Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 85

Thread: Campy Nightmare

  1. #1
    1coolrider arcticbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    474
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Campy Nightmare

    I've been riding Campy since 1963 and have continued to do so until now! I own and ride Shimano and SRAM but prefer Campy.

    My problem is a typical complaint regarding the UT crank making clicking, groaning or other bothersome noises. I have two UT cranks and have had no problems for years until now.
    I've tried all the standard solutions and some non standard ones to no avail. I replaced the bearings, etc. I won't go into the excrutiating details except to say I've removed and re-installed it 3 times in the last week. The BB shell meets specs.

    Now I've finally decided to do the unthinkable, switch to another brand. I'm wondering if anyone has tried a SRAM crank (probably Red) using a Campy 10 speed chain. Or anyone use the TA Alize rings. If I use the SRAM, will I need the SRAM FD?

    BTW, I'm running Chorus 10 speed on this bike.

    Thanks!
    Arcticbiker

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    My Bikes
    1990 Romic Reynolds 531, 2009 Giant TCR Advanced custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build
    Posts
    11,636
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    PM @Campag4life. He should be able to help you.
    Robert

    My hero: "Tar-Baby ain't sayin' nuthin'..." (Joel Chandler Harris, Uncle Remus")

  3. #3
    Bridge Burner RollCNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Central NY
    My Bikes
    Felt Brougham, Lotus Prestige, Cinelli Xperience, & a Parts Bin Rain Bike
    Posts
    7,702
    Mentioned
    147 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Usually PT are the noisy ones, and not UT. My PT crank was insanely noisy until I loosened and retightened the chain ring bolts. Then all better.

    Anyway, the SRAM 10 speed crank will work fine with your system, and you don't need to do anything with your FD.

  4. #4
    1coolrider arcticbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    474
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rpenmanparker View Post
    PM @Campag4life. He should be able to help you.
    Thanks! I'll give it a shot.
    Arcticbiker

  5. #5
    1coolrider arcticbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    474
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RollCNY View Post
    Usually PT are the noisy ones, and not UT. My PT crank was insanely noisy until I loosened and retightened the chain ring bolts. Then all better.

    Anyway, the SRAM 10 speed crank will work fine with your system, and you don't need to do anything with your FD.
    I've got a PT crank waiting for me to install it on another bike. We'll see how it goes. And yes, I greased and retightened the chainring bolts to no avail.
    Arcticbiker

  6. #6
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Artic,
    I didn't really follow your PM but what you posted above is a bit more clear.
    First identify what bike you have.

    I presume the bike has an English or Italian threaded BB and you are using Campy threaded cups with UT.

    (note: I suggest you do NOT install your PowerTorque crank and ebay it. I don't like the design but others have them on the forum and some don't complain much about them)

    Contrary to what you write, UT is one of the most problem free cranks on the planet. Yes, some do click but as with BB30, this is based upon how they are installed.

    First take Roll's good advice. Remove chain ring bolts, clean the rings, grease bolt threads and reassemble to torque spec. Park sells a little tool to hold the back of the slotted bolts while you torque the Torx bolts. Ride the bike and see if it still clicks.

    If it still clicks and you are sure its the crank and not your saddle or seat post....ride the bike out of the saddle to determine this...then the crank must come off. Also remove the threaded cups, clean the threads, and smear light grease on both BB female threads and cup male threads and reassemble. Generally if there is clicking it is the cups and grease and proper torque quiet them.

    When you install the crank, put a liberal amount of grease on the bearings...pack the backside of the bearings as well with grease...and a light coat inside the cups. Important. Prior to installation, use mineral spirits and a tooth brush to thoroughly clean the hirth joint interface. This joint must be immaculate. You can also place a light coat of grease on the joint prior to assembly. I have done it both ways and some believe this takes all the tolerance out and is quieter. If you have the right BB shell width i.e. your wave washer has a hint of compression, it should be dead silent. Mine always has been. Also check your pedals. Pedals require maintenance as well...or can...my Speedplays do and pedal bearings can wear as well and creak. Also check the clips on your shoes.

