skagitteam

Thank you for all of the thoughts, folks, this has been really helpful. It seems like the consensus is that I should go with the standard english/BSA threaded setup, which was my initial thought as well. So that is the plan. It also happens to take best advantage of the cranksets that I already own, which helps with the cost.

Garthr

It's rather obvious, so no I'm not going to "bite" on the bait .... lol . Forums and bike shops are full of the answer.

joejack951

Both are full of a ton of misinformation too. I'm not saying Shimano hasn't obsoleted anything but they've done an admirable job in my opinion of offering current options to replace gear that's quite old at this point.

surreal

In a lot of ways, you're right. You can still buy some stuff that's can be retrofitted to the old stuff, but the quality of the current-production-old-tech stuff is a lot different from the high end stuff you might be replacing. For instance, if you have some ol' 8speed ultegra, the current-production 8speed cassette will not be quite as nicely finished as the original Ultegra 8 speed cassette. Shimano still makes some 6- and 7-speed shifters, but they're yucky, plasticky things. They're not going to be actual replacements for your old Deerhead era XT shifters. Shimano still makes square taper BBs, but these are way off from the units they offered BITD.

Some examples of totally obsoleted Shimano stuff would be 5 speed freewheels, low-cog-count freewheels and cassettes in certain gear ranges, octalink v1 BBs/cranks, many of their igh offerings and associated parts/shifters, 7speed barcons (sniffle), uniglide cassettes, inteerglide stuff (good riddance), anything for their front freewheel system, u-brakes, and any kind of headsets. (They used to make some nice threaded headsets, BITD.) I'm sure there are more examples.

I am more dismayed by the change in cable pull ratio for dyna-sys versus older systems/road systems. It used to be, you could mix-n-match shifters and derailers between anything Shimano that was ever designed to index at all. If the number of cassette cogs matched the number of clicks on the shifter, you were golden. You could run mtb cassettes/derailers with road cranks and shifters. You could run a brand-new 9speed rd on your otherwise 7speed vintage bike. You had options. They've killed all of that with these new pull-ratio changes, and they're killing things even more with ridiculous "improvements" like directional chains and what have you. This is obsolescence of a different sort, and I guess they don't really owe us anything different, but it's an end of an awesome era, where tinkerers could truly customize their bikes.

RubeRad

I hear that! A friend gave me a very nice Octalink v1 Tom Ritchey crankset and BB, but the BB is too long and I can't find a decent-price V1 replacement, so I've got a terrible chainline!

well biked

Looking at it from the perspective "what's the safest choice?," as has been stated in the thread already, the standard 68mm English threaded bb shell is the clear answer.

Beyond that, it's good to know the basic facts pertaining to the various, newer standards that are being commonly used, if you're considering them at all. If your frame builder is using some of the newer press fit standards regularly, they may have an opinion about advantages/disadvantages when it comes to the actual construction of the frame, and I would listen to their recommendations and thoughts. My opinion is that BB30 is not the way to go no matter what you do. It is a standard that, again IMO, can be problematic.

If you do like the large bore of BB30 (which provides the capability to use both 30mm and 24mm spindles), then PressFit 30 or EVO386 is an improvement over BB30 IMO and in my experience. More durable, stays quiet, etc. We've had great results with PressFit30 in our shop compared to the older BB30 standard.

BB86 is another of the newer pressfit standards that uses an encased bearing unit that's pressed into the frame, but this standard doesn't allow the use of 30mm spindles, so it's not as versatile as the standards with the larger bore such as BB30 or PressFit 30. Keep in mind, with adapters (shims), you can easily use 24mm spindles with BB30/PressFit30 bearings. A threaded 68mm English threaded shell won't allow use of 30mm spindles either (for all practical purposes), but the pros outweigh the cons for most people. BB86 uses the same size bearing as a threaded outboard bearing on an English threaded setup, but the bearings are pressed in instead of threaded in. In other words, the bore in the frame is smaller than BB30/PressFit30, but the width of the shell is 86mm compared to 68mm for BB30/PressFit30. BB86 is designed for 24mm spindles (like Shimano HollowtechII spindles, for example), and essentially gives you the same bearings you would have with external threaded bearings, but with BB86 they're housed inside the frame's wider bb shell.

I'll add one more new standard, EVO386, if your head's not spinning already. It has the large bore of PressFit30 (46mm diameter), but the frame's shell is 22mm wider. There are those who believe this one may be the end-all standard of the press fit systems, having most of the advantages of all the other pressfit systems.

