Question about White Industries MTB hubs
Keith Beck
Stayed in drawer until now: building wheels. I note that there is a small
(2-3mm) hole in each hub, which aligns with an inner hole when rotated to a
certain position. My guess is this has something to do with lubrication
access, but don't have a clue as to what to do about it: what the purpose
is, etc. Please help.
keith kbec...@earthlink.net
Phil Brown
Why not ask them? they're in Petaluma, CA-707 area code or whiteindustries.com.
Phil Brown
Sheldon Brown
> Approx 10 years ago I won a set of White Industries MTB hubs in a race.
> Stayed in drawer until now: building wheels. I note that there is a small
> (2-3mm) hole in each hub, which aligns with an inner hole when rotated to a
> certain position. My guess is this has something to do with lubrication
> access, but don't have a clue as to what to do about it: what the purpose
> is, etc.
If these are the hubs I'm thinking of, that's an access hole for an
itsy-bitsy Allen wrench, which goes to a grub screw. If you loosen the
grub screw, you can unscrew the axle cap to replace the bearing cartridges.
These hubs are cartridge bearing units, not intended to be lubricated.
Sheldon "If Memory Serves..." Brown
+------------------------------------------------+
| Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, |
| somewhere, may be happy. --H.L. Mencken |
+------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
Bill Lloyd
> Keith Beck queried:
>
>> Approx 10 years ago I won a set of White Industries MTB hubs in a race.
>> Stayed in drawer until now: building wheels. I note that there is a small
>> (2-3mm) hole in each hub, which aligns with an inner hole when rotated to a
>> certain position. My guess is this has something to do with lubrication
>> access, but don't have a clue as to what to do about it: what the purpose
>> is, etc.
>
> If these are the hubs I'm thinking of, that's an access hole for an
> itsy-bitsy Allen wrench, which goes to a grub screw. If you loosen the
> grub screw, you can unscrew the axle cap to replace the bearing
> cartridges.
>
> These hubs are cartridge bearing units, not intended to be lubricated.
You are correct. There are 3, 2 mm screws, spaced 120 degrees apart.
Loosen them to disassemble the hub (be VERY careful with the rear
hub... pawls and leaf springs can go flying everywhere if you're not
careful!).
They're nice hubs... though the old ones with the Ti axle had some
issues with the bearings crimping the axle... they did a recall and
sent out hardened steel axles for the rear. This was addressed about
10 or 11 years ago (damn I'm old!) with their rear cassette hubs.
Jeff Wills
> Keith Beck queried:
>
> > Approx 10 years ago I won a set of White Industries MTB hubs in a race.
> > Stayed in drawer until now: building wheels. I note that there is a small
> > (2-3mm) hole in each hub, which aligns with an inner hole when rotated to a
> > certain position. My guess is this has something to do with lubrication
> > access, but don't have a clue as to what to do about it: what the purpose
> > is, etc.
>
> If these are the hubs I'm thinking of, that's an access hole for an
> itsy-bitsy Allen wrench, which goes to a grub screw. If you loosen the
> grub screw, you can unscrew the axle cap to replace the bearing cartridges.
>
> These hubs are cartridge bearing units, not intended to be lubricated.
>
> Sheldon "If Memory Serves..." Brown
My memory tells me the same thing- it's a 2mm Allen, IIRC. Either
that, or I've started receiving psychic projections from Sheldon.
Jeff "psycho, maybe, but not psychic" Wills
mike taffe
> They're nice hubs... though the old ones with the Ti axle had some
> issues with the bearings crimping the axle... they did a recall and
> sent out hardened steel axles for the rear. This was addressed about
> 10 or 11 years ago (damn I'm old!) with their rear cassette hubs.
The OP got these for free I guess so the point is a bit moot. But
these were *not* "nice hubs". These were an underengineered POS from
the git go. Yes I got suckered on them. Yes, they were light and fancy
lookin'. And yes, I put a lot of miles on them and they didn't ever
break, even before the steel axle swap. But they worked like crap from
a maintenance standpoint. The little grub screws just weren't able to
keep the whole thing together so as to keep the lateral play out of
the hub.
Bill Lloyd
Well, yes, I had some lateral play in mine as well. Though, while you
could feel it if you rocked the rim back and forth, the total play at
the *rim* was maybe 0.5 mm. Something you could NEVER tell when
riding, because the rim itself will flex more than that (and the tire,
substantially more). So I argue that a very small amount of play
wasn't that big of a deal... the hubs spun well, the pawls always
caught, etc.
I have maybe 10K miles on a couple pairs of MTB hubs. And had maybe 5K
road miles on a set I built up as race wheels for the road (I later
sold them). I wouldn't call them a POS. Sure a little play could
develop that you could never completely eliminate, but I don't think it
was nearly enough to have any impact while riding. Plus, the creep or
play was lessened by the change from Ti to steel axles.
Chalo
>
> The OP got these for free I guess so the point is a bit moot. But
> these were *not* "nice hubs". These were an underengineered POS from
> the git go. Yes I got suckered on them. Yes, they were light and fancy
> lookin'. And yes, I put a lot of miles on them and they didn't ever
> break, even before the steel axle swap. But they worked like crap from
> a maintenance standpoint. The little grub screws just weren't able to
> keep the whole thing together so as to keep the lateral play out of
> the hub.
Spoken like a true yokel.
Cup & cone hubs (the 19th century kind like those offered by Shimano
and their clones) have to have a bit of axial preload adjusted in so
the primitive bearings won't self-destruct from being loaded on just
one ball at a time.
Modern deep-groove radial contact cartridge bearings, like those in
better hubs, work best when they are not axially preloaded. There
are two ways to be sure that the axle is not applying a thrust preload
to the bearing: There can be a means of adjustment that requires a
very delicate touch to set, because the difference between zero
endplay with minimal preload and zero endplay with significant preload
is not easy to perceive. The other way to ensure no axial preload on
the bearings is to leave just a bit of endplay so that it's obvious
the bearings are not in a bind.
Bullseye used to provide a detailed explanation of this issue along
with their hubs, because the feedback from mechanically ignorant folks
clearly illustrated that they associated any amount of axle endplay
with a mechanical problem. Minor endplay is a characteristic of a
healthy hub using industrial cartridge bearings.
