Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    22
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    What kind of bottom bracket is this? (PIC)

    My first modern bike. Can somebody tell me what kind of bottom bracket is this? Octalink? Cuz the seller told me it's cup and cone.

    Ritchey compact crankset 50/34

    P1050868.jpg
    Last edited by puregsr; 10-15-12 at 03:32 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    593
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes, cup and cone, not Octalink or ISIS. So probably either a ball-bearing retainer design, or loose bb's.

  3. #3
    Senior Member DieselDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Beaufort, South Carolina, USA and surrounding islands.
    My Bikes
    Cannondale R500, Motobecane Messenger
    Posts
    8,522
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Old school cup and cone. Serviceable and reliable enough. Can be replaced with a cartridge unit.
    Bikes use brakes to stop.

    If your bike has breaks, don't ride it.

  4. #4
    7-speed doomsday prepper ThermionicScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    CID
    My Bikes
    1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX
    Posts
    8,923
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The kind I like.
    Quote Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
    There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
    RUSA #7498

  5. #5
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Grid Reference, SK
    My Bikes
    I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
    Posts
    3,769
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    THe spindle likely uses the older squate taper BB/crank interface. If you remove the crank-fixing bolt you can see the end of the spindle and figure out for sure what type it is. Be sure to firmy re-tighten the bolt before riding.

  6. #6
    coprolite fietsbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW,Oregon Coast
    My Bikes
    7
    Posts
    3,219
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why do you ask, does it need replacement?

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    22
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It feels like my chainline is kind of messed up. Ritchey compact double (50/34) and 10 speed 105 cogs (12-27).
    Pedaling in small chainring and largest cog, large chainring would occasionally rub and catch the chain. Not sure if it's an adjustment issue or not. Quick measurement shows that it might be 2mm off the presumed 43.5mm chainline.

  8. #8
    Senior Member BlazingPedals's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Middle of da Mitten
    My Bikes
    Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, homebuilt recumbent
    Posts
    7,341
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They don't make bottom brackets in 1mm increments. If you're only 2mm off from the ideal, then you're about as close as you're going to get. Most likely, you'll just have to tweak either the limit screw or the cable tension.

  9. #9
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Grid Reference, SK
    My Bikes
    I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
    Posts
    3,769
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BlazingPedals View Post
    They don't make bottom brackets in 1mm increments. If you're only 2mm off from the ideal, then you're about as close as you're going to get. Most likely, you'll just have to tweak either the limit screw or the cable tension.
    It is hard to tell if this is the case for the OP, but there are some BBs that can be adjusted by loosening lockrings on both sides and threading the BB to one side or the other. However, if the pedals are close to centred in the frame, 2mm will not make enough af a difference (and is likely within most peoples' ability to measure chainline) to go tot he trouble.

    Also, that is kind of a weird setup - unless it is an aftermarket boutique BB, you normally only find cup-and-cone BB shells designed for splined BB tools on the cheapest of the cheap bikes. I suspect there is either a parts mismatch (cups from one style of BB kludged to work with another style), it is not a cup-and-cone BB, or someone has gone out of their way to take an ultra-cheap cup-and-cone BB from a X-Mart bike to install on this (apparently) decent aluminum road bike. Or perhaps it is a BB designed for a 73mm shell and the lock ring was added to cover up the extra exposed threads.

  10. #10
    7-speed doomsday prepper ThermionicScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    CID
    My Bikes
    1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX
    Posts
    8,923
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by puregsr View Post
    It feels like my chainline is kind of messed up. Ritchey compact double (50/34) and 10 speed 105 cogs (12-27).
    Pedaling in small chainring and largest cog, large chainring would occasionally rub and catch the chain. Not sure if it's an adjustment issue or not. Quick measurement shows that it might be 2mm off the presumed 43.5mm chainline.
    The chain should be nowhere close to the big chainring when you are in the small ring and the largest cog. Do you mean that you are in the smallest cog in the rear, and so the highest gear available when in the small ring? That's a common problem due to the size difference between the 50T and 34T chainrings, and one of several reasons you should be in the larger chainring at that point.
    Quote Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
    There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
    RUSA #7498

  11. #11
    Old fart JohnDThompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Appleton WI
    My Bikes
    Several, mostly not name brands.
    Posts
    13,112
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BlazingPedals View Post
    They don't make bottom brackets in 1mm increments. If you're only 2mm off from the ideal, then you're about as close as you're going to get.
    Quote Originally Posted by LarDasse74 View Post
    It is hard to tell if this is the case for the OP, but there are some BBs that can be adjusted by loosening lockrings on both sides and threading the BB to one side or the other.
    Not likely on a cup & cone type bottom bracket. But looking at the OP's picture, if the problem is that the chainrings are too close to the frame, there does appear to be room for at least a 1mm spacer under the fixed cup to move the arm out. If the problem is that the chainrings are too far away, the OP would need a shorter spindle.

  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    22
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
    The chain should be nowhere close to the big chainring when you are in the small ring and the largest cog. Do you mean that you are in the smallest cog in the rear, and so the highest gear available when in the small ring? That's a common problem due to the size difference between the 50T and 34T chainrings, and one of several reasons you should be in the larger chainring at that point.
    I meant when I'm in 34 front and 12 back. I know to avoid this combo, but just think it's kind of odd that this is a common problem with compact doubles.

  13. #13
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Grid Reference, SK
    My Bikes
    I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
    Posts
    3,769
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnDThompson View Post
    Not likely on a cup & cone type bottom bracket.
    I have serious doubts that this is a cup&cone BB.

  14. #14
    Senior Member rdtompki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Hollister, CA
    My Bikes
    Volagi, daVinci Joint Venture
    Posts
    3,963
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by puregsr View Post
    I meant when I'm in 34 front and 12 back. I know to avoid this combo, but just think it's kind of odd that this is a common problem with compact doubles.
    I don't think this is unusual and this combination is discouraged on compact setups. Whether or not you get an actual rub is a function of the chainline and chainstay length.
    Rick T
    --------
    Volagi - Triple"ized" and Tubeless
    daVinci Joint Venture

  15. #15
    7-speed doomsday prepper ThermionicScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    CID
    My Bikes
    1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX
    Posts
    8,923
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by puregsr View Post
    I meant when I'm in 34 front and 12 back. I know to avoid this combo, but just think it's kind of odd that this is a common problem with compact doubles.
    The idea with compact doubles is that the big ring is used with the whole range of the cassette for most of your riding, and the small ring is used with the bigger cogs when you have a hill to climb. It's been common wisdom throughout the decades to avoid the big-big and small-small combos, but with today's flexible chains it's more of an annoyance.
    Quote Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
    There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
    RUSA #7498

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •