Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Bottom Bracket Bearing Retainer Orientation - REDUX

Notices
Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Bottom Bracket Bearing Retainer Orientation - REDUX

Old 03-27-11, 08:48 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
trayraynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 82

Bikes: 2012 Masi Evoluzione, 2012 Cannondale R2 Tandem, 1992 Ellison Tandem, 1990 Trek 950 Singletrack, 1990 Trek 970 Singletrack, 2019 Schwinn Twin Tandem

Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Bottom Bracket Bearing Retainer Orientation - REDUX

I've poured over previous posts and have found little consensus regarding the correct orientation of an 11-ball bearing retainer - does the retainer portion of the unit face the cup or the cone on a Shimano MT60 BB? See attached photos. I prefer to continue to use the bearings in the retainers - that in mind, can anyone weigh in on this with some wisdom on what is the correct orientation?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
Slide1.jpg (64.5 KB, 40 views)
File Type: jpg
P1030346.jpg (76.8 KB, 25 views)
trayraynor is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 09:07 AM
  #2  
rebmeM roineS
 
JanMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Metro Indy, IN
Posts: 16,217

Bikes: Bacchetta Giro A20, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer

Liked 349 Times in 227 Posts
I poured myself a cup of coffee and then went out to the garage where I took a look at an old non-shimano axle set. On this set, the closed side of the retainer (left on your photo) faces the spindle bearing surface and the open side faces the cup. When oriented correctly, the ball bearings will roll freely on both bearing surfaces. That's the key. Before installation, try it both ways; one way should be smooth-rolling while the other may involve retainer rub on a bearing surface.
__________________
Bacchetta Giro A20, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
JanMM is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 11:37 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,820
Liked 133 Times in 91 Posts
The proper orientation for a retainer is in the bottom of the trash can. They are not necessary and eliminating it and using free balls (heh, heh, I said free balls) will probably allow you to get in another 2 bearings in the BB which will prolong the life of the BB.
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 11:50 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,214

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 3,059 Times in 1,684 Posts
Depending on the retainer design there may or may not be a reduction of the balls in the bearing. Though I agree that they serve mainly as an assembly convenience, there's no evidence that using one degrades performance in any way.

If you wish, there's no reason not to discard retainers, but in most cases no reason to do so. If you keep the retainer and aren't sure of it's orientation you can assemble the axle bearing and cup dry in your palm and observe which will make things obvious. Or you can use a simple test. Lay a pencil at an angle against the inside and outside of the retainer simulating the face of the cone and cup, the orientation that clears the retainer is correct.

To the OP- Looking at the specific retainers in the photo the closed side (counter-intuitively) nestles into the cup and the spindle enters the open side. Exactly opposite to your Redux post.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 01:09 PM
  #5  
cab horn
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,353

Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione

Likes: 0
Liked 29 Times in 21 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Depending on the retainer design there may or may not be a reduction of the balls in the bearing. Though I agree that they serve mainly as an assembly convenience, there's no evidence that using one degrades performance in any way.
Not using a retainer is advantageous for two reasons:

1) No retainers to fail, for one.
2) If more balls can be put in after the retainer is tossed, wear is decreased and more balls take the load.

Retainer orientation is obvious if you sit down and look at your parts for more than 5 seconds and mock the aseembly up on a table, one way results in the retainer hitting places where bearings normally sit, one does not.
operator is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 01:19 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,214

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 3,059 Times in 1,684 Posts
Originally Posted by operator
Not using a retainer is advantageous for two reasons:

1) No retainers to fail, for one.
2) If more balls can be put in after the retainer is tossed, wear is decreased and more balls take the load.

Retainer orientation is obvious if you sit down and look at your parts for more than 5 seconds and mock the aseembly up on a table, one way results in the retainer hitting places where bearings normally sit, one does not.
Yes retainer orientation is obvious, except that the OP got it exactly backwards (as posted). Obviously the obvious is less obvious to some than others.

As for the drawbacks of retainers, here I respectfully disagree. First of all properly installed retainers rarely fail. Secondly many designs including the one pictured in the post do not result in fewer balls than possible loaded loose.

Contrast that with the minor benefit that using original retainers ensures against having an extra ball, which is vastly more problematic than one too few. I'm neither Pro or Anti using retainers and generally do without because it makes my life easier, but I've seen too many instances where folks decided that they were smarter than the guy who designed the bearing and packed in that one ball too many.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 01:29 PM
  #7  
cab horn
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,353

Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione

Likes: 0
Liked 29 Times in 21 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY

As for the drawbacks of retainers, here I respectfully disagree. First of all properly installed retainers rarely fail. Secondly many designs including the one pictured in the post do not result in fewer balls than possible loaded loose.
If everything was properly installed we never see anyone coming into the shop with cranks that don't turn because the retainers exploded. You've worked on bikes, this is a common thing to happen on ****ty old bikes used as commuters.
operator is offline  
Old 03-27-11, 01:45 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,214

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 3,059 Times in 1,684 Posts
Originally Posted by operator
If everything was properly installed we never see anyone coming into the shop with cranks that don't turn because the retainers exploded. You've worked on bikes, this is a common thing to happen on ****ty old bikes used as commuters.
I agree, 99% of bearing related problems, not counting normal wear, are from folks thinking they knew more than they actually did and doing their own work. So what else is new? Forget flipped retainers, I've seen hub cones installed backward (cone to the outside) and had folks look me straight in the eye and insist that it was always that way.

We could have a fun thread if we had pros post the most outrageous claim made by a consumer reporting a bike problem.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Myosmith
Bicycle Mechanics
25
04-28-12 12:33 PM
wtandem
Bicycle Mechanics
4
02-13-12 02:51 PM
rothenfield1
Bicycle Mechanics
3
04-30-11 10:40 AM
NukeouT
Bicycle Mechanics
9
02-15-11 05:02 PM
dnomel
Bicycle Mechanics
2
09-11-10 10:54 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.