There are others, too, but at least this covers the basic principles. But to answer your original question: 68mm English thread will have parts available (bb's and cranks) and is already a proven, accepted standard.

oldbobcat

Case in point.

Planned obsolescence is the wave of the future. If you buy a component that is on the way out for the style of bike you have, you will have trouble finding replacements and will end up dealing with stuff like bad chainlines. Right now the store where I work is selling Octalink V1 bottom brackets for $15 because our supplier is selling them to us for $7.49. These things aren't going to be around much longer.

And building a new bike with Shimano 600 cranks because you like JIS bottom brackets is just putting the cart before the horse. JIS is the interface for inexpensive MTBs and hybrids, fixies and single-speeds, cheap road bikes purchased on BikesDirect and Amazon, and kids restoring the lugged steel Allez Grandpa rode when he was in college, just like in American Flyers.

Hollowtech II, GPX, and FSA's Mega-Exo will be around for a few years. Manufacturers will continue to monkey with new ways to set the bearings into the frame, but the spindle-bearing interface has legs. And even though my current bike has press-fit bearings, I think BSA threaded is the best way to set bearings into a frame. The precision and durability of machined threads and facing trumps a few millimeters of down tube width to make the bike "stiffer."

I'm a shop mechanic and I love old bikes and old technology and I admire guys who find stuff and keep it running. You guys appreciate this stuff and know what it takes, most of the time. Where I get off is where you recommend it for everyone else, because everyone else isn't you. When this stuff wears out, they bring the bikes to me, and when I don't have the replacements in stock or I can't locate them with my customary suppliers, I have to listen to the disappointment and anger. My job is to get the customers back on their bikes using solutions that have a very high probability of working.

From the early post-war era to about 1983 bike technology changed very little, so bikes were easy to upgrade and customize. Those days are gone. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it's just gone.

oldbobcat

Octalink V1? 7- and 8-speed STI? Spindles and cups for loose-ball bottom brackets? Toeclips for Dura-Ace aero pedals? 7-speed cassettes or freewheels that will work with a 30-year-old Dura-Ace rear derailleur? You're not looking back very far.

You should hear the moaning when I tell a customer that the only replacement I can get for his beloved 6500 STI is Sora, and he has to buy the pair.

oldbobcat

On new bikes, 2013 was the last year for Ultegra 6700. Aftermarket and replacements might be around for another year or two.

oldbobcat

OBB will be around for a long time.

fietsbob

In Bike Shops we source parts to fix what people own ..

surreal

If your shop does that, it's truly awesome. And, i'm sure other shops do, too. But many shops limit the customer's options to what can be ordered thru JBI, QBP, etc. This is, of course, a shame, but you can hardly blame them in terms of effective use of labor, warranty issues, and consistency.

surreal

[QUOTE=oldbobcat;16130270]...
Planned obsolescence is the wave of the future. ......And building a new bike with Shimano 600 cranks because you like JIS bottom brackets is just putting the cart before the horse. JIS is the interface for inexpensive MTBs and hybrids, fixies and single-speeds, cheap road bikes purchased on BikesDirect and Amazon, and kids restoring the lugged steel Allez Grandpa rode when he was in college, just like in American Flyers....[QUOTE]

Planned obsolescence is a greedy practice that makes lifelong, slavish customers out of some cyclists and makes curmudgeonly retrogrouches out of others. To say that JIS is the interface for the list of bikes you provide above is to tell only half of the story. JIS used to be the interface of expensive mtbs, top-of-the-line road bikes, and basically everything that wasn't ISO SqTaper or OPC. The industry moved from SqTaper on higher end bikes to keep the market moving-- to make ppl "see" why the $3000 bike was better than the $300 bike and, most importantly, to make the guy with the expensive bike he bought 5 years back feel inadequate, b/c he doesn't have an awesome BB on his bike.... Case in point: Octalink and ISIS were dreadful interfaces, and almost universally loathed by cyclists everywhere. But the Industry created a buzz for them. I managed t mostly aoid them, and it didn't bother me too much, b/c new frames would still have BSA shells, and I can still run what I want. These new "standards" threaten that, so I'm disappointed.

