should I use loose balls or retainers?
N8N
I'm at the point in my build where I'm just waiting for the Frame
Saver to set up and hopefully will begin final assembly tonight (yay!)
One question - when using loose ball bottom brackets and headsets,
should I reinstall the caged ball bearings, or simply replace with
(more) loose ball bearings? ISTR someone recommending that the latter
be done, that the cages were simply for ease of initial assembly, but
ISTR also that someone had said that the cages kept the balls from
rubbing against each other so they would stay perfectly spherical
longer. Opinions? I do have an assortment of ball bearings so using
the loose balls doesn't hold me up at all.
thanks
nate
Keiron
> Hi again,
>
> I'm at the point in my build where I'm just waiting for the Frame Saver
> to set up and hopefully will begin final assembly tonight (yay!)
I hope pictures follow!
> One question - when using loose ball bottom brackets and headsets,
> should I reinstall the caged ball bearings, or simply replace with
> (more) loose ball bearings? ISTR someone recommending that the latter
> be done, that the cages were simply for ease of initial assembly, but
> ISTR also that someone had said that the cages kept the balls from
> rubbing against each other so they would stay perfectly spherical
> longer.
I read that thread too (no, I don't read all of them!): wouldn't the cage
and or the bearing races have some 'erosional' effect on the balls
anyway? And in either case wouldn't it be slight?? I'd have thought that
most people would have changed the bearings on a whim before there was
any great effect from the balls breaking down. I've never changed the
bearings in one of my bikes, still turns nice and smooth. Over the 20
years the bearings will last I think there will be value for money on
either case. However, logic suggests to me that load over more rather
than fewer bearings is better, so loose?
landotter
Do which ever in practice is the least pain in the ass. Like you might
find using the cage on the bottom frame cup to be a pIA saver, but the
upper balls, not so much. BB bearings are usually nice and big, and
will behave if you use plenty of grease.
andre...@aol.com
I'm with Otter. Use whatever is easier, which usually is caged
bearings. Easier to maintain and replace and you always know if you
are missing bearings. If you use loose bearings, get a magnet to
collect them.
raamman
>
> - Show quoted text -
ages ago, BC ( Before Cartridge bearings...) I had to open up my BB
because of crunching noises and rough turning, I discovered the
retainer had broken apart and the pieces had made a mess of things; it
simplified things and increased reliability doing away with the
retainers
someone
However, logic suggests to me that load over more rather
> than fewer bearings is better, so loose?
Falacy. The retainer spaces the balls evenly and accurately
preventing high loads on the two lowest balls. The retainer permits a
localised reservoir of grease, essential when using such a viscous
medium. The retainer prevents ball to ball contact, which gives an
extended service life.
andre...@aol.com
wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:08:08 -0700 (PDT), "andresm...@aol.com"
Sorry, I wasn't paying attention
Keiron
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 12:51:54 -0700 (PDT), someone
> <thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Falacy. The retainer spaces the balls evenly and accurately preventing
>>high loads on the two lowest balls. The retainer permits a localised
>>reservoir of grease, essential when using such a viscous medium. The
>>retainer prevents ball to ball contact, which gives an extended service
>>life.
>
> I thought we already doused your fallacies on this subject?
I'm marginally convinced. What's the other side of the story?
someone
That would be ignorance. Better a happy fool, eh?
someone
wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:10:23 GMT, Keiron
> not in any significant way. They are not packed so tight that there
> is aggressive ball to ball interaction. The balls are loaded between
> axle and race or between race and race with a headset. Any ball to
> ball contact is unloaded.
>
Ignorance. Take a cap of a coffee'biscuit tin or similar, put
pennies around the circumference and use your finger to represent the
axle/spindle. Apply the load. A gap is formed in the direction of
the load and the two balls either side have a greater load placed
through them between axle and housing due to their displacement. To
get past the gap, they must speed up relative to the other balls. In
reality the other balls at their lower loading are being worn due to
the skidding of the bearing tracks past them. So more wear and more
fatigue.
> There's no support for the "two lowest balls" having more wear than
> the others and even if there was, the bearings rotate and the "two
> lowest" is a temporary condition.
The bearing cups are stationary and it is their bearing surface which
fails at the bottom of the cup when loose balls are used with grease
exclusively. The extra loading caused by not using a retainer will
also crack some balls. This is the usual reason for disassembly and
inspection of the bearing track of the cups and spindle will also show
some fatigue. Choose a superior lubricant than the original and then
you may get away with not using retainers.
>
> I'd rather have the additional bearing or two taking load. In a hub or
> BB, that's about a 10% increase in bearing surface.