Chalo Colina
Trevor Jeffrey
Chalo wrote in message <8b4b7de4.04073...@posting.google.com>...
>Cup & cone hubs (the 19th century kind like those offered by Shimano
>and their clones) have to have a bit of axial preload adjusted in so
>the primitive bearings won't self-destruct from being loaded on just
>one ball at a time.
Cup and cone bearings have been around for in excess of a century as
the most suitable bearing for bicycle wheels. Its design allows for oil
lubrication which flush away any debris due to bearing contamination or
corrosion. Lateral loading is catered for in this design without
detriment to the unit. Warped axles have little to no effect on the
efficiency nor longevity of the unit. It also has been designed to cope
with manufacturing tolerances of the 19C. This type of bearing unit has
been designed for a specific purpose and as such is unlikely to be bettered
by a unit more appropriate for electric motors.
Pre load is unnecessary and undesirable. Cup and cone bearings survive
despite poor adjustment. When a bearing is loaded in the normal manner all
balls are working. As long as quality balls are used and the bearing is
kept flushed with oil, the bearing will have an indefinite life.
My experience with damaged bearings has been due to inadequate
lubrication. Most usually when grease has been used as a fit and forget
method. I forgot with new Campag' and ended up with a corroded cup the
block side of the rear wheel after six months of summer use. Bike was
stripped and re-lubed with Castrol LM saturated with 3in1 cycle oil. No
further bearing loss. Re-oiling is done when turning resistance increases
due to the grease drying out.
Cup and cone will also cope with a broken axle.
TJ
Chalo
> Cup and cone bearings have been around for in excess of a
> century as the most suitable bearing for bicycle wheels.
Both plain bronze bushings and wood bearings, which preceded cup and
cone, have some of the virtues you describe as well as some uniquely
their own. However, all of them pose a requirement for proper
adjustment, unlike modern industrial cartridge bearings. The
opportunity for adjustment is the same as the opportunity for
maladjustment, which in my judgment is the cause of most failed wheel
beaings that I have serviced.
The combination of no axial adjustment, no periodic maintenance,
complete replaceability, and the lowest amount of bearing drag is an
unbeatable advantage for sealed cartridge hub bearings IMO.
Chalo Colina
Trevor Jeffrey
Chalo wrote in message
>Both plain bronze bushings and wood bearings, which preceded cup and
>cone, have some of the virtues you describe as well as some uniquely
>their own. However, all of them pose a requirement for proper
>adjustment, unlike modern industrial cartridge bearings. The
>opportunity for adjustment is the same as the opportunity for
>maladjustment, which in my judgment is the cause of most failed wheel
>beaings that I have serviced.
>
>The combination of no axial adjustment, no periodic maintenance,
>complete replaceability, and the lowest amount of bearing drag is an
>unbeatable advantage for sealed cartridge hub bearings IMO.
Translated:
Cup &cone bearings have an inherent adjustment, cartridge bearings do
not. Cup &cone allows for the frequent replenishment of lubrication along
with the removal of damaging debris, cartridge bearings do not. Cartridge
bearings are susceptible to damage due to misalignment. Cartridge bearings
are generally sealed for life which gives them a finite lifespan, which
requires periodic replacement.
Sealed cartridge bearings have the drag of the seal. The loading taken
by a wheel means that the rolling resistance of a similarly sized bearing is
greater in a cartridge bearing due to smaller balls and four contact points
per ball instead of two.
Conclusion: Cartridge bearings are good for the bike shop.
TJ
dianne_1234
<Trevor_...@beeeb.net> wrote:
>The loading taken
>by a wheel means that the rolling resistance of a similarly sized bearing is
>greater in a cartridge bearing due to smaller balls and four contact points
>per ball instead of two.
I seem to recall one test with the result that Campy cup-n-cone
bearings had more drag than precision cartridge bearings (Bullseye
perhaps?).
The explanation was the conical angle of the contact in cup-n-cone
bearing: The left and right hub bearings form a V. This introduces
opposing axial forces that increase the normal load on the bearings
for a given radial load. In other words, the cones act as a "wedge"
like a V-belt in a V-pulley.
Of course, there are lots of other factors, too, that may have a
greater effect.
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Dianne,
Possibly this is the test that you have in mind?
http://www.damonrinard.com/wheel/grignon.htm
"Bearing friction measurements shattered the myth about
Campagnolo's superior hubs. The worst bearing performance,
by a wide margin, was posted by the Shamal (0,021 N-m). The
Shamal's bearings are smooth. It is just the seals that are
so goddam tight. And this was a fully broken-in wheel. Next
worst was the Zipp (0,017 N-m). Then came the other sealed
Campy hub, a Chorus unit (0,014 N-m). The brand new sealed
cartridge bearings of the Cosmic and Cane Creek were star
performers (0,007 and 0,006 N-m). So were the well worn
unsealed cup and cone bearings on the Specialized (0,005
N-m) and those of the 20 years old Campagnolo Record hub
around which is built our 36 spokes wheel (0,007 N-m)."
"In Campagnolo's defense, it must be mentioned that both
sealed Campy hubs feature a grease injection hole and that
both units had received a generous serving of the sticky
stuff prior to winter hibernation. Neither wheel had been
ridden since."
Carl Fogel
Chalo
>
> Cup &cone bearings have an inherent adjustment, cartridge
> bearings do not.
Properly designed, hubs using cartridge bearings never need
adjustment, ever. Calling this a shortcoming is like saying clinchers
are inferior to tubulars because you can't sew them or glue them .
> Cup &cone allows for the frequent replenishment of lubrication along
> with the removal of damaging debris, cartridge bearings do not.
Cup & cone bearings, due to their poorly aligned nature, frequently
allow contaminants past their seals, if they even have any seals.
Therefore they must allow periodic disassembly for cleaning.
> Cartridge bearings are susceptible to damage due to misalignment.
Cartridge bearings sit in precision-cut bores where they are only
subject to misalignment in the case of a bent axle. Because they do
not depend on an external axle thread for alignment, they can use an
externally smooth axle, or one of larger major diameter than a
conventional axle, or both, thus effectively preventing axle bending.