In the end, the Industry is happy b/c some clowns get super-enthused for all of the new technology; they need to have a Yaw fd b/c they don't know what one is... and square taper won't cut it b/c they need the shiny novelty of PF FU 6930 if they're going to keep up with the Joneses..... The rest of us know that SqTaper is only on crap bikes now b/c the Industry (by and large) made a decision to discontinue nice square taper cranks/BBs, and also made the decision to run SqTaper only on low-end bikes. We're not fooled, but we have to decide between biting the bullet with the planned obsolescence or getting creative to build old-tech stuff.

Understood. But, you need to stop blaming the customers for any low-probability situations, and recognize that the planned obsolescence model is what makes so many scenarios unworkable.

I'll come out and say it: it's bad. And, it's unnecessary. Bike pervs like myself can always be counted on to buy nice components and frames compulsively. We don't need any new "standards" for bait. But, those of us with some experience, we despise the new "standards" b/c we see the writing on the wall. BB30 will be deader than a doornail in less than a decade. Fools in 2021 will be on this forum saying "I'm thinking of buying this old Cannondale" and ppl on this forum will be all like "make sure it's not BB30! You'll never find a crank/bottom bracket to fit it!"

I never recommended JIS to the OP, but I did suggest BSA b/c BSA gives the option for anything from SqTaper up to the best and hottest current cranks on the market. Further, it promises longevity among retro-ppl. There aren't likely to be many BB30 zealots in the future, so there won't likely be many niche manufacturers around to keep BB30 alive.

As for me, I'll stick to my PF51 and try to be happy.

HillRider

OK, I've said this before but Octalink and ISIS were NOT the same. I've had excellent service from two Octalink bottom brackets including one 6500 that's over 35,000 miles old and still in great shape. I'm not the only one to have had great results with them.

ISIS was designed as an Octalink patent beater. As an open source design it could, and was, made by a number of makers in a huge range of qualities. The poor ones were terrible and gave the entire concept a bad name.

As to "planned obsolesce", I don't think it's as malicious as you make it appear. It's not as if the manufacturers have a series of designs premade and introduce them in a planned sequence to displace each other in order. New designs and ideas are generated by various companies as the ideas occur to them and are introduced as they are thought up. Others follow suit or try to make a better mousetrap to stay competitive.

well biked

+1 to that. Shimano Octalink bb's are/were some of the most reliable and durable out there. ISIS, not so much. I know lots of folks, folks who ride quite a lot, who still use Octalink bb's, bb's that have been in service for years. Most of my own experience with Octalink is with V2 on the mtb side, and those are absolutely bombproof bb's as well. MUCH more durable than external bb's, for example. Nothing "dreadful" about Octalink at all. Except that it gets lumped together with ISIS in people's minds, sometimes.

surreal

Octalink and isis have some differences, but there are some commonalities as well. They both have miniscule bearings, and they both had a tendency to fail under any sort of duress. It wouldn't surprise me if a lightly-used octalink BB on a road bike lasted a while, but if you're riding trails, you're gonna toast the octalink almost as quickly as the ISIS.

Also, both are reviled in the collective memory of cyclists who were not able to dump em quick and put it all behind them, like the rest of the cycling industry did. Good riddance.

The external BB was developed to allow the use of bigger, more durable bearings, but the nature of an external bearing made them more prone to contamination. This is where the bb86/bb92 comes in; it allows the use of bigger bearings, and those bearings are better-protected. The problem? Now you have a whole new shell design, and it gives your frame a pot bellied appearance-- but, more importantly, it continues that march towards obsolescence.

HillRider, don't kid yourself. It may be a fact, or simply an oft-repeated rumor, but Shimano has purportedly held a patent for a 14-speed cassette for years now. You really think that, when they jumped to 7, they didn't already intend to go with 8, 9, 10, and beyond? Who are we kidding, now, really? If more=better, than why not come up with a BB124 "standard" and a 195mm OLD rear hub, so we can just run some 25speed cassettes and be done with it?

joejack951

Wait, 30 years back isn't that far in a market that recently have been changing on a uearly basis it seems? How many 30 year old Dura Ace RD are still in service? Think about it, with such a tiny market what incentive does a huge company like Shimano have to keep producing parts for some of its (likely not that great) boutique items it produced in the past?

While some may love the loose ball bottom bracket, Shimano makes cartridge square taper BB to replace them for ridiculously little money.

8 speed STI is alive and well as far I can see. The new Claris shifters are nicer and cheaper than the older 8 speed Sora. They have the true STI paddle arrangement and trim positions for all three rings (something even my Ultegra 6503 shifters don't have).

