be going for them in the future, the ease of install/removal can't be beat. I have never liked cranking down the bolts and stretching out the taper, always hated using a puller. I may be a retro grouch, but I'm lazy and cheap too....


...But the decades of proven BB life expectancy of the pre-cartridge BBs is something that modern systems ....

I'll take a UN-54 over cup/cone anytime. I ride in the winter with all the blue salt, the chainstay/seatstay holes conduct that crap straight into the BB. Exposed bearings get eaten from that junk in one bad week. The UN-54 just keeps on trucking. Also is self-alighned, no need to have your vintage frame chased/faced.

You may be able to take your crank apart with only 3 tools but you have to use those 3 tools more often than I do to remove an external bottom bracket crank and bearings. You have to remove 2 bolts, two arms and the BB. And removing those arms isn't all that easy. It takes a lot of force to slide them off the axles.
Just curious -- how many times do you have to do this to make it a show-stopping issue? I only take cranks off my bikes (all square taper or -- gasp! -- cottered) every couple years.

Using a decent crank puller is really easy. Really.

My experience is that the shortest lived bottom brackets I've ever encountered were low end SR or Suguino cup-and-cone models. The cups lasted fairly well but the spindles developed pits on the ball races in a few thousand miles even when well lubricated and properly adjusted. I expect it was a combination of low grade steel and poor sealing since my bikes are ridden in all sorts of weather, including salty winter roads. Perhaps if I had Campy or Shimano high grade cup-and-cone models I'd have had better service.

That said, my experience with Shimano and Campy cartridge square taper bbs has been exemplary. Several Shimano UN-7X and 5X bbs have lasted over 30,000 miles each, required no annual maintenance or attention and installation was set and forget. My Campy Chorus square taper cartridge has only 14,000 miles so it's still in its infancy but so far so good.

Cup and cone system is nice but the sealed squared tapper units last forever and are cheap after all. WHy campagnolo if a token unit works fine for a half of the price? Shimano units are pretty good also. Now campagnolo came with super torque that is the campagnolo version of the shimano style. Why they did that? WHO KNOWs, im still debating why, UT worked fine but change the bearings is a hassle if you don't have the pullers and settlers thingys.

BB30 is noisy from what i heard so probably we will comeback to squared tapper or to something pretty similar to it in a few more years, but the original squared tapper for sure will continue being around til' the end of days for sure.

I have two hardtails, one square taper and one octalink. I enjoy both of them and don't notice much of any difference between them. With a new bike I am building, it too will be using octalink, simply because that's the interface of the spare crankset I had lying around. If I ever upgrade, I'll be getting an external crankset just for the sake of trying something new.

Do I have anything against square taper? Absolutely not. It's a great system and works.

Square taper with cup 'n cone is Industrial Revolution age technology. The ball bearing was invented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bearing_%28mechanical%29#History)for the bicycle and up-market Edwardian bikes were advertised with 'balls all round.'

Square taper is said to be bettered for race use by larger diameter hollow spindles, which are said to be 'stiffer' and reduce flex. Standard cup 'n cone B/Bs are prone to water and mud ingress when combined with lack of maintenance.

But, for me, the square taper on my two humble bikes has yet to wear out, or break. Spares are available world-wide. :)

Actually the square taper aluminum crankset was a French invention in the 1930's I believe and the use did not become widespread until the late 60s or early 70s IIRC. Most cranksets prior to that were cottered steel cranks except on the highest end bikes.

Stronglight can lay claim to inventing the square taper bottom bracket although there were a few other non cotted interfaces that never caught on.

I prefer well made cup and cone bottom brackets as they offer better bearing support and run smoother than almost any Shimano ST cartridge unit made... with regular care they can last 10's of thousands of km.

Stronglight can lay claim to inventing the square taper bottom bracket although there were a few other non cotted interfaces that never caught on.

I prefer well made cup and cone bottom brackets as they offer better bearing support and run smoother than almost any Shimano ST cartridge unit made... with regular care they can last 10's of thousands of km.

In a way, this is why I switched from cup and cone to cartridge BBs. They are not any smoother than cartridge types though they might have less drag due to looser seals. And the cartridge BBs last 10's of thousands of km with zero care. When they do wear or break throw in a new one for the cost of a cheap tire.