> Cartridge bearings are generally sealed for life which gives them
> a finite lifespan, which requires periodic replacement.
Cup & cone bearings typically admit more contaminants and always
feature looser tolerances than industrial bearing cartridges, which
gives them a finite lifespan. When they fail, they usually cannot be
replaced and must either be cobbled back together in a damaged state,
or discarded along with the wheel they are embedded in. This is in
contrast to cartridges, which are simply removed and replaced with
new, often for less than the price of new high-quality bearing balls
for a cup & cone hub.
> Sealed cartridge bearings have the drag of the seal. The loading
> taken by a wheel means that the rolling resistance of a similarly sized
> bearing is greater in a cartridge bearing due to smaller balls and four
> contact points per ball instead of two.
This would be true if the dimensional tolerances were similar between
cup & cone vs. cartridge bearings. They are not. Ordinary cartridge
bearings being industrially standardized and graded, they feature
finish and dimensions typically 10X more accurate than average cup &
cone parts, and assembled concentricity roughly 100X better. You can
feel the difference in your fingertips when you turn an axle from one
of each kind of hub.
> Conclusion: Cartridge bearings are good for the bike shop.
This would be true if most bike shops did a more thorough job of
stocking bearing cartridges, and if cartridge bearing replacement were
more difficult for the end user to do. As it is, there are industrial
bearing retailers in practically every city, and bearing replacement
can be done quickly and easily by a non-expert mechanic using
ordinary, non-bike-specific tools.
I sometimes buy bearing cartridges on eBay for less than a dollar
each. If I want finer German, Japanese, Swiss, or USA-made bearings,
I can buy them nearby on any weekday. Rebuilding a smartly designed
hub can be done with a pair of crescent wrenches and a mallet in a
couple of minutes.
The biggest troubles and design mistakes with any cartridge bearing
hubs are due to the manufacturer incorporating unnecessary and
unhelpful cup & cone features to make them more familiar to people who
have serviced only cup & cone hubs. Threaded axles, adjusting
features and locknuts serve only to visit some of the cup & cone hub's
weaknesses-- chronic misadjustment and poor concentricity-- upon
cartridge bearing hubs that do not require any such features.
The cheapest cup & cone hubs are shockingly cheap, and they provide
good value given that they work at all. But it is not those hubs that
I consider a poor bargain-- it's the expensive cup & cone models that
have the same shortcomings.
I consider a cup & cone hub to be a kind of bearing cartridge that
happens to have spoke holes in it. But it's not a very good cartridge
bearing, and like all cartridge bearings it can only be thrown away
when it's worn out or damaged. It's a fine technical solution for the
conditions of, say, Pakistani cottage industry. But it's not a 21st
century First World solution worthy of a bike enthusiast's money or a
bike mechanic's time and effort.
Chalo Colina
Trevor Jeffrey
>"Trevor Jeffrey" <Trevor_...@beeeb.net> wrote:
>>
>> Cup &cone bearings have an inherent adjustment, cartridge
>> bearings do not.
>
>Properly designed, hubs using cartridge bearings never need
>adjustment, ever. Calling this a shortcoming is like saying clinchers
>are inferior to tubulars because you can't sew them or glue them .
You should have used something better than this. Correctly designed
cartridge hubs have a weight penalty to bear due to the requirement of a
stiffer axle and hubshell than cup &cone. They also require a special
removal tool at greater frequencies than it is required to disassemble
cup&cone. Wired on tyres are inferior to tubulars for many reasons including
cost. The benefits of using tubs far outweigh their perceived hassle. They
are different, with practice the skill is learnt and becomes easy. Being
sewn and glued on the rim is an advantage with a puncture and I am
descending
a hill in excess of 60mph.
>
>> Cup &cone allows for the frequent replenishment of lubrication along
>> with the removal of damaging debris, cartridge bearings do not.
>
>Cup & cone bearings, due to their poorly aligned nature, frequently
>allow contaminants past their seals, if they even have any seals.
>Therefore they must allow periodic disassembly for cleaning.
The nature of the design allows misalignment in the sense of what is
required for a cartridge bearing. As a c&c remains a c&c and does not want
to imitate a bearing from a washing machine motor it does exceptionally well
despite your unfounded criticisms. Periodic disassembly is not required, a
drop of oil every 1000 miles is all that is required. The oil migrates out
between the dustcap and cone taking any debris including wear particles with
it. This facility is not available in a sealed cartridge bearing, the seal
trapping in the wear particles to cause a relatively early demise to the
bearing. Unfortunately sealed cartridge bearings do not keep contaminants
out, water in contact with the bearing seal will creep into the bearing and
quickly cause corrosion. The reason being that only small amounts of grease
lubrication are used and the antioxidant wears out relatively quickly.
>
>> Cartridge bearings are susceptible to damage due to misalignment.
>
>Cartridge bearings sit in precision-cut bores where they are only
>subject to misalignment in the case of a bent axle. Because they do
>not depend on an external axle thread for alignment, they can use an
>externally smooth axle, or one of larger major diameter than a
>conventional axle, or both, thus effectively preventing axle bending.
C&c could be precision made, why waste money? The precision required
involves three cuts for a properly manufactured cartridge bearing hub rather
than the single cut and bang in the cup on a c&c system. Again the hubshell
has to be stiffer, so heavier. The use of a larger diameter axle not only
increases weight but reduces the available bearing space and so small balls
and greater rolling resistance. It is not possible to prevent axle bending
within reasonable sizes it is only possible to reduce it. Cartridge
bearings generally used in bicycles need accurate, to the extreme, alignment
because of the four point contact ball.
>
>> Cartridge bearings are generally sealed for life which gives them
>> a finite lifespan, which requires periodic replacement.
>
>Cup & cone bearings typically admit more contaminants and always
>feature looser tolerances than industrial bearing cartridges, which
>gives them a finite lifespan. When they fail, they usually cannot be
>replaced and must either be cobbled back together in a damaged state,
>or discarded along with the wheel they are embedded in. This is in
>contrast to cartridges, which are simply removed and replaced with
>new, often for less than the price of new high-quality bearing balls
>for a cup & cone hub.