Then sell them 10 speed shifters, plus a Tiagra 10 speed cassette and KMC chain.

I'm glad you brought up this example because it's what I referred to as part of the misinformation out there. 9 speed STI isn't obsolete, just high end 9 speed STI. Again, what incentive does Shimano have to continue to produce three generation old high-end parts?

For the record, I commute using ST-6503 shifters.

well biked

I've got a LOT of experience with Octalink off road, and nothing could be further from the truth. Shimano Octalink bb's, even the current production lower level ones, are extremely durable. I know, in theory, with the smaller bearings it seems like they shouldn't be much better than most of the ISIS stuff out there.......but they are. Theory sometimes doesn't hold water.

well biked

You're putting stuff into this thread that simply isn't true. BB86 bearings are the same size bearings, designed for 24mm spindles, as threaded external Hollowtech II bearings. The difference: they're encased differently, and they're pressed into the shell so that they're internal, not external. The bearings themselves are not "bigger." You'd have to go to something like PressFit30/BB30 (i.e. larger bore in frame) for that.

edit: In re-reading your earlier post, I think you may have meant that BB86/91 bearings are bigger than Octalink bearings(?). If so, my apologies, because obviously that is true. Although, interestingly, Octalink bb's are much more durable than external Hollowtech II bearings or the newer (pressfit and enclosed) BB86/91. Again, theory doesn't always hold true in practice.

surreal

I apologize; I see how you might have read it that way; by saying bb86 allows the use of "bigger" bearings, I meant as compared to octalink/Sq.Taper bearings. BB86 are the same size as HT2 bearings (the aforementioned "bigger" bearings), but they're housed within the shell. Basically, HT2-sized bearings, with Sq-Taper style protection from the elements.

As for octalink offroad, I saw a lot of those BBs die before their time on mt bikes during my shop days BITD. That's just anecdotal stuff, but the interwebs are littered with threads from about 2006 about how grim octalink can be. Some of the complaints, related to spline failure, likely comes from user-error at installation. But those tiny bearings are nobody's fault but Shimano, and the magazine reviews/ads from the advent of HT2 made the more-durable oversized bearings a key selling point, along with enhanced stiffness.

well biked

Yep, see my edit above. I apologize as well for mis-reading your post.

And I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the durability of Octalink bb's.

HillRider

First, the Shimano 14-cog cassette and matching chain patents are not "purported", they are real patents from the mid-'90's. The numbers are:

Patent 5,954,604 - 14 Speed Cassette

Patent 5,921,881 - New Chain Design

They were unique designs not just an extension of then current technology and, you will note, were never commercialized. People keep referring to these patents as if they were some sort of malignant look at the future and they were nothing of the sort.

As to cog number inflation, Campy is at least as much to blame as Shimano being the first to introduce 10-speed and 11-speed.

surreal

Oh, I'd distribute the "blame" equally among most of the big Bike Industry players.

Are you seriously suggesting there shan't be a 14speed cassette, even if they don't use the patent from the 90s? Do you act surprised every time they trot out an extra cog and act like it's a novel idea? How long, do you think, til they move it on up to 12?

fietsbob

they, the manufacturers, respond to upgrade fever too , in with the new , ignore the old.

people are treated the same. sell to 18 - 35. is the advertising game.

oldbobcat

[QUOTE=surreal;16130845]It' not the customers' fault. Too often, it's the customer's buddy who "knows all about bikes" and makes a recommendation, and when it leads to a dead end we don't hear the end of it--first, the anger that I'm not as smart about bikes as his buddy, second, the disappointment that the parts aren't in stock, third, the unbillable time spent locating the parts, and finally the unbillable worry that none of this is going to work together anyway. I'm just saying to all you "buddies," consider the ability of who you're talking to and who is going to end up maintaining the bike.

The vintage Masi that I brought back to life didn't start that way. The previous owner had presumably tried to make it into a touring bike by putting a long Phil Wood bottom bracket in it, and gave up when he saw that the front derailleur wouldn't go out that far. I called nearly every bike shop in Boulder County for the Phil Wood tool. The guy who had one said he hadn't used it for years, so I offered him ten bucks for it, and threw it in with the deal that I made on eBay.

I love old bikes and old cars, and I love to watch those hot rod shows on Discovery where the guys turn a '64 Ford Galaxie into a neat street rod, but when a friend asks me what kind of car he should buy I'll probably say a Honda Accord.

And I was wrong about 8-speed STI--2300 is alive and well.