    To me UT cranks are about as good as it gets when installed on a threaded BB. Now with the new Praxis conversion BB, Campy lovers can adapt UT cranks to BB/PF30 framesets as well which really changes things for the better as previously Campy cranks didn't mount very well to BB/PF30.

    HTH

  7. #7
    1coolrider arcticbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    474
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the reply. I sent you a PM before I saw this.

    I installed as you describe above, greased and re torqued the chainrings, cleaned and greased the hirth joint. We'll see how it goes.
    Arcticbiker

  8. #8
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by arcticbiker View Post
    Thanks for the reply. I sent you a PM before I saw this.

    I installed as you describe above, greased and re torqued the chainrings, cleaned and greased the hirth joint. We'll see how it goes.
    Might as well keep the conversation public. Read your PM. Don't use Loctite or even antiseize paste on cup threads. Use grease throughout.

    In response to your PM...don't give up on your UT crank. You have a much greater chance of keeping an UT crank quiet than a myriad of other cranks you may consider for the simple fact that an UT is the most solid and most simple design. It may even be your pedals...or your seat post if you haven't done the out of saddle test. As to mounting a Sram crank...pretty much any late model GXP style crank will mount to your bike. But I wouldn't give up on your UT. Remove the pedals and stick some platforms on it and try to make it creak out of the saddle.

    You will solve this and likely without replacing the crank if you do your homework.
    Good luck.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    My Bikes
    1990 Romic Reynolds 531, 2009 Giant TCR Advanced custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build
    Posts
    11,636
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Another possibility is the front end. I have had clicking in phase with pedaling that was due to rocking the bars back and forth. Cleaning and reinstalling the head set was necessary. That can be check by riding no hands for a short bit.
    Robert

    My hero: "Tar-Baby ain't sayin' nuthin'..." (Joel Chandler Harris, Uncle Remus")

  10. #10
    Bridge Burner RollCNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Central NY
    My Bikes
    Felt Brougham, Lotus Prestige, Cinelli Xperience, & a Parts Bin Rain Bike
    Posts
    7,702
    Mentioned
    147 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    And not to be overly simple, but make sure your rear skewer is tight. That can lead to a clicking that can drive you insane. One of my cohort tore his pedals and BB apart three times, and finally found a loose rear skewer.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Homebrew01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Ffld Cnty Connecticut
    My Bikes
    Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales
    Posts
    16,486
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    ^^ Same with the front skewer.
    Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike

  12. #12
    1coolrider arcticbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    474
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
    Might as well keep the conversation public. Read your PM. Don't use Loctite or even antiseize paste on cup threads. Use grease throughout.

    In response to your PM...don't give up on your UT crank. You have a much greater chance of keeping an UT crank quiet than a myriad of other cranks you may consider for the simple fact that an UT is the most solid and most simple design. It may even be your pedals...or your seat post if you haven't done the out of saddle test. As to mounting a Sram crank...pretty much any late model GXP style crank will mount to your bike. But I wouldn't give up on your UT. Remove the pedals and stick some platforms on it and try to make it creak out of the saddle.

    You will solve this and likely without replacing the crank if you do your homework.
    Good luck.
    I did as you suggested using only grease and no loctite. The first two times I re-assembled the crank, the noise abated for about 30-35 miles then rumble started up again. The first time I noticed a problem the noise was a regular click on the drive side pedal position of 6. This noise disappeared after the first rebuild with the new bearings.

    Today at after the third rebuild, the noise is gone for now. I only rode 37 miles so I'll need another test ride to be sure. I've become pretty good at disassembly and reassembly! I've got my fingers crossed.

    Thanks for the encouragement to stick it out!
    Arcticbiker

  13. #13
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by arcticbiker View Post
    I did as you suggested using only grease and no loctite. The first two times I re-assembled the crank, the noise abated for about 30-35 miles then rumble started up again. The first time I noticed a problem the noise was a regular click on the drive side pedal position of 6. This noise disappeared after the first rebuild with the new bearings.

    Today at after the third rebuild, the noise is gone for now. I only rode 37 miles so I'll need another test ride to be sure. I've become pretty good at disassembly and reassembly! I've got my fingers crossed.