Cup &cone will admit more contaminants than industrial cartridge bearings
because cup and cone are found on bicycles where water is usually a major
factor(fair weather only cyclists do not apply here) and industrial
cartridge bearings of the sealed type are found on electric motors hopefully
without water splashing over their armatures. The c&c design copes
admirably with the problem due to its great capacity for an excess or
reservoir of lubricant in the form of oil saturated grease. When kept in
this state no stripping down or replacement is needed. They do not fail if
kept wet with lubricant containing antioxidant. At a bearing stockist 5000
balls were less than two small sealed bearings.
>
>> Sealed cartridge bearings have the drag of the seal. The loading
>> taken by a wheel means that the rolling resistance of a similarly sized
>> bearing is greater in a cartridge bearing due to smaller balls and four
>> contact points per ball instead of two.
>
>This would be true if the dimensional tolerances were similar between
>cup & cone Vs. cartridge bearings. They are not. Ordinary cartridge
>bearings being industrially standardized and graded, they feature
>finish and dimensions typically 10X more accurate than average cup &
>cone parts, and assembled concentricity roughly 100X better. You can
>feel the difference in your fingertips when you turn an axle from one
>of each kind of hub.
I don't know of any one who rides a bike with their fingertips. I might
as well say that this monitor in front of me has a screen 1000 times
smoother than a piece of paper, so I type better than I write. Anyone know
whether smooth paper improves handwriting? cartridge bearings deteriorate
faster than cup and cone and their rolling resistance is higher at all
stages of life than a smooth cup and cone bearing using loads found in cycle
bearings.
Industrially standardized also means one size fits all, you get what
your given. No thanks, give me the component designed for the job with 120
years usage to back it up.
>
>> Conclusion: Cartridge bearings are good for the bike shop.
>
>This would be true if most bike shops did a more thorough job of
>stocking bearing cartridges, and if cartridge bearing replacement were
>more difficult for the end user to do. As it is, there are industrial
>bearing retailers in practically every city, and bearing replacement
>can be done quickly and easily by a non-expert mechanic using
>ordinary, non-bike-specific tools.
If it requires ordinary tools to replace, the accuracy of fit is poor and
that is why it has worn and needs replacement, otherwise its 2 years old,
the antioxidant has expired and the bearing has got wet. Mechanics still
need to be skilled. Expert and professional I consider superfluous.
Rest of Chalo's post cut due to its repetition and my need of sleep.
4am utc
11:30 utc
As a sealed cartridge bearing in not designed for human powered
transport where weight is an issue, it is inappropriate to consider it for
this application.
The sizing of a typical hub does not allow an adequate size of cartridge
type bearing for the load and speed involved.
A peculiarity of cartridge bearings is that they are designed for a much
higher speed than that involved in a bicycle wheel. The stop, start and
slow conditions encountered are not catered for by the lubricant in a
standard sealed cartridge bearing. If one of the seals was broken and the
grease replenished with something more suitable for the slow nature of a
bicycle wheel then a longer service life would ensue. Not so simple
anymore, is it?
TJ
Trevor Jeffrey
carl...@comcast.net wrote in message ...
>Possibly this is the test that you have in mind?
>
>http://www.damonrinard.com/wheel/grignon.htm
>
>"Bearing friction measurements shattered the myth about
>Campagnolo's superior hubs. The worst bearing performance,
>by a wide margin, was posted by the Shamal (0,021 N-m). The
>Shamal's bearings are smooth. It is just the seals that are
>so goddam tight. And this was a fully broken-in wheel. Next
>worst was the Zipp (0,017 N-m). Then came the other sealed
>Campy hub, a Chorus unit (0,014 N-m). The brand new sealed
>cartridge bearings of the Cosmic and Cane Creek were star
>performers (0,007 and 0,006 N-m). So were the well worn
>unsealed cup and cone bearings on the Specialized (0,005
>N-m) and those of the 20 years old Campagnolo Record hub
>around which is built our 36 spokes wheel (0,007 N-m)."
>
>"In Campagnolo's defense, it must be mentioned that both
>sealed Campy hubs feature a grease injection hole and that
>both units had received a generous serving of the sticky
>stuff prior to winter hibernation. Neither wheel had been
>ridden since."
The quoted text supports my statements in than cup & cone bearings are
superior through all stages of life when used for cycle hubs. Bearings
should never be packed with grease. The figures show the extra force
required. Overheating of the grease will pull the oil from the bearing
surfaces resulting in premature failure. A filled bearing is different to a
packed one.
TJ
carl...@comcast.net
<Trevor_...@beeeb.net> wrote:
[snip]
> . . .descending
>a hill in excess of 60mph.
Dear Trevor,
What hill do you descend in excess of 60 mph?
Curiously,
Carl Fogel
Chalo
> You should have used something better than this. Correctly designed
> cartridge hubs have a weight penalty to bear due to the requirement of a
> stiffer axle and hubshell than cup &cone.
Tell me then why _all_ of the lightest hubs ever made available have
used cartridge bearings (e.g. Tune, TNT, Hershey, etc.)
> They also require a special
> removal tool at greater frequencies than it is required to disassemble
> cup&cone.
So to you, a mallet is a "special tool"? My oldest wheel has its
original bearing cartridges in it. At about 35,000 miles it is
beginning to exhibit wear and a bit of roughness in the bearing
surfaces, but no more so than the average _brand new_ cup & cone hub.
> Wired on tyres are inferior to tubulars for many reasons including
> cost. The benefits of using tubs far outweigh their perceived hassle.
> They are different, with practice the skill is learnt and becomes easy.
> Being sewn and glued on the rim is an advantage with a puncture
> and I am descending a hill in excess of 60mph.
This is telling. You may place your faith in tubies at 60 mph, but I
wouldn't. I weigh about 400 lbs. and descend at that speed often
enough, and only clinchers are available in widths and casing
strengths that would allow me any confidence in doing so.
When motorcycling at up to 140+ mph, I would use only clinchers as
would any motorcyclist. But then, we misinformed motorcyclists also
use cartridge bearing hubs exclusively-- evidently because the
motorcycling environment is much gentler on them than bicycling would
be! I have some 55,000 miles on my 1100cc motorbike, which now sports
its second pair of front hub bearings.
