There are many ‘standards’ in the road cycling world but none that causes more ire than pressfit.
Cannondale developed the BB30 bottom bracket in 2006 as an open standard. It used a larger 30mm axle which allowed bigger bearings and a bigger bottom bracket shell, providing extra stiffness and lower weight. But it required a precision machined shell and crank, and was expensive to manufacture with an alloy shell bonded to the carbon frame.
Pressfit soon followed in 2009 and aimed to address the high tolerances of BB30 by housing bearings in nylon composite cups that are then pressed directly into the frame. It reduced the manufacturing costs, and this helped it to be swiftly adopted by frame manufacturers. It still offered all the same weight and stiffness benefits of BB30, but with more simplicity and lower cost.
However, while the use of plastic shells lowered the critical need for high tolerances, variations in quality control lead to a litany of creaking bottom brackets, a result of a poor interface between the bearing and frame. Internet forums are full of frustrated cyclists trying to cure noisy pressfit bottom brackets.
– Video How To: Install a PressFit Bottom Bracket
– How to remove press-fit bottom bracket bearings
But something interesting is happening in the industry. We’re seeing new frames being developed with conventional threaded bottom brackets replacing pressfit, to the rejoicing of cyclists everywhere deafened by creaking pressfit installations.
Could it be that the love affair with pressfit is over and the tide has turned back in favour of the threaded bottom bracket? We spoke to two bike brands big (Specialized) and small (Bowman Cycles) to get their perspective the future of pressfit.
We asked these companies because Bowman’s updated Palace R frame has swapped from pressfit to threaded, and for its new Roubaix Specialized has used a threaded bottom bracket on the entry-level model and a pressfit on the top-end S-Works bikes.
Bowman Cycles
I think the primary problem with pressfit is that an error at any stage can cause the most horrendous noise problems, and they are not easy to remedy without spending money. A threaded bottom bracket, on the other hand, can be taken out, greased, retightened and fettled far more readily, and the threading does away with the need for such accuracy during the manufacture, as by nature it will tighten (as long as the frame is faced properly).
The larger pressfit shells do allow for carbon engineers to do interesting things with layup and tube size, but for metal frames, the benefits from a frame manufacturing process are limited, if you can afford to research and develop any chainstay designs tyre clearance preference require.
In metal frames, I’d suggest they should be dead as every manufacturer makes a superb chainset that fits natively. Carbon is another matter as the customer seems to want to chase the smallest number of grammes as the latest must have. Bonding in a thread for a bottom bracket is not only adding a possible failure point down the road, it also adds weight in a world where people are spending a lot of money to save six grammes making a totally hollow dropout.
The customer just needs to realise that the high tolerances needed to make a pressfit bottom bracket work in a carbon frame cost money. It can be done – and people shouldn’t be fobbed off if their high-end composite bike creaks, but they also need to be realistic. There are solutions out there that companies can use to make reliable, light frames, Colnago’s C60 has an elegant solution and a frame that still builds up stupidly light. The T47 standard is another option that privately many product managers want too use, but the gram chasing mainstream does not permit it.
So, is it dead? Yes, kinda, maybe – not quite.
– How to fit a threaded bottom bracket
Specialized
Without it sounding a cliché, Specialized is, and has to be, about rider first engineering; we have to look at the rider at every level and with every budget first to give them the bike and equipment that gives them the best riding experience and performance benefit.
So the easiest answer to this is, yes, for Specialized pressfit bottom brackets still have a future where absolute performance matters, given that they are stiffer and lighter than a conventional threaded bottom bracket.
The ‘but’ is that a pressfit system requires incredibly high tolerances and the highest standards in quality control in frame manufacture for it to function at its absolute best, and this realistically is achieved with high cost and low volume.
The other variable is the frame material and method of manufacture.
So, with the new Roubaix platform as an example, Pro and S-Works models have a press fit BB30 system, and Expert level and below use a conventional threaded bottom bracket.
road.cc comment
We doubt pressfit is going to vanish anytime soon. For high-end frames developed for racing the weight and stiffness benefits trump all other concerns, and some of the issues are often down to poor installation. For professional racers, bikes are regularly cleaned and maintained. For cyclists that don’t have a pro mechanic washing their bike after every ride, Park Tool has interestingly developed special compounds that it reckons helps to eliminate the potential for a creaking pressfit bottom bracket. We’ll be testing those soon to see if they are the perfect solution.
But it’s clear pressfit has lost many fans over the years. There’s no denying the simplicity and ease of installation offered by a threaded bottom bracket setup., and the bearings appear to be less susceptible to British weather and infrequent servicing plans. So, we fully expect more bike brands to follow Bowman and Specialized’s lead for bikes aimed at regular everyday cyclists rather than the pro racers, who don’t have to pay for or look after their bikes, and spec threaded bottom brackets.