Simple.
someone
wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:20:47 -0700 (PDT), someone
>
> <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Ignorance. Take a cap of a coffee'biscuit tin or similar, put
> >pennies around the circumference and use your finger to represent the
> >axle/spindle. Apply the load. A gap is formed in the direction of
> >the load and the two balls either side have a greater load placed
> >through them between axle and housing due to their displacement. To
> >get past the gap, they must speed up relative to the other balls. In
> >reality the other balls at their lower loading are being worn due to
> >the skidding of the bearing tracks past them. So more wear and more
> >fatigue.
>
> wear.
Wear is not equal. Wear is predominantly at the bottom of the cups,
it is exagerated by faulty cycling technique. Bearing wear and
fatique is an important consideration and specification of size and
lubricant to give a good life was established many moons ago. If it
were irrelevant then 1/8" balls could be used in all bearings.
Variation of application shows load and speed differences which demand
variation of bearing and lubrication.
>
> >> There's no support for the "two lowest balls" having more wear than
> >> the others and even if there was, the bearings rotate and the "two
> >> lowest" is a temporary condition.
>
> >The bearing cups are stationary and it is their bearing surface which
> >fails at the bottom of the cup when loose balls are used with grease
> >exclusively. The extra loading caused by not using a retainer will
> >also crack some balls. This is the usual reason for disassembly and
> >inspection of the bearing track of the cups and spindle will also show
> >some fatigue. Choose a superior lubricant than the original and then
> >you may get away with not using retainers.
>
> Extra loading caused by not using retainers? Nonsense. The retainers
> have nothing to do with load on the bearings.
You are being obtuse. Use of the can lid and some pennies shows your
error.
jay
What is a 'superior lubricant' and how does one identify it.
Advertising claims? By how much it costs. Hmm, this one is 5X as
expensive, therefore it's 5X better.
There really should be a "Consumers Report" type testing of all
manufactured commodity products. The public has every right to know
what they are spending their $ on. It's not right for business to
lobby & get the government to allow them to sell shit disguised as
gold.
Keiron
I was in the process of deciding. You know, examining the possibilities
and then making my mind up?
Cock!
Jobst Brandt
>>>>> Fallacy. The retainer spaces the balls evenly and accurately
>>>>> preventing high loads on the two lowest balls. The retainer
>>>>> permits a localised reservoir of grease, essential when using
>>>>> such a viscous medium. The retainer prevents ball to ball
>>>>> contact, which gives an extended service life.
>>>> I thought we already doused your fallacies on this subject?
>>> I'm marginally convinced. What's the other side of the story?
>> That would be ignorance. Better a happy fool, eh?
> I was in the process of deciding. You know, examining the
> possibilities and then making my mind up?
...or deciding. What is missed in this kind of semi-technical
discussion is that bearing balls do not make metal-to-metal contact
with the races as they might in lubricant free assemblies. Oil in
greases remains firmly in place between bearing balls and races with
the exception of fretting motions (small oscillating ball movement
without rotation of either bearing race).
Before offering wear and load mechanisms for such bearings, I suggest
reading Tedric Harris of SKF Bearings tome on the subject, the most
exhaustive analysis of how, for instance ball bearings, slide and roll
in their races. It is definitely not the way it is commonly cited in
these newsgroups. Unfortunately tribology is a poorly understood
science.
Jobst Brandt
jim beam
>>>>>> Fallacy. The retainer spaces the balls evenly and accurately
>>>>>> preventing high loads on the two lowest balls. The retainer
>>>>>> permits a localised reservoir of grease, essential when using
>>>>>> such a viscous medium. The retainer prevents ball to ball
>>>>>> contact, which gives an extended service life.
>
>>>>> I thought we already doused your fallacies on this subject?
>
>>>> I'm marginally convinced. What's the other side of the story?
>
>>> That would be ignorance. Better a happy fool, eh?
>
>> I was in the process of deciding. You know, examining the
>> possibilities and then making my mind up?
>
> ...or deciding. What is missed in this kind of semi-technical
> discussion is that bearing balls do not make metal-to-metal contact
> with the races as they might in lubricant free assemblies. Oil in
> greases remains firmly in place between bearing balls and races with
> the exception of fretting motions (small oscillating ball movement
> without rotation of either bearing race).
1. that utterly contradicts your bullshit "fretting" theory.
2. there is only separation at high rotation speeds. below that, there
is indeed metal-to-metal contact.
http://www.tribology-abc.com/abc/stribeck.htm
http://www.tribology-abc.com/calculators/e12_3.htm
>
> Before offering wear and load mechanisms for such bearings, I suggest
> reading Tedric Harris of SKF Bearings tome on the subject, the most
> exhaustive analysis of how, for instance ball bearings, slide and roll
> in their races. It is definitely not the way it is commonly cited in
> these newsgroups. Unfortunately tribology is a poorly understood
> science.
no shit - you show that every time you blather and drivel on the subject.
oh, and your 1954 edition of that book has since been updated jobst.
several times. but apparently you've never actually opened it.
someone
>
> What is a 'superior lubricant' and how does one identify it.
