Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

FSA BB86/BB386EVO Bottom Bracket - Anyone used this?

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

FSA BB86/BB386EVO Bottom Bracket - Anyone used this?

Old 11-01-18, 01:07 PM
  #1  
FlashBazbo
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
 
FlashBazbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 4,288

Bikes: OPEN new U.P. Di2

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 983 Post(s)
Liked 135 Times in 89 Posts
FSA BB86/BB386EVO Bottom Bracket - Anyone used this?

I've got a BB86 frame and I would like to use an FSA BB386EVO crank. FSA makes a bottom bracket for this . . . instead of a single row of balls on each side of the BB, there are two rows of much smaller balls on each side. Has anyone used this bottom bracket? Did it spin well and hold up well? Are there alternative products that do the same thing?
FlashBazbo is offline  
Old 11-01-18, 01:35 PM
  #2  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
My suggestion is stay away from FSA bb's and don't go off the reservation. Instead, opt for a tried and true industry standard for BB386 which is effectively a wide shell PF30...like the one Wheel Mfg sells. What you want to endure axial preload without premature bearing failure are good quality angular contact bearings.

Something like this:
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Mfg-Angular-Contact-Bracket/dp/B01FLWE5ZW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1541100697&sr=8-1&keywords=bb386evo+wheel+manufacturing
Campag4life is offline  
Old 11-01-18, 01:49 PM
  #3  
TimothyH
- Soli Deo Gloria -
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 14,783

Bikes: 2018 Rodriguez Custom Fixed Gear, 2017 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2015 Bianchi Pista, 2002 Fuji Robaix

Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6833 Post(s)
Liked 683 Times in 431 Posts
I don't know if any of the Enduro Torqtite bottom brackets would work.

https://www.endurobearingsonline.com...or-30mm-cranks

I have an angular contact PF30 Torqtite for Shimano 24 mm cranks on my gravel bike. Installation was two minutes. Nothing needed to be pressed.


-Tim-
TimothyH is offline  
Old 11-01-18, 01:55 PM
  #4  
FlashBazbo
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
 
FlashBazbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 4,288

Bikes: OPEN new U.P. Di2

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 983 Post(s)
Liked 135 Times in 89 Posts
Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
My suggestion is stay away from FSA bb's and don't go off the reservation. Instead, opt for a tried and true industry standard for BB386 which is effectively a wide shell PF30...like the one Wheel Mfg sells. What you want to endure axial preload without premature bearing failure are good quality angular contact bearings.

Something like this:
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Mfg-Angular-Contact-Bracket/dp/B01FLWE5ZW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1541100697&sr=8-1&keywords=bb386evo+wheel+manufacturing
That won't work. As noted in my original post, the frame is a BB86 -- hence, the question.

Since making that post, though, I have noted that Wheels Mfg makes a "loose bearing" (no sleeve) dual-row bottom bracket for the BB86/Bb386EVO application. I would tend to go with them.
FlashBazbo is offline  
Old 11-02-18, 04:20 AM
  #5  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by FlashBazbo View Post
That won't work. As noted in my original post, the frame is a BB86 -- hence, the question.

Since making that post, though, I have noted that Wheels Mfg makes a "loose bearing" (no sleeve) dual-row bottom bracket for the BB86/Bb386EVO application. I would tend to go with them.
You are right FB. I glossed over your OP and thought you had a BB386 bottom bracket.
Sorry if I am not a fan of your proposed combo. Reason is...not true design intent to run a 30mm crank spindle within a 41mm ID shell. Why is that? Leaves little for bearing size and hence the double row you propose. Ball forces are higher with smaller balls. BB86 is a cup with bearing design and not pure bearing design as with 42mm BB30 with 30mm crank spindle. Translation is...BB30 and its wider shell derivatives have 'bigger balls'.

You may know that but wanted to mention it. BB86 is more design intent with Shimano 24mm spindle which has 'bigger balls'.

Chart below addressing vagaries known as the tangled web of needless bottom bracket proliferation.


Campag4life is offline  
Old 11-02-18, 05:27 AM
  #6  
FlashBazbo
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
 
FlashBazbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 4,288

Bikes: OPEN new U.P. Di2

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 983 Post(s)
Liked 135 Times in 89 Posts
Campag, now you're with me. Well, except that you call the double-row design the design that "I propose." I'm not proposing anything. I'm not even dating. I'm just asking if anyone has used the double-row design and, if so, what their experiences are.