    Thanks for the encouragement to stick it out!
    Good work!

  14. #14
    Senior Member rousseau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    2,435
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by arcticbiker View Post
    This noise disappeared after the first rebuild with the new bearings.
    I recently had a flare-up of creaking that I narrowed down to the Ultra-Torque bearings after eliminating the other possibilities. Best of luck on your trouble-shooting. I hope this works out for you.
    The pleasure is momentary, the position ridiculous, and the expense damnable.

  15. #15
    Senior Member vwchad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Everett, Washington
    My Bikes
    2013 Focus Izalco Pro, 2012 Focus Mares AX 2.0
    Posts
    568
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had a creaking issue from a few sources on my UT crank. The first creak was resolved by removing, cleaning, and reinstalling the chainrings. Sounds like you've already done that. Things got quieter, but still had a creak. Unfortunately, my frame is BB30, so I was using the press in bearing cups from Campy. The drive side would actually work its way out a few thousandths of an inch. The noise was terrible. I pulled it apart again, cleaned it up, and installed the cups with some Loctite 609 retaining compound. Basically a sleeve retainer that can be disassebled if needed. Totally silent still after about 400 miles.

    I really like the UT design. I can have the cranks off in about 30 seconds, with one tool. It is by far my favorite crank design that I've used so far. Looks darn good as well. Don't give up on it, you'll sort it out.

  16. #16
    Senior Member ColnagoC40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    My Bikes
    Vitus 979 x 2, Vitus 992, Colnago C40, Colnago C60
    Posts
    343
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Old thread I know, I just installed a 2015 Super Record group set onto a Colnago C60 frame and comment on the UT design using pressed in cups.

    There seems to be a lot of complaints about these on the web?

    IMHO, looking at this design, where the bearing cone presses onto a shaft and the bearing cup is a sliding fit into the frame retaining cup is not a good idea. As the mating surface between the crank bearing cup and the frame bearing retaining cup cannot rely on hydrodynamic lubrication (there is no rotation), the small movements in this area during operation will deplete the grease lubricant applied during assembly. Once this happens the softer part being the frame bearing retaining cup will wear. Once there is enough wear, the process will accelerate rapidly, clearance will increase and this will be the source of the ticking, or clunking noise so many complain about. I believe the remedy would be replacing the cups which presses into the frame at around $40 a shot, when this assembly becomes audible.

    Not a good design, Campy!!!

  17. #17
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ColnagoC40 View Post
    Old thread I know, I just installed a 2015 Super Record group set onto a Colnago C60 frame and comment on the UT design using pressed in cups.

    There seems to be a lot of complaints about these on the web?

    IMHO, looking at this design, where the bearing cone presses onto a shaft and the bearing cup is a sliding fit into the frame retaining cup is not a good idea. As the mating surface between the crank bearing cup and the frame bearing retaining cup cannot rely on hydrodynamic lubrication (there is no rotation), the small movements in this area during operation will deplete the grease lubricant applied during assembly. Once this happens the softer part being the frame bearing retaining cup will wear. Once there is enough wear, the process will accelerate rapidly, clearance will increase and this will be the source of the ticking, or clunking noise so many complain about. I believe the remedy would be replacing the cups which presses into the frame at around $40 a shot, when this assembly becomes audible.

    Not a good design, Campy!!!
    If you are simply being declarative, you need to be more specific. You didn't mention what year C60 you have or what kind of BB it has. The new C60 has a very different wide shell BB. Today, Campy can be made to work effectively with press fit BB's being narrow or wide shell press fit.

    So before you believe you have an accident in waiting, you need to be specific about what BB type you are mating with your SR UT. Also your 'hydrodynamic lubrication' reference needs further elaboration to make your point. Grease should not be in the equation. Loctite should be used to secure press fit joints. It is not a viscous fluid and prone to hydraulic displacement as you suggest.

    The biggest problem with press fit, it builders don't know how to build them or don't understand the physics at play. Yes Campy's press in cups for BB30 and PF30 in particular aren't the best but today there are alternatives which make UT work effectively. Wide shell BB86 applications are no problem with UT provided they are installed with best practices.