> Again the hubshell
> has to be stiffer, so heavier. The use of a larger diameter axle not only
> increases weight but reduces the available bearing space and so small > balls and greater rolling resistance.
You seem to be oblivious to the trend of the last 20 years in bicycle
equipment, where adoption of larger component diameters has allowed
lighter weights than ever before, with superior stiffness than was
possible before.
Of course, that is adequately illustrated by the cartridge bearing
hubs that use larger axles and fatter hub centers than cup & cone
hubs, but weigh a fraction as much.
> It is not possible to prevent axle bending
> within reasonable sizes it is only possible to reduce it.
Yet somehow over the course of many years I have never seen an
externally smooth cartridge bearing hub axle that was bent. During
the same span of time I've seen literally hundreds of bent threaded
axles. Coincidence?
> Cartridge bearings generally used in bicycles need accurate, to the
> extreme, alignment because of the four point contact ball.
There are such bearing cartridges as you describe, but they are not
generally used in bicycles. The usual kind are "double sealed deep
groove radial contact" bearings, with two contact points per ball.
> industrial cartridge bearings of the sealed type are found on electric
> motors hopefully without water splashing over their armatures.
--And machine tool spindles with chip-laden coolant spraying
everywhere, and motorcycle wheels, and skateboard wheels, and boat
propellor shafts, etc., etc., etc. Everywhere but bicycle wheel
bearings. Maybe bicycle manufacturers know something the rest don't?
If so, they forgot to tell their folks who make the cartridge bearing
bottom brackets and headsets.
> A peculiarity of cartridge bearings is that they are designed for a much
> higher speed than that involved in a bicycle wheel. The stop, start and
> slow conditions encountered are not catered for by the lubricant in a
> standard sealed cartridge bearing.
Funny, but when I'm, say, tapping a hole pattern on a vertical mill,
there is a lot of starting, stopping, and reversing, under heavy load,
at low rotational speed. The cartridge bearings in the spindle seem
to cope with this as well as they do with high RPM. They require
replacement only every few years and few billion rotations under load.
> If one of the seals was broken and the
> grease replenished with something more suitable for the slow
> nature of a bicycle wheel then a longer service life would ensue.
WTB Grease Guard hubs, also licensed by Suntour, allowed just this:
They had single-sealed cartridge bearings with a grease fitting behind
them so that they could be flushed and replenished as often as desired
with no disassembly. They proved to offer no significant improvement
for most users; that is, a few years of maintenance-free use followed
by new bearings was as satisfactory as periodic regreasing in return
for slightly longer bearing life. Either one sure beats throwing
otherwise good wheels away after lots of fettling and cleaning, as is
the practice with cup & cone hubs.
Chalo Colina
Trevor Jeffrey
That was not a cue to go totally off topic. The hill/mountain? is Moel
Eithinen sometimes called the Bwlch as opposed to the Old Bwlch or Bwlch
Penbarra which contains a 1in3 hairpin. It's in N. Wales.
TJ
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Trevor,
I'm not quite clear whether you mean that your hill includes
the 1 in 3 hairpin, or 33% grade, or if you mean that the
hairpin is in the other hill, but either way it seems
unlikely that anyone does 60 mph through a hairpin.
What would you say the grade is on the section where you
exceed 60 mph?
Is this the mountain bike trail that I see on the internet
when I google for bwlch, or is it a road? That is, are we
talking about a ski-resort dirt-descent specialty-downhill
or a paved road?
Carl Fogel
Trevor Jeffrey
Chalo wrote in message <8b4b7de4.04080...@posting.google.com>...
Perhaps the lightest cartridge hubs used titanium axles.
What was their weight, and how do they compare to Campag Record with
titanium axles(c1980)? Compare like with like here. Exlude skewers off
all.
>So to you, a mallet is a "special tool"? My oldest wheel has its
>original bearing cartridges in it. At about 35,000 miles it is
>beginning to exhibit wear and a bit of roughness in the bearing
>surfaces, but no more so than the average _brand new_ cup & cone hub.
>
That is admirable that you still have a serviceable unit using original
cartridge bearings after 35,000miles. Are they sealed cartridge?
What is the exact type of bearing , dimensions and fit?
What is the make/model of hub, cost and when?
So how do you know a mallet is all it would take to exchange these bearings?
Has it seen water?
Actual service life is important, but how well does it roll compared to an
equivalently priced cup&cone model of the same period.
That bit of roughness shows the bearing surface has failed.
OK for some people tub's may be inappropriate due to the lack of
availability of wide off the peg models. At a guess I think you would need
35mm section in a tub a little more with wired-on.
Motorcycle - Nice big motor with plenty of reserve power, large wheel
bearings large stiff rear fork/front fork thick solid axles.
Power of motorcycle typically160 000watts
Power of cyclist 120watts
priority of cyclist - develop a little bit of power, make it go, make it
stop, make it turn, pare weight
priority of motorcyclist - Develop plenty of power, make it go, make it
stop, make it turn, protect components
>
>There are such bearing cartridges as you describe, but they are not
>generally used in bicycles. The usual kind are "double sealed deep
>groove radial contact" bearings, with two contact points per ball.
This type of bearing, has a high degree of osculation and much sliding
takes place, so is intolerant to contaminent and must be highly protected
against ingress so upping the cost of the hub. The slow and stop conditions
of a bicycle make this the quickest wearing choice of rolling bearing .
Without renewal of lubricant alongside removal of wear debris, this will
make it the first to fail through fatigue. It is almost not a rolling
bearing.
What milage do the bearing surfaces of this type typacally fail at? And at
what size are they?
I feel it woul be more apprpriate to use taper rollers with an oil feed.
This requires adjustment but I don't think is available in the small sizes
required for hubs and pedals antway.
What you infer is that for the inexpert or forgetful mechanic, sealed
cartridges are more suitable. I say, if it drips oil, a cup and cone
bearing will outlive you.
I think that your assessment of c&c bearings being poor is based on
experience with incorrectly lubricated units. Ideally the balls should roll
in an oil bath.
TJ
Trevor Jeffrey
>the 1 in 3 hairpin, or 33% grade, or if you mean that the
>hairpin is in the other hill, but either way it seems
>unlikely that anyone does 60 mph through a hairpin.