Lots of things on a bike are much more robust than they need to be. They are that way generally because (1) they are cheaply built in their robust form, and (2) the bearings / parts are standard, mass produced, off the shelf items available in just about any industrial supply warehouse. Today's conventional bottom brackets are (with few exceptions) more robust than they need to be -- for precisely these two reasons. They are spec'd as much for their economy of purchase as for anything else. Nobody -- not even the pros -- are cracking bearings in their bottom brackets. And that's why I find the double-row (but smaller) bearing design plausible. Where is the dividing line? Are the smaller, but doubled, bearings sufficient for the relatively tiny loads a cyclist puts on bearings? And maybe more importantly . . . how do the double row bearings handle contamination issues? (In this application, it seems to me that bearing contamination is a far more likely issue than the loads a bearing faces. The same piece of grit will likely impact a smaller bearing in a bigger way than it would a big bearing.) [EDIT: I figure the double-row version would be more expensive to produce, thus why "everybody's not doing it." But there are a number of these designs on the market. I've just never talked with anyone who has used one.]

Has anyone used one of these double-row BB86-to-30mm spindle bottom brackets? How did it go? Did it hold up well over the long haul?

Last edited by FlashBazbo; 11-02-18 at 08:44 AM.
FlashBazbo is offline  
Old 11-02-18, 06:10 AM
  #7  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts

FB,
I still think you should propose. In fact, it may have a major bearing on your life and allow you to see the path of righteousness only single row, 'big balls' can provide.
Only my opinion of course.

Seriously, hopefully you will get the answer you seek. But you know you are swimming upstream finding this needle in a haystack but not needle bearings at least.
A 41mm cup design BB86 also known as 'Shimano Press Fit'...was in effect designed for a 24mm dia spindle Shimano crank because the smaller diameter spindle Shimano crank liberates enough diametral clearance to run single row decent size ball bearings. And yes, makes sense contamination would be the enemy of smaller bearings as you state.

Take the plunge ^^^^
Campag4life is offline  
Old 11-02-18, 06:40 AM
  #8  
motosonic
Senior Member
 
motosonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 275 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 2 Posts

I'm not sure if this is what you're referring to.. but, my Wilier currently has a Kogel Ceramic BB386 EVO and I love it. Was attached to a DA Crank though. Didn't have a need for a FSA but, I suspect It'd work just as well.
motosonic is offline  
Old 11-02-18, 08:41 AM
  #9  
FlashBazbo
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
 
FlashBazbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 4,288

Bikes: OPEN new U.P. Di2

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 983 Post(s)
Liked 135 Times in 89 Posts
motosonic, your frame is a BB386. If mine were, I wouldn't have the question. Your BB is actually "adapting" in the opposite direction, going from a 30mm to a 24mm Shimano sized spindle in a BB386 frame. (I'm looking to use a BB386 30mm spindle in a BB86 frame.) For the record, I have found that Kogel makes a BB86/30mm BB, too. But I can't find any reviews.

I still haven't found any online reviews for BB86/30mm, but there are quite a few from mountain bikers using BB92/30mm -- and their reviews are uniformly positive. So far, I haven't found any long term reviews, though, or any descriptions of problems. It takes a negative review or two to really get the feel for a product or design.
FlashBazbo is offline  
Old 11-03-18, 05:13 PM
  #10  
Ontarget
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm currently running a FSA BB386 crank in a BB86 frame using the FSA double row bearings. I've got 6,000 miles on the BB without any trouble, and I suspect it'll last a good long while. I can't speak to contamination, as I'm in sunny Southern California where it rarely rains.

As you pointed out, Wheels Manufacturing sells Enduro bearings for this setup, and I've learned that Rotor does as well, though I have no experience with either.

On initial installation one of the bearings spun smooth as butter, but the other spun a little tight (though it was perfect when not installed). I think this is one of the drawbacks with a bearing system that doesn't use cups. I ended up using emory paper to ever-so-slightly reduce the OD of the bearing. Once I got it down enough it spun smoothly installed.

I wasn't thrilled with the concept of this setup, but I had the BB386 crankset and wanted to use it in my BB86 frame. With the benefit of hindsight it's fine.

I hope that helps ...
Ontarget is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
wunderchicken
General Cycling Discussion
3
07-22-18 08:03 PM
mstateglfr
Bicycle Mechanics
10
08-02-16 07:59 AM
msjeep4x4
Road Cycling
3
05-01-13 08:08 AM
MooCow
Bicycle Mechanics
3
05-04-11 09:49 AM
bikejack
Bicycle Mechanics
8
01-28-11 08:35 AM

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.