What do you think? Will your next bike have a pressfit bottom bracket or has the creaking driven you mad?
82 thoughts on “Fed up of pressfit bottom brackets? Find out if something better is on the way”
It all seems pretty simple to
It all seems pretty simple to me – BSA 68mm for anything sub-€1000, T47 for anything over that. As far as manufacturing costs go, apparently ´there is no significant price difference to execute a T47-compatible frame or BBs compared to PressFit 30.´ (matt phillips)
The proportion of people who
The number of people who may actually benefit from the tiny difference made by pressfit and BB30 is very, very small. But the power of marketing bollocks wins every time.
I don’t mind Pressfit, but
I don’t mind Pressfit, but please make a standard, I have had 4 bikes with pressfit and most of them are different! Also, make it easier to see what u need!
If it was my choice, I’d
If it was my choice, I’d happily sacrifice a few grams at the bottom bracket to have a stronger and more reliable system, T47 or something similar to Colnago’s solution seem like a good idea if the oversized bearings are desired.
I totally agree with bowman’s, if it’s a metal frame, a threaded bracket makes much more sense, the increased size for any other standard seems a little pointless unless you’ve got some super wide chainstay girders to weld on. Plus a Chris King or Hope BB looks so much better (with matching/contrasting headset and hubs of course).
People are saying ‘high
People are saying ‘high tolerance’ when they actually mean ‘low tolerance’.
rookybiker wrote:
As applied to bottom bracket standards, the appropriate word I believe is “sloppy” – especially with PF30.
rookybiker wrote:
Exactly, all the way through, high when they mean low. Obviously no engineers there.
Threaded but only Italian
Threaded but only Italian cut
Oh please let this be true –
Oh please let this be true – I want bikes and frames without a built in creak, so the sooner this press-fit monstrosity of a idea becomes a long forgotton memory the better.
Pressfit manufacturers should
Pressfit manufacturers should seek to bolster their position by putting it to a vote among the cycling community. And the perfect slogan for them has recently become available: “Vote BB30 for a strong and stable cycling future!”
handlebarcam wrote:
I think they’d be better off with something like, “Don’t get screwed, just push it in!” 🙂
Of all the bottom bracket
Of all the bottom bracket standards ive had over the years i much prefer Colnago’s solution to the press fit bottom bracket over any others
They have their Threadfit system, basically its two large cups that you thread into your frame which you then press a normal press fit bottom bracket into it
If it develops any creaks (none so far in 5000 miles) you can just replace the BB, grease the cups or even replace the cups
Plus as the cups are large to accommodate the pressfit bb means they can make the downtube/bb interface much larger increasing stiffness
Certainly noticed the difference when going from my C59 with euro bb to my C60 with the threadfit system, the whole BB area is so much stiffer with notciable less flex
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/colnago-c60-released-blending-tradition-with-forward-thinking/
Well, that would be a fine
Well, that would be a fine state of affairs; we’ve all bought in to the “PRESS-FIT BB and now they want to change thm; well lets hope they design a fitting to go in to a Carbon Bottom Bracket shell; so that the Press-Fit can be turned in to a threaded BB. on a carbon frame.
The major problem is the
The major problem is the sheer number of press-fit standards (BB86/92, BB90/95, BB386/392EVO, PF30, BBright). Even BB30 itself, and all its variants, is still technically press-fit because you’re still pushing bearings into a shell and not spinning them into a threaded one.
My TCX has a BB86 shell. So far so good. Out of the press-fit bottom bracket formats it’s the one I’ve heard the least headaches about; on the other end of the spectrum are BB30 and PF30.
You also have BB30 to thank for introducing the idea of a 30 mm aluminum crank spindle, which introduces all sorts of bearing-related problems on its own. Shimano and Campagnolo, for the most part, haven’t seen the need to graduate from their current 24 and 25 mm steel crank spindles.
68mm threaded in my KTM CF
68mm threaded in my KTM CF frame (one of the reasons I chose it) and I have no problems at all with a 1000 watt peak power input.
I don’t seem to remember the pros having much difficulty knocking out ridiculously high watt numbers on threaded frames on all materials on a very regular basis, nor indeed on track frames so unless you feel you’re losing something in efficiency that is critical to your riding then a threaded BB frame shouldn’t be an issue at all.
I’ve been riding BB30/BB30a
I’ve been riding BB30/BB30a and PF30/PF30a Cannondale frames for years without the slightest issue. Honestly, I don’t understand what the fuss is all about.
Boss Hogg wrote:
I’ve been riding a Cannondale PF30 for a year and it’s driven me to strip the group off the frame and fit it to a threaded bb frame. Creak, clunk, knock bang. I’ve lost a year of enjoying my rides because of this POS system. 🙁
Chrisc wrote:
“Creak, clunk, knock bang” – c’mon, that’s definitely exaggerated.