>
>What would you say the grade is on the section where you
>exceed 60 mph?
>
>Is this the mountain bike trail that I see on the internet
>when I google for bwlch, or is it a road? That is, are we
>talking about a ski-resort dirt-descent specialty-downhill
>or a paved road?
Motorcyclists coming towards you at 100mph+ dont always return to their
nearside, I guess so they can see around the bend which of course I want to
cut. The lead rider must keep their head up for this reason.
It takes three or four riders riding close to get past 100kmh
TJ Now stop it!
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Trevor,
If you reveal marvels like this, you can hardly expect
people to stop asking for explanations. (I will, however,
skip the raised eyebrows about motorcycles routinely
climbing such grades at over 100 mph.)
For a typical bicycle rider's weight and profile, a long
stretch of extremelly rare 15.4% grade is required to reach
60 mph.
Heavier riders with improved tucks can do better. Chalo
Colina, for example, may be able to reach 60 mph on a mere
6.6% slope, since he enjoys considerably increased force
(over 400 pounds with bicycle) without a corresponding
increase in wind drag.
Pedalling, of course, is unlikely to be of any value. Over
157 rpm is required to pedal 60 mph on a 700c 53x11 and
would involve losing more to increased wind drag than could
be made up.
Perhaps you could check the details again with the other two
or three riders involved and persuade them to favor us with
a post or two about the maximum recorded on their
speedometers?
Meanwhile, you might enjoy plugging a few figures into this
speed calculator:
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesSpeed_Page.html
Set the power to 0 watts and the slope to -0.154 and you'll
produce a speed of about 60 mph for a 75kg rider and
bicycle. Plug in Chalo's 182kg and the result converts to
93.5 mph.
I never trust my conversions, so I like to check them here:
http://members.aol.com/javawizard/speed.html
You can reduce various factors to increase speed, but you'll
have to keep them believable. A 10% slope with the defaults
produces only 48 mph. Increasing this 25% would be
impressive.
You may also have some explaining to do in order to convince
people that a peloton coasts downhill faster than a single
coasting rider. As I understand it, the lead rider works
like a dog and those who follow enjoy the reduced wind drag
available just behind him.
There are regular discussions here about whether the leader
benefits slightly from someone filling in his slipstream,
but I can't recall anyone claiming an improvement of more
than a mile per hour.
People do maintain sites reporting impressive climbs and
descents for bicyles, so you might want to look into getting
your local route listed if it turns out to have a
significant stretch of 10% grade.
Here are two links to places that list notable climbs:
http://www.ulb.ac.be/di/ssd/ldoyen/e/v.html
http://www.cyclos-cyclotes.org/altigraph.html
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
Chalo
>
> Perhaps the lightest cartridge hubs used titanium axles.
> What was their weight, and how do they compare to Campag Record with
> titanium axles(c1980)? Compare like with like here. Exlude skewers off
> all.
Consult Damon Rinard's component weights:
http://www.geocities.com/kwanseng/weight.html#fronthubs
These are out of date, but informative. Note that the hubs are
arranged in order of ascending weight, that the measured front hubs
begin at 64 grams, and that the first cup & cone hub on the list
weighs 115g. The lightest cup & cone hub on the list that I know to
have a steel axle weighs 128g.
I am certain that all of the very lightest hubs use aluminum axles,
made feasible by large diameters and smooth outer surfaces.
Other verified weight lists show examples down to 52g. There are more
data here, but nothing by Campagnolo on this list:
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=hubs
> That is admirable that you still have a serviceable unit using original
> cartridge bearings after 35,000miles. Are they sealed cartridge?
> What is the exact type of bearing , dimensions and fit?
> What is the make/model of hub, cost and when?
The wheel in question uses a front Specialized hub (made by Suzue
IIRC) that has a traditional-looking shell, adjusters and locknuts.
Under a set of cosmetic dustcaps, it hides 6000-2RS double sealed
made-in-Japan cartridges, which measure 10x26x8mm. I bought it in
1989; I don't remember how much it cost except that it was a little
cheaper than Deore XT at the time.
> So how do you know a mallet is all it would take to exchange these bearings?
This particular hub requires cone wrenches to remove the locknuts and
adjusters from one side, after which a tap to the axle end drives out
the other side.
> Has it seen water?
Yes. It lived out its days on a daily rider in Austin, TX, where rain
arrives infrequently but usually in God's Own Buckets. So the hub
didn't get wet often, but it got plenty wet.
> That bit of roughness shows the bearing surface has failed.
Yes, those bearings are done. They still don't have much more end
play than they ever did, but their former glassy smoothness is gone.
I don't use that wheel anymore so I haven't bothered to replace the
cartridges.
> I feel it woul be more apprpriate to use taper rollers with an oil feed.
> This requires adjustment but I don't think is available in the small sizes
> required for hubs and pedals antway.
Well, yes they are, but at a cost that would make components with such
bearings prohibitively expensive.
> I say, if it drips oil, a cup and cone bearing will outlive you.
...
> I think that your assessment of c&c bearings being poor is based on
> experience with incorrectly lubricated units. Ideally the balls should
> roll in an oil bath.
I have to admit that in my years of bike wrenching and bike building,
I have never knowingly met a cyclist who packed hub bearings in
anything other than some kind of grease. I have heard the hub center
drillings on Nuovo Record hubs referred to as "oil holes" but have
never seen them used in that way.
It sounds like a good way to keep a bearing clean and a bike filthy.
I suppose the thing gets "washed" often enough in Old Blighty.
Chalo Colina
Gary Young
> "Trevor Jeffrey" <Trevor_...@beeeb.net> wrote:
>
> > You should have used something better than this. Correctly designed
> > cartridge hubs have a weight penalty to bear due to the requirement of a
> > stiffer axle and hubshell than cup &cone.
>
> Tell me then why _all_ of the lightest hubs ever made available have
> used cartridge bearings (e.g. Tune, TNT, Hershey, etc.)
Are there any cartridge bearing hubs currently in production that
don't cost an arm and a leg? I know you recommend the JuJu hub, but it
seems to be available only in a 32-hole version, not 36.
