Originally Posted by
Campag4life
Glad to help. Because of my background, I see the pitfalls with current BB's and so if I can contribute some advice to help out, I try to do so.
Bike companies are guilty of performing their beta testing on their customers. The evolution of installation practices for integrated BB's is unconscionable and transparent to those close to the industry. Its pretty obvious that the specification of epoxy and Loctite by large companies in the last couple of years is a response to all the customer complaints when bearings were installed without and would creak or work themselves out. So basically bike companies changed their installation practices because their original procedures were flawed. Excessive movement as in the case of the Scott with its smaller press fit bore is likely what results in its wear. A smaller diameter bore has greater stress than a larger PF30. But hard to know why the Foil BB in particular is so vulnerable. It may even be related to the type of carbon or layup...but probably tolerancing as well...or lack of tight BB I.D. tolerance and big side BB I.D. would accelerate wear. Adhesives would negate this...even if slip fit or even a slight clearance. A work in progress basically left to the consumer to sort out. Press fit bearing systems without adhesive with combination of side and vertical loading as in the case of a BB have little chance to be reliable...unless a lower power rider, low mileage bike and tight tolerances.
If you don't get any relief with Scott, don't sweat it. Epoxy and ride it and it will be OK. Keep in mind why using an epoxy bonding agent to keep the bushings in place is effective. Its because it is a natural adjunct and bonding agent to the matrix used in carbon fiber. The binding polymer in carbon fiber is often a thermoset resin such as epoxy, but other thermoset or thermoplastic polymers, such as polyester, vinyl ester or nylon are often used as well. So epoxy naturally bonds to the matrix of carbon fiber and bushings act as a mold of sorts. So when you epoxy plastic bushings in place using the crank as an alignment aid and why critical to install the crank before the epoxy sets up....and then you knock worn bushings out later to replace them, what is left is a nice round hole or line to line mold of the bushing O.D. created by the epoxy. So there is very little downside to a repaired carbon BB with press fit like BB91 or PF30.
Without adhesive, no chance and there will be more Foils with the same problem showing up here.
PS: for those that obtain a new frameset from Scott, or even own a Foil currently, I strongly suggest you adopt Specialized procedure for their narrow PF30 BB used on their flagship S-works bikes which specs the epoxy I referred to above if you want longer life out of your BB. Not doing this will simply let history repeat itself.
Here is a link to the Spesh procedure:
http://service.specialized.com/colla...G0338_revC.pdf
Note: Spesh does NOT spec epoxy for their BB30 because green Loctite
#640 is more effective for bonding bearings to alloy bores which are insert molded into the carbon shell unlike their S-works narrow PF30 bikes with virgin carbon 46mm BB shell I.D similar to 42mm OD BB shell used on the Foil.
Just a quick update Campag, to let you know that I gave up on my attempted warranty claim for my son's Scott Foil 20 frame due to the wallowing out of the BB shell. It just wasn't worth all the aggro, as I knew I was up against it being the second owner and wasn't getting any real support either from the previous owner. I had a one time reply from her saying that her Team Manager recommended wrapping plumbers tape around the bearing, he does it all the time!!

Yeh right.......I went ahead instead as you had kindly advised and used epoxy to secure the new bearing in place and everything went very smoothly. For some reason though, I had great difficulty in trying to purchase the Scotch Weld DP420 here in the UK as you advised, so after long discussions with the Scotch Weld dealer opted for the DP490 Black, which was in stock and immediately available for delivery. Performance was almost exactly the same, but work life was longer at 180 minutes, which meant less of a concern applying, but on the negative side, has a cure time of 7 days as opposed to the 1 day of the DP420. This however was no problem to me personally and quite happy to accept this. Anyway, just thought I would let you know that all your efforts in helping on this Forum does not go unnoticed and taken for granted. I appreciate very much your help and without it I wouldn't have known which way to turn. Thank you once again.
Piccy of the bike attached, with its upgrade to internal Di2 and new Mavic 40c Carbone clinchers(Wheel decals are black gloss..they are yellow from the flash!)