In any case, Cannondale frames have lifetime warranty, so if it’s really that bad, you can ask for a replacement.
Boss Hogg wrote:
Hilarious. My first proper road bike was a Caad8 and it pretty much creaked out of the shop door, and Cannondale wouldnt do a thing warranty wise.
jterrier wrote:
“Creak, clunk, knock bang” – c’mon, that’s definitely exaggerated.
In any case, Cannondale frames have lifetime warranty, so if it’s really that bad, you can ask for a replacement.
— Chrisc Hilarious. My first proper road bike was a Caad8 and it pretty much creaked out of the shop door, and Cannondale wouldnt do a thing warranty wise.— Boss Hogg
Hilarious indeed. Apparently I am the only customer who got Cannondale frames that don’t creak.
Quote:
The bb on my cannondale doesn’t creak. The bike creaks, but its because of the cable routing around the head tube. I changed the bb before I worked it out. I suspect a lot of folk are blaming bb30 for other creaks too.
In a metal frame bb30 shouldn’t be hard to get right because the bb shell can be reamed at the end of manufacturing and the correct interference on the fit can be gained. To add threads for a threaded solution you’d require similar starting tolerance before tapping anyway.
The best BBs are of course the SKF cartridge type which last many tens of thousands of km due to proper sealing.
P3t3 wrote:
Yes, SKF bearings are top quality at very reasonable prices, incomparably better (and most times cheaper) than those marketed as bicycle bearings.
jterrier wrote:
The low-end CAAD8 with Sora has a threaded BB – have you asked about swapping your frame for one of those? When I bought the Mrs her first road bike, I deliberately went for the low end one for this very reason, then binned off the Sora groupset for new Tiagra.
Boss Hogg wrote:
I had three Cannondales, two frames done under warranty.
Click. Crack. Creak. Click. Crack. Knock. No.
turboprannet wrote:
So I guess I must be one of the rare cases of a breakdown-free Cannondale user. And I’ve had seven of them so far.
Boss Hogg wrote:
same here. 2013 synapse has never creaked with its bb30. I like bb30 so much, i spec’d it on the custom ti bike, nary a creak there either
Boss Hogg wrote:
welcome, member of noncreaking Cannondale bike rider! My bb30 synapse of 4 years has remained silent. So much so that i had no problem tempting fate by speccing a titanium bike with bb30 a year after that. This one is also a noncreaker.
garuda wrote:
My Synapse developed a BB30 creak after a wet winter and re-greasing it only helped temporarily, but a little bit of Loctite on the interface between the frame and the bearing shell solved it.
Boss Hogg wrote:
Boss Hogg wrote:
Nope, it was stripped a refitted 3 times, glued in to manufacturers spec and knocked every ride the first 3 miles till it settled and found somewhere to grip. Drove me to distraction.
Boss Hogg wrote:
Yeah, same here. Nothing with PF30 and nothing with OSBB. Maybe it’s the quality of the C-Bear bottom brackets I fit into the frames?
There’s good words for
There’s good words for Colnago above, but my cousin’s creaked like hell until he did the Praxis (or similar) thing. And Sigma didn’t do anything about it.
It was really annoying to cycle with him – the noise was painfully loud.
Got my first road bike a
Got my first road bike a couple years ago – a CAAD8. Developed a ‘click’ within the first 1,000 miles (started hearing it 30 miles into my first century ride). Wasn’t always constant, but just a single click whenever the left crank was at about 10 o’clock. Read some forums/watched some videos, and after a good cleaning/regreasing of the bearings and shell, the clicking stopped… temporarily.
After another ~1,000ish miles or so it came back. Then I replaced the bearings and cleaned and greased everything again. Seemed good good for quite a while this time (granted, by this point the weather had turned nicer – not as much wet riding). It did eventually come back (maybe ~2000 miles since the last regreasing), but I just dealt with it for a while as I didn’t have much time to fiddle with it.
But then the teeth on the stock FSA cranks started looking fairly worn. Was able to get a really good deal on some Ultegra cranks, so tried the plastic adapter things to get them to work with the BB30. Bad idea. Made it about 100 miles before not only the ‘click’ returned, but now some creaking/cracking sounds. Tried cleaning/regreasing/tightening/loosening/adding spacers… sounds never went away. Went ahead and got an actual metal, screw-together adapter: https://fairwheelbikes.com/kcnc-bb30-adapter-bottom-brackets
Made it through some really wet rides this spring, and no creaking at all. But then I decided to finally give my bike a really good, thorough cleaning… :-(. Back to its creaking ways. May need to try going back to a 30mm crankset to see if that helps, but don’t have the money at the moment and also afraid that it won’t help anyways.
tl;dr version –> my next bike will NOT have BB30/BB30A! But at least I’m not afraid of working on bottom brackets anymore
OR_biker wrote:
I had that exact same thing. Drove me nuts for months. Turned out my rear QR was slightly off line. BB click disappeared, because it was never really there.