Dave Lehnen
<snip>
> Dear Trevor,
>
> If you reveal marvels like this, you can hardly expect
> people to stop asking for explanations. (I will, however,
> skip the raised eyebrows about motorcycles routinely
> climbing such grades at over 100 mph.)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
Oh, go ahead and raise your eyebrows. Many modern sport bikes
have the power-to-weigh to climb very steep grades at very
high speeds.
For example, a current open-class bike would weigh less than
450 lb, full of gas, oil, etc, and would have far over 100
rear-wheel horsepower when in the powerband. A rider in full
racer-wannabe gear might be another 200 lb.
Even if the rider isn't tucked at all, much less than 40 hp
is required to overcome aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance
at 100 mph. With 650 lb total weight, climbing a 33% grade at
100 mph takes an additional 55 hp. Even at this extreme slope,
high speeds are possible. With only a 10% grade, it takes just
over 17 hp to overcome gravity at 100 mph.
Motorcyclists' uphill speeds are more limited by corners, sanity
or lack therof, and fear of legal consequences than by grade.
Dave Lehnen
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Dave,
True, modern motorcycles can exceed 100 mph uphill.
My eyebrows were lifting at the notion that this is a common
enough occurrence on an alleged 10% grade in Wales that
bicyclists allegedly descending at over 60 mph must keep a
wary eye out for motorcycles cornering on the wrong side of
the road at closing speeds exceeding 160 mph.
Perhaps I should have made my skepticism concerning the
original poster's ability to judge speeds clearer?
The original poster could be right about exceeding 60 mph on
his descent--an impressive tailwind, a much steeper grade
than he thinks, drafting trucks, or an unusually heavy build
might let him roll a mile a minute downhill.
He could also be right about motorcycles zooming up toward
him on the wrong side of corners at over 100 mph so often
that he has to keep an eye out for them.
But poor judgement of speed is at least as likely an
explanation. Few of us have much demonstrable skill at
judging our own speed at such high rates, much less the
speed of oncoming traffic. And generally we claim higher
than actual speeds (until the police pull us over).
Even at bicycling speeds, snap judgements of oncoming speeds
can be ludicrous. A defense witness once accused me of doing
well over 30 mph on a bicycle trail. I was tempted to let
the accusation stand in exchange for a copy of the court
record to hang on my wall to impress Lance, but honesty
compelled me to point out that my best efforts produce only
19 mph on the speedometer on that gentle uphill.
Carl Fogel
Chalo
>
> Are there any cartridge bearing hubs currently in production that
> don't cost an arm and a leg? I know you recommend the JuJu hub, but it
> seems to be available only in a 32-hole version, not 36.
SunRace make sealed bearing hubs besides the JuJu in other drillings.
I use their high flange 36 hole and mid flange 48 hole BMX hubsets on
other bikes.
Formula, Quando, DiaTech, Bulletproof, and World Class are other
brands that produce budget-priced sealed bearing hubs. Of these I
know for sure that Formula and DiaTech offer cartridge bearing
cassette hubs, even in 48 hole drilling. Specialized sealed bearing
hubs tend to be inexpensive and nicely made. Like all OEM-market
parts, all those I have named will be available only intermittently in
the retail market.
Chalo Colina
Trevor Jeffrey
attained. I think this may have been using 52x12 on 27" wheel. The bicycle
descent speed recordings where done using cycle computers, and as we could
overhaul cars I do not disbelieve the max speed recordings. Personally I
was able to attain pedal revs in excess of 200rpm on the road for short
periods. This was acheived by daily training for five weeks of round pedal
action using light gears with acceleration bursts upwards of 10 seconds.
All training was kept easy. The use of a cadence meter useful as I would
push a bit harder at each burst through a ride.
TJ
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Trevor,
Yes, 180-200 rpm on 27 inch tires with a 52x12 produces
62-70 mph for tires of 2136 to 2155 mm.
But here's a typical comment on how useful pedalling is at
60 mph and 180-200 rpm:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=68bs3j%24l70%40hplntx.hpl.hp.com
or
That is, can you pedal a freely suspended rear wheel up to
that speed and cadence?Jobst Brandt suggested this as a test
years ago, but I haven't found anyone addressing it.
Maybe you're the one to break new ground here?
Carl Fogel
Gary Young
One thing that's made me stick with Shimano hubs is the worry that the
cassette freehub body might go bad. Do these cartridge hubs use the
same type of body as Shimano hubs. If not, are replacements readily
available?
Chalo
> One thing that's made me stick with Shimano hubs is the worry that the
> cassette freehub body might go bad. Do these cartridge hubs use the
> same type of body as Shimano hubs. If not, are replacements readily
> available?
I don't know, and I don't know. I have only one cassette hub among
approximately 20 bikes, and as it's relatively new, I haven't opened
it up to see whether it uses a cartridge bearing cassette.
Many sealed bearing cassette hubs I have seen and serviced use a
regular Brand S clone cup & cone freehub body. This is questionable
practice, since any axial preload necessary for proper functioning of
the freehub also gets transferred to the cartridge bearings, which
don't need or like it. It does resolve your issue, though.
As to whether there is good parts support for a given cartridge
cassette hub, the answer is maybe, probably, perhaps. I imagine that
it varies a lot from maker to maker, with maufacturers that have an
established or growing reputation to uphold (e.g Specialized and
DiaTech respectively) doing a better job of it than no-name or
OEM-only manufacturers. Anyplace you can buy a budget cartridge
bearing hubset would be a good place to ask whether _that seller_ can
get you spare parts.
Chalo Colina
Trevor Jeffrey
>62-70 mph for tires of 2136 to 2155 mm.
>
>But here's a typical comment on how useful pedalling is at
>60 mph and 180-200 rpm:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=68bs3j%24l70%40hpln
tx.hpl.hp.com
>
>or
>
>http://tinyurl.com/5znt5
>
>That is, can you pedal a freely suspended rear wheel up to
>that speed and cadence?Jobst Brandt suggested this as a test
>years ago, but I haven't found anyone addressing it.
>
>Maybe you're the one to break new ground here?
??
TJ
David Damerell
>The combination of no axial adjustment, no periodic maintenance,
>complete replaceability, and the lowest amount of bearing drag is an
>unbeatable advantage for sealed cartridge hub bearings IMO.