  18. #18
    Senior Member ColnagoC40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    My Bikes
    Vitus 979 x 2, Vitus 992, Colnago C40, Colnago C60
    Posts
    343
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
    If you are simply being declarative, you need to be more specific. You didn't mention what year C60 you have or what kind of BB it has. The new C60 has a very different wide shell BB. Today, Campy can be made to work effectively with press fit BB's being narrow or wide shell press fit.

    So before you believe you have an accident in waiting, you need to be specific about what BB type you are mating with your SR UT. Also your 'hydrodynamic lubrication' reference needs further elaboration to make your point. Grease should not be in the equation. Loctite should be used to secure press fit joints. It is not a viscous fluid and prone to hydraulic displacement as you suggest.

    The biggest problem with press fit, it builders don't know how to build them or don't understand the physics at play. Yes Campy's press in cups for BB30 and PF30 in particular aren't the best but today there are alternatives which make UT work effectively. Wide shell BB86 applications are no problem with UT provided they are installed with best practices.
    Answers to your questions:

    The Colnago C60 was launced in August last year, they are all the same so far, mine is a 2015.

    Pressfit BB86.5, Colnago uses a special arrangement here they call "ThreadFit 82.5" this allows the BB cups to be pressed into replaceable precision machined BB piece. Ernesto allows us to have no movement between frame and BB cups and allows us to replace the BB cups a gazillion times without any risk to wearing out or damaging the frame, without the use of Loctite.

    2015 Campy Super Record, Ultra Torque with the ceramic bearings serial number 0196, so some of the early production.

    "Hydro dynamic lubrication" means the concave shape of the bearing cone and the bearing cup, with balls held together by a race, distributes lubricant when the bearing turns so that there is a protecting film between ball, cone and cup always.

    A sliding fit between bearing cup an frame BB retaining cup will wear the pressed in frame cup out in the area where the bearing outer cup moves, due to movement without the above described lubrication action.

    Some of my opinions and it is OK if yours are different:

    Loctite is only used in press fit joints where the press fit design tolerances were out of specification, badly machined, or the design was incorrect. Loctite is a band-aid for bad workmanship. Colnago seems to be well aware of this.

    The new ceramic bearings do not take grease, Campy recommends a very light machine oil. Campy do however recommend grease between bearing cup and pressed in BB cup. This is not a press fit, it is a sliding fit, my design concern mentioned in my post above. The fit is designed allowing the bearings to move in the cups, due to the large tolerances between different frames.

    I don't believe I have an accident in the waiting, but I sure know that I won't be doing around 10,000 miles a year for 15 years without any maintenance as experienced on my 2000 Record BB in my C40. This one will need a whole lot of maintenance including cup replacement in comparison.

    With respect, this new design comes from a new generation of college Engineers, who do not have a lot of practical experience in the field, especially when it comes to sound automotive principles. One thing I give them credit for, is they did design for an assembly saving every gram possible, but reliability was not the first objective. They also allowed for a wide tolerance range on the BB, probably due to the new wave of Asian manufacturers.
    Last edited by ColnagoC40; 02-06-15 at 09:56 AM.

  19. #19
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ColnagoC40 View Post
    Answers to your questions:

    The Colnago C60 was launced in August last year, they are all the same so far, mine is a 2015.

    Pressfit BB86.5, Colnago uses a special arrangement here they call "ThreadFit 82.5" this allows the BB cups to be pressed into replaceable precision machined BB piece. Ernesto allows us to have no movement between frame and BB cups and allows us to replace the BB cups a gazillion times without any risk to wearing out or damaging the frame, without the use of Loctite.

    2015 Campy Super Record, Ultra Torque with the ceramic bearings serial number 0196, so some of the early production.

    "Hydro dynamic lubrication" means the concave shape of the bearing cone and the bearing cup, with balls held together by a race, distributes lubricant when the bearing turns so that there is a protecting film between ball, cone and cup always.

    A sliding fit between bearing cup an frame BB retaining cup will wear the pressed in frame cup out in the area where the bearing outer cup moves, due to movement without the above described lubrication action.