I’ve had no major issues with
I’ve had no major issues with BB30, although bearing life doesn’t seem that great. I’m now also on PF30a which is okay so far but if it develops a problem other than the bearings wearing out then I’ll be moving to a thread together cup solution like a Wheels Manufacturing. This basically makes PF30 more like BB30 as far as I can see.
I do have an issue with the sealing of BB30/PF30 though, it’s entirely reliant on the bearing seals which I believe results in premature bearing wear. Once you’ve got the hang of changing the bearings this is just a running cost issue though, not a source of psychological trauma.
I haven’t seen the Colnago solution although from the comments above it sounds great. Like others I don’t see why you wouldn’t cut a thread in a metal frame BB, compared to the rest of the work in making a metal frame it seems a fairly trivial thing to do.
My only experience of PF30
My only experience of PF30 has been on the Boardman CX that I use for commuting.
Feckin’ nightmare. Must have spent £150 on various attempts to stop it creaking until a cheapo PF30/BSA adapter and a Tiagra Hollowtech chainset finally solved the issue.
Wouldn’t touch press fit again. Even better if it ceases to be an option in mid range offerings.
To be fair to the format though, the machining on the Boardman frame was clearly done to a price, so as suggested above it may well be absolutely fine for high-end frames where exacting tolerances are employed.
I’ve three bikes with
I’ve three bikes with pressfit BB. 2 now have Hope PF46 conversions. The other uses Sram adaptor cups, with threaded shimano bearings. So, pressfit is not reliable bottom bracket idea.
From the sharp end….in the
From the sharp end….in the workshop… I must say, I prefer screw in Bottom Brackets…. Press Fit are okay in principal but really they were only designed for the “weight weenies” for lightness but with the trade off with creaks etc….. However… I have never had issues in swapping out press fits of all the standards for customers… but really the screw in BB’s are way better, the ultegra ones are pretty robust units…. I predict a steady drift back to threaded types in the next few years….
If you have problems with
If you have problems with your press fit BB, as I did with my BBRight/Ultra Torque setup, I can’t recommend Wishbone bottom brackets highly enough. They seem to have a version for every combination of BB and chainset standard out there. I’d have got rid of my R5 if not for these.
Hope so….getting irritated
Hope so….getting irritated from the squeeking of BBs on sportives lately. Did one in Norfolk last week that sounded like a swarm of crickets creeking its way around the county. Must be far worse riding one of the damn things!
Although a happy BB86 +
Although a happy BB86 + campag UT user, it’s clear many press fit installations don’t work properly due to minute variations in frame/ component specs . This would explain the huge variations in customer experience even within one standard.
In general the fewer interfaces the better, even using a ‘threaded adapter’ still needs a press-in component somewhere, which may creak.
for Campag users I would highly recommend a solution that uses their own metal cups to press into the frame, as this keeps bearings in the same position as intended. No extra sleeves/ adaptors etc to creak. YMMV however.
700c wrote:
To this end, I think US firm BBinfinite have a nifty solution. The entire bottom bracket comes as a single solid metal unit you just press into the frame BB shell – not in two halves, as most others. Certainly intriguing, IMO, and worth taking a look into.
https://www.bikerumor.com/2015/03/04/review-bbinfinites-amazingly-smooth-one-piece-pressfit-bottom-bracket/
700c wrote:
Agree 100% with this – Campy UT chainsets have always had the bearings pressed onto the chainsets, so PF BBs haven’t been a major issue. Had no issues with mine on alloy/ti bikes.
I was out with club run on
I was out with club run on Sunday, half the bikes creaked or clicked, the others were threaded bottom brackets
CXR94Di2 wrote:
Ditto. Horrific noises emanating from some bikes on my club run too. One of the guys insisted he’d had his creaking BB fixed, but it had since developed another, different noise.
I used to guerilla-lube chains and pedals (identify the culprit, wait for a cafe/pub stop or mechanical, and sneak up with a little tester bottle that I keep in my saddle bag – hey presto, a bit of peace and quiet) but there’s not much I can do for a creaking bb. 🙁
Threaded outer-bearing
Threaded outer-bearing standards like Hollowtech remove all the brute force required for internal and press-fit bearings, especially tricky square-taper cassettes which need a removal tool with locking bolt and a car torque wrench! Hollow-tech was piss easy to fit and remove, unlike square taper cassettes and I assume press-fit bearings! I really don’t get press-fit at all; it was an arse to replace press-fit headset bearings with the not-cheap removal and fitting tools.
