Campag4life

Actually where you went to school doesn't matter much. What matters is the talent of the engineer and his experience. Some rise to Chief Engineer for a reason.

hueyhoolihan

what a hoot! desperate people desperately trying to establish credibility on an internet forum... on a zombie thread, no less.

ColnagoC40

After you have re-written my narrative, you understand 90% of it, I don't believe you got it initially, otherwise this thread would have been way shorter.

I am pleased however that we finally agree the cups are sacrificial and the weak point in the design.

Encouraging that you experienced 20,000 maintenance and trouble free miles, I'm normally the one who has no problems when everyone else's stuff breaks. But there sure is a lot of chatter on the web about this design.

When it comes to beating your own drum, about me living arithmetic while you live in a calculus world, and how good an Engineer you are, I'm not into posting my resume on a forum. But hey, if you want a calculus challenge, start a new thread and I will bite.

As far as me not having stepped out of the dark ages, yes in this modern world we live in, I prefer more expensive CNC precision milled parts that fit together properly, rather than gluing stuff together due to poor joints. That is why you purchased a frame, from a company started by a guy whose life started in a VW bus and later sold 49% of his assets to Asia. Different folks different strokes as I prefer a frame hand built in Italy, by a guy who cut his teeth building frames for Eddy Mercks and still builds mine underneath his home, in a basement shop where he opens the doors every morning to welcome his staff and treats them like family.

While these things are ludicrously priced, compared to their material value, let me know where you can buy a built up C60 for $8,000 you mentioned, we can make some money with that.

chaadster

Campag4life

Let's be clear.
This is what you wrote in your opening thread:

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!!!


Above was and is complete bu!!$hit and why I responded in the first place. Even though the alloy cups are sacrificial by design...much in the same vane as the threaded cups in your Colnago frame are sacrificial to not disparage fixed bores in a std. BB86.5, each have a very long life. So for the record you were flat wrong about having any concern about the design which is proven and having the audacity to chastise Campy for their design which is really silly from somebody with your experience level. The web is full of accounts written by guys like you. You obviously don't know much about UltraTorque cranks which I have been riding for 10 years and their durability including cups is legendary.

So you have been schooled and you're welcome.

BillyD

You can always find an ongoing pissing contest somewhere around here.

R1lee

Buy shimano

Campag4life

Campag4life

Thanks for letting us speak frankly. This was simply a case of a guy coming on here and disparaging a long standing solid design who made some ridiculous assertions which I rebutted. That's all.
Cheers Billy.

Herbie53

If that thing keeps creaking, I suggest just riding more and pedaling harder until the noise vanishes or it hurts so much you no longer care. If that does not work, give me the bike and get another one.

MSCE
STLE CLS
ISA

ColnagoC40

Be honest, if you understood this in the first place then why reply with a Loctite solution more than once which has no relevance to the real issue, which you later admitted and now again deny?

Just so you know, it is not important for me to correct, but what is correct is important. To you being correct or right as a person is what is the most important.

So have at this more if you want, but I am done with this thread, there is no point in challenging egos any further.

Where is the calculus thread? There i would be more than interested to continue.

RollCNY

No one got it initially, because it was gibberish. Cup and cone races exist in tapered roller bearings. Ultra torque BB's use angular contact ball bearings, which have an inner race, an outer race, and a cage. Shimano Hollowtech and SRAM GXP also use angular contact ball bearings. To use your words, "in Engineering terms".

He didn't agree with that. He said they were the design failure point. Planning to have the least expensive component fail is the strength of the design.

Back to your " Engineering terms", none of the bearing cups you have mislabelled are milled: they are turned and ground. If you are going to preach, learn the religion.

And there is the real reason that you reopened this thread: pathetic brags. Just as you did in your Vitus thread. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. In Engineering terms, of course.

chaadster

Looks like you got all that mostly incorrect.

ColnagoC40

I agree, with ball bearings we talk about an inner race and an outer race, while some bearing manufacturers however would still refer to the race as being the inside surface of the cup. My bad for using roller bearing terms, if that confused the issue. Where did I say they are milled? I was referring to the picture posted. But come to think about it, turning, milling, cutting can all fit the same semantic in a multi-tool CNC machine.

Anyway, another Campy die hard?

Time to move to a different thread.

Campag4life

Roll, isn't another Campy diehard any more than I am. He is just a smart guy who knows BS when he reads it. He rebutted what you wrote properly. This isn't about ego. I could care less about your ego. Its the way you came to the thread and your declarative statement about probably the finest crank and BB design ever created. DA gets honorable mention for being as good with a completely different design and BB interface but Campy UT is tremendous and has excellent reliability and durability. Mine have been flawless. Btw, I hope you aren't a sock puppet for the equally misinformed Rogue Mechanic on the web who throws UT under the bus with his derisive 'shimming' of UT in replacement of the wave washer. He does have a small following for those that also don't know what they are doing.