    Some of my opinions and it is OK if yours are different:

    Loctite is only used in press fit joints where the press fit design tolerances were out of specification, badly machined, or the design was incorrect. Loctite is a band-aid for bad workmanship. Colnago seems to be well aware of this.

    The new ceramic bearings do not take grease, Campy recommends a very light machine oil. Campy do however recommend grease between bearing cup and pressed in BB cup. This is not a press fit, it is a sliding fit, my design concern mentioned in my post above. The fit is designed allowing the bearings to move in the cups, due to the large tolerances between different frames.

    I don't believe I have an accident in the waiting, but I sure know that I won't be doing around 10,000 miles a year for 15 years without any maintenance as experienced on my 2000 Record BB in my C40. This one will need a whole lot of maintenance including cup replacement in comparison.

    With respect, this new design comes from a new generation of college Engineers, who do not have a lot of practical experience in the field, especially when it comes to sound automotive principles. One thing I give them credit for, is they did design for an assembly saving every gram possible, but reliability was not the first objective. They also allowed for a wide tolerance range on the BB, probably due to the new wave of Asian manufacturers.
    You are wrong on almost every level including the initial premise of your thread. I have no idea what your background is, but if engineering, good luck. Mine is engineering btw.
    Quite honestly, this will go over your head but Colnago's new BB on their C60 is a bit of a bad joke. Complexity for complexity sake, another needless interface to the BB and no value added. Pure marketing. Their BB is no more improved by having a threaded interface to a sleeve pushed inside their BB shell than the man on the moon. The interface to UT press in cups to BB86.5 is no different than a standard Trek BB86.5...only in the case with Colnago, one more interface to connect to the bike...a sleeve with two threaded cups. Needless. The ruse is improved co-axiality of bore centers which isn't a problem with standard BB86.5.

    So good luck pressing in Campy cups directly into the threaded in place sleeve Colnago uses not using Locitite. Even money to creak. Yours may or may not based upon, your weight strength and riding frequency. The tolerance of both std BB86.5, the Colnago sleeve and Campy press in cups is very tight. The wear you speak of will accelerate without Loctite over time. Loctite prevents movement and wear...that is the point.
    Loctite is no more a bandaid then putting carbon paste on a seatpost to mitigate slippage at the same clamp torque.
    Loctite provides light bonding that negates cup movement. Only light bonding is required because lateral forces especially with BB86.5 with cups internal to the BB sleeve are low. Campy cups that are external to BB shell as in the case of BB/PF 30 are more problematic because of the load path.
    Lastly, just to be clear, no Loctite is required between Colnago's sleeve and BB shell. This is because the threaded cups they spec capture the sleeve such that it will not move. Loctite however is needed between the sleeve ID and the Campy press in cup OD if you want a dead quiet bike over time.

    As I stated before, the biggest problem with integrated BB's isn't the design as much as it is the interpretation of the design and the installation practices by those who don't understand them. It is clear that this is too much to ask of the lay public based upon your post and all the problems on the road. Those who understand integrated BB's don't have the same problem.
    Last edited by Campag4life; 02-06-15 at 11:44 AM.

  20. #20
    Senior Member ColnagoC40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    My Bikes
    Vitus 979 x 2, Vitus 992, Colnago C40, Colnago C60
    Posts
    343
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
    You are wrong on almost every level including the initial premise of your thread. I have no idea what your background is, but if engineering, good luck. Mine is engineering btw.
    Quite honestly, this will go over your head but Colnago's new BB on their C60 is a bit of a bad joke. Complexity for complexity sake, another needless interface to the BB and no value added. Pure marketing. Their BB is no more improved by having a threaded interface to a sleeve pushed inside their BB shell than the man on the moon. The interface to UT press in cups to BB86.5 is no different than a standard Trek BB86.5...only in the case with Colnago, one more interface to connect to the bike...a sleeve with two threaded cups. Needless. The ruse is improved co-axiality of bore centers which isn't a problem with standard BB86.5.