I’m getting a Wheels
I’m getting a Wheels Manufacturing 386Evo BB fitted later today due to a sound from my BB akin to the frame snapping under any load from the crank. Hopefully this type of BB, due to it’s screw in nature, will eliminate the creaking nois? Will keep you posted.
steviemarco wrote:
I hope it works out for you. In my own experience, it didnt. My bb86 (sram gxp) started to tick after 18 months use, for some reason i thought it would be a good idea to try an expensive and beautifully engineered screw together design on the basis that the screw togetherness would hold it in place more tightly and itd never make a noise again… It creaked, ticked and popped immediately and much more frequently than the one it replaced. I confess i swore a little and contemplated flinging the bike in a hedge.
At that point i did what i should have done in the first place and went to my LBS, they took one look, said aluminium cups in carbon frames always creak, put a new standard sram one (plastic cups) back in, now its silent again. Every day is a school day!
A bit of history here to
A bit of history here to maybe add to the discussion (or throw a spanner in the works).
For most of my working life I was involved in frame & bike manufacturing, working in the UK, Far-East, Italy and other places.
I’ve seen trends come & go; sat back and watched new designs first fêted then slated, watched other perfectly acceptable solutions dropped and buried in pursuit of the next big thing.
I’ve also did a fair bit of mechanicking and spent many a day/week trying to track down and eliminate phantom knocks, creaks and rattles. Along the way I’ve been fortunate to work with some superb framebuilders and mechanics who steered me in the right direction and kept me from veering off down dead-ends.
The first thing I’ll say is this; bottom brackets and bracket shells get a bad rap.
They get blamed for everything, regardless of size, shape or standard. A bad rap because a lot of the time the fault lies elsewhere. Even the much-lauded threaded BB can end up under attack from a rider or mechanic too inexperienced, indifferent or adventurous to fully investigate.
Here’s one example.
In the early 80’s, I worked for a major retailer in Central London who also produced own-label stuff. One of their bikes came back not long after delivery with a creaking bracket. The BB cups and bearings were duly replaced. The creak stayed. Another was fitted, everything double-checked and the bike went back on the road. Next day the bike was back. This time, new cranks, chainrings and bolts were fitted with everything disassembled and reassembled with a good coating of locking compound and/or grease where appropriate. Still no joy; the creak remained.
Eventually, after a few more failed remedial solutions, the wheels were swapped out. The creak remained but this time sounded different. This led to discovering the real culprit, the freewheel (ask yer granny). The creak was coming from a poorly machined sprocket, but anyone and everyone who inspected that bike would swear the creak was coming from the BB.
Lesson learned; sound will travel along tubes and be echoed and amplified in the BB shell.
I’ve come across a similar example where the culprit was a poorly fitted headset cup, but the BB was initially blamed.
When the whole TIG-welded alloy frame thing gathered steam in the late ‘80’s, it was first welcomed because of the favourable weight and stiffness properties of oversize alu frames.
But mechanics were soon finding out they came with unexpected baggage, in the form of creaky BB’s.
Back then, BB’s were threaded across the board, regardless of metal or material.
Frames were, for the large part, manufactured in the far-east, but there was still plenty of European sources in those days. At first, mass production/poor tolerances were seen as the culprits, but frames made in Italy or USA would creak just as bad as those from Taiwan.
Poor machining was blamed for a while, but didn’t really solve anything because the first thing a good mechanic would do was clear/align threads and face shells when trying to sort things out. Again, a lot of the time, creaks were appearing to be in the BB due to the echo-chamber effect of noise travelling along tubes. But behind it all was another reason still not really acknowledged today. This goes back to the initial frame manufacturing.
One thing you don’t really get with lugged frames is tube-on tube friction. It happens all the time on lugless frames. Traditional framebuilders knew about it way back in the day when building steel lugless frames (Americanized to ‘fillet-brazed’) and the good ones knew how to do something about it. But this knowledge really didn’t filter through to the production runs in the far-east, southern Europe or USA.
Likewise, the same wisdom is largely lost to the latest generation of ‘learn-as-you-go, worry-about-it-later’ framebuilders who’ve cropped up in the last 10-15 years. Perhaps this is due to the fact the full apprenticeship is a thing of last century. It could be that the knowledge/experience/wisdom pool has dried up. It’s probably not helped by the internet/social media-driven ‘want-it-all, want-it-now’ mindset so prevalent in clickbait-friendly microbrands.
So whether the frame is coming out the gates of a 50000- frames-per-annum factory or from a 5-a-year shed makes no difference. If you don’t get it right at the earliest stages of the frame being built, down the line the bike will be a creaker. Alu, steel or composite frames are all susceptible to this and its something that won’t go away overnight or by adding or removing threads to a bracket shell or designing ‘new’ standards.
