Does anyone have experience with replacement bottom brackets? I'm going to put my superbe pro crank on the Colnago frame. I'm not trying to figure out the size. Veil says it should be a 109 Jis. I talked to Phil Wood they have 108 and 111... I know they are kinda the benchmark but then I see a Shimano for $20 on. (I have a Phil Wood BB on my old finest) should I consider anything else? It's been awhile since I've looked for a BB.

Any thoughts?

I don't have a Phil BB, but their wheel hubs spin forever.

As to the most affordable BBs, I have been using them on recent builds without any problems at all. Are they as good as a Phil?, or other expensive model? Probably not. I did replace the new BB on a recent build to reduce the Q-factor.

edit: Maybe someone with more knowledge can expand upon the question of whether the taper angle is different between today's Shimano replacements and vintage Euro spindles. A steeper angle on the Shimano taper might explain the wide Q i found a bit irritating.

Initially Phil wood was (one of?) the only company to use cartridge bearings in their bottom brackets. This made them relatively popular but a high dollar item. Since then cartridge bottom brackets have become sealed. I like the Shimano UN-55. Once installed I've never thought about it again. I don't think the Phil bottom brackets are worth the price they're charging these days with so many other options available.

One of the advantages of a Phil Wood unit is that you can adjust alignment on the drive side--often as much as 4mm. You can't do that with most other units, particularly the Shimano cartridge ones.

One is $20 and the other is $140. Which one do you think is better?

The Shimano UN55 may well be the single best deal in bicycles.

I refurbish old bikes for a living, making cheap, dependable bikes for people. I've never found a dead UN5x. I just plugged a UN51 I took out of an ancient and thoroughly demolished mtn bike into another bike bc it still turned perfectly. The only stories I've heard of killed UN5x BBs were from people who used them for years, if not decades.

They're amazeballs.

Another vote for the shimano bb, my uncle rode my bike the other day (hes been doing bicycle stuff since a kid, he's now 60) and he was really impressed by how smooth the drivetrain was. No reason to buy the Phil unless there's a special spindle length/type combo that you can't find anywhere else.

I've got a Phil BB with the titanium axle on my vintage weight weenie bike, and it's done well. The bike gets treated gently, at least in regards to weather, and I probably have less than 5000 miles on the BB. No problems with it.

I've also been using the Shimano UN-71 cartridge BBs on a few bikes. These get a lot of miles and subjected to a bit of rotten weather. One bike was exhibiting a bit of roughness, so I pulled it out and figured out that the cups were too tight (I've since decided that this is an issue with the BB shell or the threading itself). The UN-71 had about 15,000 miles on it, so I cut it open and took at look at the bearings and the surfaces where the bearings run....





summary: it all looked great. Lots of miles left in it.

I don't think the UN-71 is still made, but for a $30(?) BB, they have been quite reliable for me. Seems like the UN55 is likely a good value too.


Steve in Peoria

The phil wood ones are nice... but unnecessary. The shimano UN55s last for tens of thousands of miles and you can replace the shimano one a half dozen times before you'd reach the price of the phil wood. (Not that you'd ever have to in the bike's lifetime. If you wore out a half dozen UN55s the bike would be on its last legs with other parts.)

If you have to buy a BB that's not the exact size you want, you always buy the next step up. So for your case, it'd be the 111.

Yeah, except a 108 may give you a more correct chainline. Often spec'd sizes are fudged up a mm anyway, if you add another couple mm on top, it starts to become significant. In practice, it doesn't really matter than much if your chainline isn't a perfect 44.5, but it's nice if it is.

Obviously if the chainrings hit the chainstay, than nothing works, so I understand why people suggest playing it safe.

FWIW a 108 Phil BB is the correct size for a modern Sugino Mighty tour crank on BSC shell. Not sure about old Suntour Superbe.


Tange and others make a cartridge BB that is much cheaper than a Phil.

A bb spacer works. If you're super fussy about chainline or Q, spacer may be the way to go.

But certainly, just going to the next size up is the safe bet if you're not fussy.

I'm fussy

Yeah, I'm fussy too. I prefer that stuff to be spot on. Phil BB make it fairly easy as they are infinitely adjustable from side to side. For me it's worth it.

Phil BB don't have a lip on the right side cup. This looked better in the days of asymmetric spindles. Now the drive side cup protrudes and looks a bit odd, but on the plus side you don't need a spacer.

JIS (Japanese) and ISO spindles have the same two-degree taper, but the taper runs to a smaller diameter 'point' on ISO spindles. Because of that, a crank arm will sit a few mm farther outboard on a JIS spindle versus an ISO spindle of the same length.

Since you mentioned 'vintage Euro spindles', it might be relevant to point out that there were some other proprietary spindle tapers before just about everyone adopted JIS or ISO.

There are other cartridge bottom brackets that provide an adjustable chain line. Miche and Edco come to mind since I have both.

Sugino made one, too, back in the early 80's

For my Superbe Pro BB replacement I used Origin8's ISO-Campy taper BB


My 144bcd Superbe Pro has that much/debated taper and this one did
the trick.

Thank you [MENTION=232461]SkyDog75[/MENTION] for confirming what I knew, and providing the explanation I lacked.

It's $20 to replace a $20 bottom bracket when its bearing are fouled with grime and grit and the bottom bracket starts to creak.
It's $140 to replace a $140 bottom bracket which has similar bearings. Or to justify the high cost, you can get a bearing press to replace the bearings.

Huh?
Title is: BB quality vs price.
The more expensive one is higher quality.

FWIW - Phil Wood will renew their BBs and replace the bearings for $40. I just had this done and they were a pleasure to deal with.

Edit: I should clarify that this BB came on a bike I bought. I don't think I could justify buying a Phil BB over a standard cartridge BB myself.

It depends on how you define higher quality.
Like a more expensive bottom bracket has a highly polished shell and nice engravings.
Or a more expensive bottom bracket has a titanium axle which is lighter but less reliable.

What had happened to your bottom bracket?
People here say that Phil Wood's bottom brackets run forever without any service.

Honestly, I think the grease had just hardened. It was very old (1970ish). I messed up the seals when I went to relube it and figured I better just send it in.

My Phil BB is from ~1978 and is still running as if it were new.


I think the OP has asked a good question about quality and cost. A professor I once had defined quality as reliability over time (as distinct from initial reliability). Given that definition, I'm not sure how to answer.


My Phil is 40 years old and working. Maintenance is possible but not needed.

I doubt that the grease in it is as good as new.
If the bottom bracket cost $20, you would change it in no time.