    So good luck pressing in Campy cups directly into the threaded in place sleeve Colnago uses not using Locitite. Even money to creak. Yours may or may not based upon, your weight strength and riding frequency. The tolerance of both std BB86.5, the Colnago sleeve and Campy press in cups is very tight. The wear you speak of will accelerate without Loctite over time. Loctite prevents movement and wear...that is the point.
    Loctite is no more a bandaid then putting carbon paste on a seatpost to mitigate slippage at the same clamp torque.
    Loctite provides light bonding that negates cup movement. Only light bonding is required because lateral forces especially with BB86.5 with cups internal to the BB sleeve are low. Campy cups that are external to BB shell as in the case of BB/PF 30 are more problematic because of the load path.
    Lastly, just to be clear, no Loctite is required between Colnago's sleeve and BB shell. This is because the threaded cups they spec capture the sleeve such that it will not move. Loctite however is needed between the sleeve ID and the Campy press in cup OD if you want a dead quiet bike over time.

    As I stated before, the biggest problem with integrated BB's isn't the design as much as it is the interpretation of the design and the installation practices by those who don't understand them. It is clear that this is too much to ask of the lay public based upon your post and all the problems on the road. Those who understand integrated BB's don't have the same problem.
    Have you pressed Campy cups into a new C60 frame, which you thought had different models? Have you even looked at the 2015 Ultra Torque in person?

    Anyway, you missed the whole core of what I wrote, totally!!!

    Go and research bearing nomenclature, and understand the difference between a "bearing cup" a "bearing cone" and know that the wear I am concerned about is not between the mating surface of the Campy frame cups and the bike BB shell. The area where you have to use Loctite if that makes it clearer, is not what I referred to at all.

    Some folks have to just state their credentials and get personal. You must be one of those young Engineers, who knows everything, right?

    One of my best riding friends owns the local Trek dealership, he loves UT, gives him a lot of extra maintenance business. Between the two of us, I believe we have figured out how to solve clicks and clunks and creaks with this kit shorter term. And, yes on a Trek you have to use Loctite, but as I said this is not where I expect a problem.
    Last edited by ColnagoC40; 02-06-15 at 12:11 PM.

  21. #21
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ColnagoC40 View Post
    Have you pressed Campy cups into a new C60 frame, which you thought had different models? Have you even looked at the 2015 Ultra Torque in person?

    Anyway, you missed the whole core of what I wrote, totally!!!

    Go and research bearing nomenclature, and understand the difference between a "bearing cup" a "bearing cone" and know that the wear I am concerned about is not between the mating surface of the Campy frame cups and the bike BB shell. The area where you have to use Loctite if that makes it clearer, is not what I referred to at all.

    Some folks have to just state their credentials and get personal. You must be one of those young Engineers, who knows everything, right?
    I am 60 years old and have worked in product development my whole life. Let me be blunt. I am sorry. You don't have a clue what you are talking about. As I stated, virtually everything you wrote is wrong.
    If you like, we can take each subject one at a time. Where do you want to start?...lol.

    Tell you what. Lets do this. There is nothing wrong with using Campy BB86 cups in your proprietary BB86.5 derivative, C60 Colnago.

    First we need to identify the concern you have. I will start with a picture of the C60 sleeve that Colnago uses that is held in place by opposing threaded cups. Campy BB86 cups are pressed into the ID of the two threaded cups shown that capture the sleeve by compression within the BB shell.

    Explain your concern...and feel free to mark up the picture and repost it to detail your issue with the interface.

    Last edited by Campag4life; 02-06-15 at 12:39 PM.

  22. #22
    Senior Member ColnagoC40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    My Bikes
    Vitus 979 x 2, Vitus 992, Colnago C40, Colnago C60
    Posts
    343
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
    I am 60 years old and have worked in product development my whole life. Let me be blunt. I am sorry. You don't have a clue what you are talking about. As I stated, virtually everything you wrote is wrong.
    If you like, we can take each subject one at a time. Where do you want to start?...lol.

    Tell you what. Lets do this. There is nothing wrong with using Campy BB86 cups in your proprietary BB86.5 derivative, C60 Colnago.