There’s a solution, but it means looking backward instead of forward. It would be pretty much impossible to implement & activate other than tracking down or digging up some post-war, pre-millennium South London framebuilders and sending them to China on some kind of evangelistic framebuilding missionary work.
Very difficult, very unlikely.
So for the large part, creaks are here to stay, like it or not. They might change tone or note, but they’re going nowhere.
BTW, apologies for the length of this post – – – blame the morning coffee!
neilwheel wrote:
I had a similar experience, swore my BB was making a horrible clicking noise so swapped it out … no joy. Put a new chain on (it needed it anyway), still no joy and still absolutely certain the noise was coming from the BB. Anyway long story short it ended up being the rear skewer not being seated properly, took me about 10 seconds to undo and re-tighten the skewer then blissful silence! Seems to me if you think you have BB noise issue you should look everywhere else before considering the BB itself!
neilwheel wrote:
I had a similar experience, swore my BB was making a horrible clicking noise so swapped it out … no joy. Put a new chain on (it needed it anyway), still no joy and still absolutely certain the noise was coming from the BB. Anyway long story short it ended up being the rear skewer not being seated properly, took me about 10 seconds to undo and re-tighten the skewer then blissful silence! Seems to me if you think you have BB noise issue you should look everywhere else before considering the BB itself!
dave_t wrote:
A mechanic friend says 90% of the bikes he work on have one or both of the QRs/wheels incorrectly seated/tightened – the first thing he does to any bike is check them.
There is nothing wrong with
There is nothing wrong with press fit BB’s. The problem is the poor tolerances of the bike frame makers around the BB when making the frames which are causing the issues. There is no excuse for poor tolerances when you see the high cost of carbon frames…
Threaded BBs are easier to
Threaded BBs are easier to fit and replace (and pretty much priced as a disposable item, so good on a cross bike where they might only last a wet season) but I’ve got a couple of bikes with PF BBs and they have been fit and forget. I’ve had no creaks with the Hope BB, which has a threaded sleeve. Given the number of manufacturers offering these in the after market (e.g., Praxis, Wheels MFG), I rather thought that this (threaded) solution would have become ubiquitous by now but it doesn’t seem to have as Shimano and SRAM continue to offer only conventional press fit. On the other hand, I’ve also had no problems (or noise) from a cheap plastic Shimano PF BB on a MTB, so maybe its down to individual frame tolerances.
surly_by_name wrote:
I’m just building up a 2015 Genesis Volare 953 stainless frameset that I bought second hand. These frames were £2,200 new, so not a cheap bit of BSO rubbish. They come with a BB86 press fit bottom bracket that looks like this:
The previous owner had fitted a Hope threaded BB into it. I felt the bearings and they were horrible, rough and gritty, so I ordered new ones. Popped the old ones out and pressed the brand new ones in, horrible again, notchy and rough. Pondered the problem, popped out the new bearings, and got busy with the micrometer. The bearing spec is 27 x 24 x 7mm, so you’d hope the BB shell would be close to 27.00mm in diameter.
The Hope BB measured 26.74mm internal, but the new bearings measure 27.04mm – exactly as they should, for an interference fit. That’s far too tight! Worse, the Hope BB wasn’t round, varying by about 0.4mm out of round. This it seemed wasn’t Hope’s fault, as their BB had been distorted by being fitted into the Genesis bottom bracket itself, which was oval, at least 0.5mm out of round. Without buying the Hope special tool to remove the Hope BB, there was no way it was going to work. So I set about filing out the Hope BB to make the inner diameter something more like 26.95mm, and more importantly, as close to round as possible. That took about three hours with a small file, constantly measuring. Eventually I was satisfied with the roundness and diameter, and pressed the new bearings back in, a much easier job this time. Success! The new bearings now feel sweet as a nut, and the Dura Ace crankset spins exactly as it should. But how many bikes are there out there with bearings crammed into a too-small press fit interface, running in shells that aren’t even close to round? If you look at Hambini’s bottom bracket videos, you’ll see it’s a lot.
So the moral of the story is: Yes, pressed-in bearings are great, but cycle manufacturing standards are diabolical. Why didn’t the manufacturer ream out the bottom bracket once the frame was welded up, to make sure it was round and coaxial and on tolerance? Surely they must realise that welding such an extreme steel as 953 would cause minor distortion of the BB shell. A good manufacturer would have put it in a jig and reamed the BB shell to make sure it was within tolerance.
I can thoroughly recommend
I can thoroughly recommend the Praxis BB shell conversion for Specialized PF30 to allow use with Shimano cranks – works perfectly, silent and easy to fit.
Alternatively I have also experienced no problems with the larger axle S-works crankset with the same BB, but had terrible creaking issues with the conversion from BB30 to shimano – i think this is where the problem often lies.