Bottom line is....you don't understand the design and perhaps still this is the case...and why your concern was ill fated to begin with. If the wave washer had a low enough spring rate to create the wear you were concerned about by repeated lateral displacement of the crank under load, then front derailleur shift quality would be poor because the crank would move laterally when the chainrings were side loaded to shift the chain between chainrings. What you and perhaps others don't realize is...the wave washer as a pre-load is there largely to accommodate the build 'tolerance' stack up of all mating parts including BB shell width and cup pocket depth based upon press. Shimano accomplishes the same thing with mechanical preload. As it turns out the crank doesn't move much at all as the bearings Campy spec's can tolerate the thrust load of the wave washer without degradation. A technical nuance which may further go right over your head pertains to something that Roll mentioned. Campy spec's angular contact bearings for UT by design intent. What angular contact bearings allow is a high enough wave washer spring rate which will not degrade bearing quality over time. This is because angular contact bearings can sustain higher thrust loading. Campy understands this and why they spec'ed the bearings they do. Speaking of bearings and their respective life, bearing life with Campy cranks is outstanding as well. Based upon the relatively high wave washer spring rate Campy spec's again based upon their testing, the crank spindle with wave washer is relatively fixed...it doesn't move laterally under normal riding conditions...if the build tolerance is correct which Campy states in their service manual to ensure adequate wave washer preload. Lateral loads on the crank due to pedal force are not extreme on any crankset as pedal forces are principally vertical and spindle position is somewhat isolated by the spring rate of the wave washer. So that was your ill founded concern and the reason it is a non issue and why alloy cups don't wear much over time with proper service.

So, you basically 'declared' it a bad design and didn't know what you were talking about. That is why I responded, to set the record straight and you wouldn't relent and now at long last are starting to get the picture.

If you would have come here and said, I just bought SR and having a design background am concerned about the longevity of the design and could somebody put my concerns to rest...after all it is Campy's flagship mechanical groupset and crank which won the TdF last year on a bike with an integrated BB, the response would have been much different. I hope you understand the distinction.
But you are wrong on other levels as well...like the roll of Loctite today in the dominant world of integrated BB's.

An overview of what happened...

chaadster

Clearly you have an agenda that's nothing to do with objectivity.

I should add that I am a Campy fan, preferring it greatly for aesthetic reasons.

Campag4life

Chad, you can write whatever you want. My comments are founded in engineering principles. Perhaps you have nothing to contribute.
If you want to take exception to what I wrote, let's have at it. But your qualitative and not substantive put down is just that, it means nothing and further the fact that you ride Campy for aesthetic reasons has no relevance to discussion even though I agree with you that Campy designs are quite beautiful.
Keep up the good work.

chaadster

Like so many other things, you've also gotten my name wrong.

Thanks, but no thanks for the invitation; we've BTDT, and I found it pointless.

I'm here just here kibbitzing, today, letting the world know that not everyone finds you authoritative and convincing as you so desperately want them to.

Campag4life

Actually Chaad, its the opposite. I want to be proven wrong. I want to grow. The path to the truth is difficult at times. Take you. You judge Campy on its aesthetics. You for example judge my comments on 'style' instead of the substance of my thoughts or your armchair analysis of my psyche or motive for posting which should be largely irrelevant. Its the bikes and the parts we care about not people's motives for posting.

The reality is we learn from one another. I would say most of what I know, I learned from somebody else. I have had some amazing teachers. Brilliant men I only hope to try and understand. You spoke of objectivity. Let me turn the table back to you. If you were more objective, you would have admitted that you learned a lot about from what I wrote as it isn't common knowledge. Some in fact, those that are more objective and less emotional like yourself, will appreciate my effort to inform...even if they don't agree with all of it. I get PM's all the time asking for technical help which I gladly provide. But instead you prefer to criticize me which is not unlike the poster I was arguing with. This is a self indictment against yourself Chaad, not me.

ColnagoC40

My bike is ready to rock'n roll, so far it has only seen 1/2mile test run, but today comes a 5 hour ride on a new SR groupset. Time will tell and we are all allowed our own opinions. Sounds as if the thread is civil again.

Where this whole thing started is my groupset was shipped via England and airport security opened the cups box, with the wave washer going bye bye. That made me look at the design and then I did some web reference, which led to noticing lots of complaints from users. Our local Trek dealer is a good riding friend and consulted with me regarding creaking issues but more with Shimano and SRAM. So I formed my own opinions based on heavier power machine design including automotive.

Lateral movement is not really my concern, due to the way we pedal. It is a loose fit, allowing MICRO movement in all directions. I am pretty sure, in fact I know that in the power machinery industry this will fail within hours. At the wattage we put out, perhaps you are right and the design holds up. A lot of folks are complaining though and where there is smoke there is normally a fire.

BTW, if you criticize product A, I am not going to flame you simply because i like the product A. The reason is, we all have our own opinions and I have no ego to defend.

Why do you think this product is so much better than the 2000 record BB?

I hope this does not piss you off any further, but really if one looks at the high end bike market today, the marketing is as good as it gets, but a lot of practical and technical savvy has gone out the window.

Campag4life

Actually, I am not pissed off. Never was.
Comparing 2000 Record aka cartridge square taper BB with current UT is really apples and oranges. A long white paper could be written comparing the two designs and this debate is sometimes contested on the web. My personal opinion is, UT is vastly superior and I have owned more Campy square taper BB bikes than UT. But it is an in depth discussion about stiffness, weight, chain line due to variable press depth, durability, maintenance schedule etc. A very lengthy discussion...not unlike a discussion comparing a BSA BB to BB30. And yes, some design departures are based upon marketing including the questionable value added of your new Colnago C60 BB design which I am not a particular fan of. If Colnago takes it to the next level, then it will be substantive. I would rather own either a BSA BB or a BB30 with Praxis UT BB, both to me are far superior than any BB86.5 derivative as is the case of the new Colnago C60 which I do believe is more based upon marketing than substance.

chaadster

A self-indictment against myself and not someone else? The devil is in the details, isn't it?

I love it when you come unhinged, because it shows more clearly how you just don't get the details right, stripped bare of the mounds of techno-babble you use to mask lack of understanding of any viewpoint that doesn't comport with your agenda.

Nachoman

Ha ha. I'm considering this for my new sig.

Campag4life

Now that is some interesting gobbly-gook...lol. Keep it comin'.

Campag4life

I think its worthy of being a quotable sig.