    First we need to identify the concern you have. I will start with a picture of the C60 sleeve that Colnago uses that is held in place by opposing threaded cups. Campy BB86 cups are pressed into ID of the threaded cups shown that capture the sleeve by compression within the BB shell.

    Explain your concern...and feel free to mark up the picture and repost it to detail your issue with the interface.

    Sigh over here, more credentials given and still did not understand what I wrote initially. OK, I have patience, lets be nice and make this an intellectual discussion. Thanks for taking the time to post the picture.

    In short, what you did not understand is that I suggest the inside surface of the softer metal pressed-in cups wear out.

    If the Campy Ultra Torque cups, is a proper press fit, or a jury rigged fit with Loctite, there is no issue with creaking or movement between the cup outer and the sleeve it is pressed into, or glued into with a breakable bond the way you do it. No issue Ever.

    The creak, tick, clunk I experience with my bike shop owner friend and what I expect to develop with my new C60 is between the mating parts of only Campy components, nothing to do with the frame, whether it is a Trek, a Chinarello, or a Colnago has nothing to do with it.

    The outer part of the Campagnolo bearing part number FC-RE112 in Engineering terms is called the bearing cup, it rotates around the bearing cone. So, what I attempted to explain in my first post is that the Campagonolo bearing cup of a hard metal, moves inside the Campagnolo pressed in frame cup (softer material), this being part of the design. There is preload with a wave washer, but there will always be movement as this is not a press fit. As lubrication in this area, as recommended by Campy will be a challenge to sustain, you will get wear.

    So, in the end there will be too much play between bearing outer and the INSIDE surface of the soft worn pressed in cup. Grease the cups without removing them, re-install the crank and the noise is gone for a little while. Replace the cups and the noise is gone for a longer period, but it will come back.

    I hope this is a bit clearer and thanks for posting the picture and spending time on this.

    BTW, any bearing where either the cone or the bearing cup is not a press fit with pretty exact tolerances, will eventually work loose. On something powered by several horse power compared to our meager human output, the noise is pretty bad when this happens and self destruction follows shortly afterwards. In the new world the folks who are well organized will pick this up with vibration monitoring and address the issue before it gets out of hand. Without stating my credentials, all I can say is that over here, bringing Loctite into the place will sure get someone fired.

    Finally, if you believe pressing cups into a machined area as per your posted picture is no better than just gluing it into a carbon sleeve, we will never be on the same page, when it comes to finer Engineering practices. In that case at 60, I won't wish you good luck, neither of us need it as I am two years ahead of you.
    Last edited by ColnagoC40; 02-06-15 at 01:58 PM.

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Battle of the engineering degrees. My Dad has a masters in engineering for Ohio State and my brother has one from Stanford. I never understand what they are talking about either.

  24. #24
    Senior Member GP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by colnago62 View Post
    Battle of the engineering degrees. My Dad has a masters in engineering for Ohio State and my brother has one from Stanford. I never understand what they are talking about either.
    they'll whip out their calculators and have a showdown on page 2.

  25. #25
    Voice of the Industry Campag4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,480
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ColnagoC40 View Post
    Sigh over here, more credentials given and still did not understand what I wrote initially. OK, I have patience, lets be nice and make this an intellectual discussion. Thanks for taking the time to post the picture.

    In short, what you did not understand is that I suggest the inside surface of the softer metal pressed-in cups wear out.

    If the Campy Ultra Torque cups, is a proper press fit, or a jury rigged fit with Loctite, there is no issue with creaking or movement between the cup outer and the sleeve it is pressed into, or glued into with a breakable bond the way you do it. No issue Ever.

    The creak, tick, clunk I experience with my bike shop owner friend and what I expect to develop with my new C60 is between the mating parts of only Campy components, nothing to do with the frame, whether it is a Trek, a Chinarello, or a Colnago has nothing to do with it.

    The outer part of the Campagnolo bearing part number FC-RE112 in Engineering terms is called the bearing cup, it rotates around the bearing cone. So, what I attempted to explain in my first post is that the Campagonolo bearing cup of a hard metal, moves inside the Campagnolo pressed in frame cup (softer material), this being part of the design. There is preload with a wave washer, but there will always be movement as this is not a press fit. As lubrication in this area, as recommended by Campy will be a challenge to sustain, you will get wear.