“Cannondale developed the
“Cannondale developed the BB30 bottom bracket in 2006”
Actually they made it turn of the millennium with their SI system…and it worked fine because the frames, BB, and crankset were all made by the same company. It’s when the BB30 concept went open market did things go to shit because tolerance went out the window.
Carbon fiber doesn’t take
Carbon fiber doesn’t take threads. You have to glue and/or press something into it. That’s just a fact. The question is just how well it’s all done.
My alloy Ribble creaked
My alloy Ribble creaked constantly. Isolated it to the BB, swapped the BB out, creak came back within weeks. I’ve since redeployed the creaky BB into a 1983 Carlton frame, with zero creak. I suspect the creaks are alloy frame related and not BB related as all 3 of my alloy frames have creaked and groaned. I replaced the Ribble with a box full of parts and put the frame in the bin.
I love my BB30 bottom
I love my BB30 bottom brackets. The bearings are proprietary and cheap as chips. Replacement takes minutes and I’ve never had a creak in either carbon or aluminium frames from them.
tailwind10 wrote:
For every rider who doesnt have a problem there are fifty owners who hate the creaking,clicking from pressfit BB
Just wondering how the
Just wondering how the Italian brands and now Specialized bond a threaded shell for BBR60 to carbon frame. That never seems to be mentioned, but must be reliable as no one seems to mention failures with Italian bikes.
Also, one supposed advantage of Press-Fit is a larger diameter BB and thus stiffer frame. Probably not significant for most, but wondering how they achieve same frame stiffness if using smaller bottom bracket tube?
Glad to see there are domestic options like the Roubaix now avaiable.
The reason so many Cdale
The reason so many Cdale frames have problems with creaking, clicking from the BB yet others do not is that many of the Cdal frames are crap. Not becasue of the BB30 system. I have owned and ridden a tremendous number of bikes as I owned a business buying and selling high end road bikes (and my own personal compulsion to ride neat stuff). I have seen BB30 bikes work just fine. But Cdale and some other manufacturers just don’t hold tight enough tolerences to make it work well. Go to YouTube and watch videos by a fellow named Habini (might not be right spelling) he is a real engineer and call BS on bike industry practices.
No one ever needed a BB30 BB… nor do they need T37. This is all a bunch of marketing hooey. Go buy a custom, ti or steel frame with a threaded BB and ride like you stole it. You will not be slower becasue of it. Heck, you will probably be faster becasue you will ride more becasue you won’t be working on your bike and becasue it will fit better.
Bryin wrote:
I’d be riding it like I stole it because that’s about the only way i’d ever get my hands on a custom Ti or steel frame….
I prefer traditional square
I prefer traditional square taper BBS. They last for years without needing changed.
Press Fit is still here after
Press Fit is still here after 2 years, and so is this article
Somebody mentioned Hambini
Somebody mentioned Hambini earlier. Here’s his blog post on pressfit bottom brackets:
https://www.hambini.com/blog/post/bottom-bracket-pressfit-and-creaking-an-engineering-opinion/
Particularly interesting is the graph showing the manufacturing accuracy of various frames that he’s measured. (Poor accuracy equals creaking…)
slappop wrote:
Dont link to that dude…
https://road.cc/content/news/shockjock-vid-seeks-refute-sexism-claim-reinforces-it-272869
I’ll continue linking to him
I’ll continue linking to him because the quality of both his engineering knowledge and the bottom brackets he makes outweighs any stupid playground spats he might unwisely get involved in. (And you might have noticed that you linked to him as well.)
What’s the point designing a
What’s the point designing a brilliant frame if Taiwan can’t make it properly. You have to design according to manufacture, if the big bike manufacturers can guarantee the integrity of the manufacturing process then they should just bond in a screw thread BB shell.
All of my bikes are PF BB. I
All of my bikes are PF BB. I have had issues, but solved them all.
1. Felt F65x cross bike, aluminium frame with BB30. The issue I had was premature wearing out of the bearings. I use it as my winter bike with full mudguards and flaps, so have done my best to prevent road spray enveloping the BB area constantly. However, the bearings just press into the frame and are completely exposed to the elements from the outside, and also internally – they rely solely on the bearing seals. Tried different brands of bearing all to no avail, they would get rumbly after a few thousand winter miles.
Swapped group sets from SRAM to new 105 which also meant the crank spindle went from 30mm to 24mm. Fitted a Praxis Works sleeved BB converter which tightens into the shell and expands to grip really tightly. No creaks and the sleeve offers much more protection from the elements. Two winters in and so far, so good.