The point was driven home to me when replacing the original '89 Suzue
cartridge rear hub on the tandem with a cup-and-cone (why? 'cos the old
one is freewheel, and I don't fancy carrying the tools to pull one on the
road, and 40-spoke to boot); the cartridge hub is really enormously easier
to work with. The front hub stays; and if I have time to shop around next
time I need a hub, it sure as hell won't be cup and cone.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Trevor,
Would this be the area?
or
That is, I see a Blwch Penbarras in the upper middle
1000-meter square, a Moel Ethinen in the center square, and
a Blwch-y-parc in the lower two right squares, with 10-meter
contour lines.
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
wrote:
While it's not the Bwlch near Moel Eithinen, there is a
short Welsh grade called Bwlch-y-Groes that descends to
Dinas-Mawddwy with an impressively steep upper 1,000 meters:
http://www.salite.ch/groes1.htm
The link above shows a drop from 546 meters to 464 meters
(16.4%) in 500 meters of road, followed by a drop from 464
to 384 meters (16.0%) in the next 500 meters of road, an
average of 16.2% for a kilometer.
This is followed by another kilometer at 14.2% grade from
384 meters down to 242 meters.
(The site's list of 54 Welsh climbs lists this one at an
average of 12.5%, with no others averaging even 9% and no
obvious stretches exceeding 12%.)
Here's a map:
or
And here's a commentary page:
http://www.iseran.com/Atlas/bwlch_y_groes.html
Plugging 0 watts power (no pedalling) and -0.164 slope into:
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesSpeed_Page.html
calculates a speed of 27.54 mps (61-62 mph) for a 75kg bike
and rider.
For a -0.142 slope and 0 watts power, the same defaults
yield 25.74 mps (or 57-58 mph).
Of course, this assumes that the approach, distance, and
curves allow the bike and rider to reach terminal velocity
within a kilometer.
If there's an unlisted stretch of paved road in Wales whose
grade exceeds 10%, the folks at http://www.salite.ch would
love to hear about it. (Click on English and a display
appears by country, including Wales.)
Carl Fogel
Bill Lloyd
mph in the Sierras in eastern California, descending from north lake
Tahoe to Truckee.
The grade isn't all that steep, either -- maybe 10%? But it's at 8500'
give or take.
carl...@comcast.net
<no.email...@foo.com> wrote:
>Well I guess in the UK they don't have the altitude, but I've hit 63.5
>mph in the Sierras in eastern California, descending from north lake
>Tahoe to Truckee.
>
>The grade isn't all that steep, either -- maybe 10%? But it's at 8500'
>give or take.
>
Dear Bill,
Here are the sites again if you'd like to play with the
numbers.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesSpeed_Page.html
http://members.aol.com/javawizard/speed.html
Plugging in -0.10 for the grade, 0 watts for no pedalling,
and 0.950 for air density around 2600 meters produces a
terminal speed for the other defaults such as 165 lbs of
riders and bike of 24.4 meters per second, or 54.5 mph
To reach 63.5 mph, you need extra power or reduced drag,
either from a tighter tuck, a steeper grade, a tailwind,
another vehicle to draft, or a heavier rider.
Pedalling is generally held to be counter-productive at such
speeds with ordinary bicycle frames and gearing. At 63.5 mph
with a 2124mm 700c tire and 53x11 gearing, you must spin up
to 162 rpm before the chain engages the rear wheel--such
furious pedalling is likely to add more drag than any useful
propulsion.
For example, a 102 kg bike and rider (214 pounds), will
coast up to 63.5 mph on the hypothetical 10% grade with the
0.950 air density.
Or the default 165 lb rider could simply tilt the road to a
grade of 13.4% at that altitude.
As an overweight Shetland pony, if not a modest Clydesdale,
even I could presumably roll my 110 kg carcass and bicycle
down your 10% grade at 66 mph (assuming that it's nice and
straight and uncrowded and long enough), so your
high-altitude claim of 63.5 mph seems quite plausible.
Drop it down to sea level air density and my 66 mph drops to
58 mph.
It should be remembered that many high speed claims may be
made quite honestly by riders unaware of handsome tail winds
or the advantage of 40 pounds of baggage. My best speed
coasting down my daily hill is 15 mph higher than usual, a
tribute to a fine west wind, while my regular victories over
a friend in coasting contests down the same hill rely on my
extra fifteen pounds of ballast, much like any underhanded
soapbox derby triumph.
Carl Fogel
Tom Sherman
> ...
> To reach 63.5 mph, you need extra power or reduced drag,
> either from a tighter tuck, a steeper grade, a tailwind,
> another vehicle to draft, or a heavier rider....
Other (non UCI legal) alternatives include substantially reducing
frontal area, such as a recumbent with a highly reclined seat and bottom
bracket higher than the seat, or substantially reducing the coefficient
of drag by partially or fully fairing the bicycle.
> Pedalling is generally held to be counter-productive at such
> speeds with ordinary bicycle frames and gearing. At 63.5 mph
> with a 2124mm 700c tire and 53x11 gearing, you must spin up
> to 162 rpm before the chain engages the rear wheel--such
> furious pedalling is likely to add more drag than any useful
> propulsion....
The additional drag can be demonstrated by coasting on a long slope, and
then either pedaling backwards at a normal cadence or pedaling forwards
at a normal cadence in too low of a gear to provide any power to the
drivewheel. I have done this on a short wheelbase recumbent, and noted a
drop in speed on the order of 10%.
--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area
Trevor Jeffrey
carl...@comcast.net wrote in message
<7a1gh01dhu5abkgjq...@4ax.com>...
>
>Plugging in -0.10 for the grade, 0 watts for no pedalling,
>and 0.950 for air density around 2600 meters produces a
>terminal speed for the other defaults such as 165 lbs of
>riders and bike of 24.4 meters per second, or 54.5 mph
pedalling 180rpm+(3 revs / second) hands together, chin on bars, knees
together with feet level, aero brake levers, aero pedals, aero rims aero
chainset 20mm section tyres +light tailwind <10mph
Apart from corners, never considered coasting down a hill back then. Brake
or power.