    So, in the end there will be too much play between bearing outer and the INSIDE surface of the soft worn pressed in cup. Grease the cups without removing them, re-install the crank and the noise is gone for a little while. Replace the cups and the noise is gone for a longer period, but it will come back.

    I hope this is a bit clearer and thanks for posting the picture and spending time on this.

    BTW, any bearing where either the cone or the bearing cup is not a press fit with pretty exact tolerances, will eventually work loose. On something powered by several horse power compared to our meager human output, the noise is pretty bad when this happens and self destruction follows shortly afterwards. In the new world the folks who are well organized will pick this up with vibration monitoring and address the issue before it gets out of hand. Without stating my credentials, all I can say is that over here, bringing Loctite into the place will sure get someone fired.

    Finally, if you believe pressing cups into a machined area as per your posted picture is no better than just gluing it into a carbon sleeve, we will never be on the same page, when it comes to finer Engineering practices. In that case at 60, I won't wish you good luck, neither of us need it as I am two years ahead of you.

    You have no idea what my background is but suffice to say what you are considering is arithmetic to me and I have lived in a world of calculus.

    I actually understood you the first time and you are still wrong. I will repeat, you are wrong on every level.

    Here is a primer for you. What you should of written to start with is...I just built a new C60 with SR crank but my concern with the longevity of the SR crank has nothing to do with my new bike or their new proprietary, derivative BB86.5 bottom bracket. My concern lies solely with the design of UT as the bearings relate to the cups they reside in. Because there is some lateral displacement associated with any wave washer cranks and there is some lateral float associate with Campy bearings which are pressed and captured on respective half shafts..but not into mating cups pressed into my frame my (false) assumption is that either the outer races of the bearing (unlikely due to hardened steel) or more likely the softer Campy cups which press into the frame will wear, induce radial play and cause noise. Whoa is me for having this concern. Apparently I don't know (you speaking) about the history of UltraTorque or its reputation for reliability.

    Above is what you should have wrote.

    Me again:
    Your concern about premature failure of Campy UltraTorque cups due to Campy bearing lateral float within the cups per design is ill founded. My personal experience is...I own a Campy UltraTorque bike with cups with 20K miles on it is...they may never wear out....lol. But here is the point. They are designed to be the sacrificial wear members of the bottom bracket. They are softer metal and inexpensive by design intent.

    So all your bluster is ill founded...what I said right off the bat. The bearings in your new Colnago can not tell the difference if they are residing in your new Colnago or in my Specialized Roubaix. The alloy cup material is identical. Even if they do wear you are riding a $8K bike and can afford to replace the cups once in a while. The UltraTorque crank design is one of the best in the industry. Colnago got rather silly with its BB design on the new C60, mostly by using the term 'thread' to draw back in loyal threaded BB sheep that don't understand the basis for the design which is redundant, if not complex and superfluous. If Colnago steps up to the game for their next gen BB design and integrates Campy cups into their threaded cup BB design, then they will have an actual design improvement which will be almost a full regression back to a threaded BB...what Colnago is known for and made for decades.

    Your comments about Loctite are ludicrous. Loctite is spec'ed by almost all bike brands including Specialized, Cervelo and Canondale for press fit applications. All the BB service manuals are available on line. Their is intrinsically nothing different between Cervelo's BBright and Colnago's BB86.5 except I.D. of the press fit. Cervelo specs Loctite to keep their BB quiet. Further there is nothing different between Specialized BB30 and BB86.5 other than ID and shell width. Both are press fit. Specialized specifies Loctite. For PF30 which Specialized spec'ed for years on their flagship S-works bike, they spec'ed EPOXY. None of these are a kluge or bandaid. You just haven't stepped out of the dark ages and understand that adhesives have become mainstream and in some instances replaced mechanical fasteners.

    I can write a book on design because it has been my life's work. It apparently hasn't been yours or you are just starting out.

    I hope some of what I wrote makes sense.
    Last edited by Campag4life; 02-06-15 at 03:09 PM.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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