2. I own two Colnagos with their pressfit solution – Threadfit 82.5mm. As others posted when this article first appeared, this seems like a pretty good solution for pressfit. Both bikes have Rotor 3d+ 30mm cranks but the PF4130 bearings suffered the same issues as the Felt BB – simply pressed into the cups and left exposed to the elements. One did develop a creak which was the bearings themselves. Solution was to fit CBear sleeved BBs which are an incredibly tight press fit (lots of creaks and cracks as you press them in!) but they are faultless and incredibly smooth.
The only other annoying creak I’ve suffered and spent forever trying to trace turned out to be the rear cassette which was freaking due to not being tight enough! It had been done up to the specified torque, which wasn’t enough. Lesson learned and logged for future reference…
PP
40nm always seems massive for
40nm always seems massive for the tiny threads on the cassette I always chicken out before I strip the freehub body and wreck the wheel. Same now with centrelock disks, squeaky bum time when nipping them up!
40Nm on it’s own won’t strip
40Nm on it’s own won’t strip or wreck anything there – go for it, that’s what they’re built for.
Never had an issue with BB86
Never had an issue with BB86 shells, Shimano BB bearings, and Shimano 24mm spindle cranks. And the BB86 standard offers greater potential tire clearance at the BB area than any of the other common standards. The shell width allows you to mount the chainstays wider than BSA/BB30/PF30/T47, and the smaller shell diamater allows more tire diameter clearance potential for a given chainstay length than a BB386EVO.
Trek’s BB90 has even greater clearance potential. Unfortunately, the actual implementation is suboptimal.
I think some of the issue with BB30/PF30 is that the bearings are too close to the bb centerline, adding more leverage to the adverse radial forces from the spindle. This would seem to explain why BB386EVO seems to be less prone to creaking and wear issues.
In my experience, press fit
In my experience, press fit bottom brackets are a complete crock of shit.
My personal experiance with
My personal experiance with press fit has been ok to be honest. I have the BB386EVO on my Cipollini to which I did get some creaking but turned out it was chainring bolts. With my Open U.P I have one of the ‘screw type’ press fit BB’s and have had no issues either, so far and thats over 2 years now, apart from replacing the bearings.
I had a 2011 Cannondale
I had a 2011 Cannondale SuperSix, which was an absolute joy to ride apart from a persistently creaking BB. I first tried cleaning the BB30 bearings, and re-fitting with grease or loctite; then I fitted a threaded sleeve which enabled me to use threaded external BB cups; finally I tried a Praxis GXP adaptor, one side of which was pressed into the BB shell, with the other side screwing into a thread in the pressed-in side. None of these efforts ameliorated the horrible creaking from the bottom bracket area, and as a result of all these efforts I came to appreciate the virtues of a simple threaded BB shell. I finally gave up on the SuperSix frame, purchased a secondhand Planet-X RT-80 frame (with threaded BB shell), built it up with the parts from the Cannondale and have enjoyed creak-free pedalling ever since.
I’ve had 3 cannondale and
I’ve had 3 cannondale and they all creak, they are arrogant in extremis thinking they know better than other bike manufacturers. I love innovation but when even they can’t make their own BB design standard work they should give up. I’m going to give hambini a call to sort my Felt cx bike (BB30) and my supersix evo (PF30A). He’s the only solution that will guarantee a creak free BB and he’s accountable. We wouldn’t need Guys like hambini if bike manufacturers and designers did a decent job. SRAM bbs are shite but a bog standard Shimano screw in BB lasts and is quiet and cheap to replace. Sorted.
The problem isn’t press-fit
The problem isn’t press-fit bottom brackets per se – the engineering is well proven and widely used – it’s the god awful build quality of some frames. In order to make bigger profits and maximise returns for their shareholders, cynical manufacturers like Cannondale and Cervelo (and several others) charge astronomical prices for some of their bikes and framesets, while marketing them like they were the peak of design and engineering excellence.
The press-fit bottom bracket shit-show is indicative of a bike industry that’s fast turning into an enormous consumer rip-off.
Slight sense in your closing
Slight sense in your closing paragraphs there David that you’re blaming the consumer while defending an industry that so often calls the editorial shots. It’s likely that the versions of the bikes the pros use, particularly the biggest names, get specially built and thoroughly checked versions of the production frames that the average punters end up with. Also, bear in mind pro riders rarely use their sponsor’s bikes beyond a season.
The problem is plain to see: too many of these so-called high-end bikes (let alone the cheaper end!) are produced in low-cost facilities by low-paid and relatively low-skilled workers. Precisely made, light, stiff, comfortable frames have always been difficult and expensive to build, whatever they’re made of. What’s going on here with press-fit BBs is a symptom of an industry that has been making huge amounts of money at the expense of the quality of their often massively over-hyped bikes.
“Knock knock”
“Knock knock”
“Who’s there? No don’t tell me, press fit BB?”
(No subject)