One which gives extended bearing life with minimal servicing.
Oil bath lubrication is a good choice for such a low speed high load
bearing. It appears that cartridge bearing assemblies may be suitable
for conversion because of their sleeve. Aterrnatively when using a
BSA type open bearing which will be considered as traditional by most,
I have found success with using a combination of commercial products.
The first is to assemble with a calcium based grease and then to add a
'cycle oil' until the grease becomes sloppy. This may be ridden until
the grease starts grabbing, easily found with the chain off the
rings. This is not a fault condition, it indicates that more oil is
needed. Simply top up a little depending on resistance.
The idea is to get a little bit of leakage over time so that the
lubricant is constantly exiting the bearing and keeping it clean and
refreshed. I guess that the grease may need replacing in twenty
years. As long as it keeps re-grabbing, there is enough there to hold
the necessary oil for lubrication.
> Advertising claims? By how much it costs. Hmm, this one is 5X as
> expensive, therefore it's 5X better.
Basically it's the correct viscocity for the bearing, this ideal
varies with temperature.
Keeping it in contact with the bearing elements at all operating
temperatures is the priority in lubricant selection. Low viscocity
grease tends to leak out of a traditional bearing unit when warmed up
in the sun hence my choice of using a stiffer grease of which I
slacken with additional oil. The viscocity changes with increasing
oil saturation. Calcium grease can do this due to the long chain
molecules, other greases I think would fall apart at saturation levels
which do not give the desired lifespan of the bearing I require
(forever, no more messing with damaged bearings).
someone
Hmmm. ?
someone
> >>>>> Fallacy. The retainer spaces the balls evenly and accurately
> >>>>> preventing high loads on the two lowest balls. The retainer
> >>>>> permits a localised reservoir of grease, essential when using
> >>>>> such a viscous medium. The retainer prevents ball to ball
> >>>>> contact, which gives an extended service life.
> >>>> I thought we already doused your fallacies on this subject?
> >>> I'm marginally convinced. What's the other side of the story?
> >> That would be ignorance. Better a happy fool, eh?
> > I was in the process of deciding. You know, examining the
> > possibilities and then making my mind up?
>
> ...or deciding. What is missed in this kind of semi-technical
> discussion is that bearing balls do not make metal-to-metal contact
> with the races as they might in lubricant free assemblies. Oil in
> greases remains firmly in place between bearing balls and races with
> the exception of fretting motions (small oscillating ball movement
> without rotation of either bearing race).
And there lies the problem, " remains firmly in place". Grease
reduces or even imobilises the oil, increasing the oils motility is
conducive to extended bearing life. A balance has to be found which
successfully wets and refreshes the bearing surfaces and yet does not
cause excessive loss of lubricant. Weather variances dictate that
with a BSA type open bearing, the viscosity of the lubricant must be
modified or swapped out. UK weather is sufficiently variable that it
is not possible to select the deal viscocity grease for six months in
advance. My choice of using additional oil as the bearing stiffens up
(filled with calcium grease) permits ongoing modification of the
grease/oil mix so as to maintain a viscosity which always lubricates
and cleanses the unit yet does not create excessive lubricant loss.
>
> Before offering wear and load mechanisms for such bearings, I suggest
> reading Tedric Harris of SKF Bearings tome on the subject, the most
> exhaustive analysis of how, for instance ball bearings, slide and roll
> in their races. It is definitely not the way it is commonly cited in
> these newsgroups. Unfortunately tribology is a poorly understood
> science.
The design has already be done, deal with the equipment. Oil it, and
keep it oiled, it will not fail if it is kept wet.
RonSonic
Any modern name brand* grease. Preferably marine if you don't intend to
replenish regularly.
>Advertising claims? By how much it costs. Hmm, this one is 5X as
>expensive, therefore it's 5X better.
>There really should be a "Consumers Report" type testing of all
>manufactured commodity products. The public has every right to know
>what they are spending their $ on. It's not right for business to
>lobby & get the government to allow them to sell shit disguised as
>gold.
No disguise and with grease there is very little shit out there.
Ron
*Not necessarilly a cycling brand, but a recognizable brand.
--
Oh damn. There's that annoying blog. Again. http://dumbbikeblog.blogspot.com
RonSonic
Oh, bullshit.
Stop using 19th Century lime grease, put something decent in there and retire
the damn oil can. Go buy a nice marine grease and be done. Yes, it costs a few
pennies more than that buggy axle stuff you're using, literally a few pennies,
and is worth all of them and more.
You can add all the oil you want, but the grease you are using contains, retains
and absorbs water. It may or may not have an anticorrosive component. 21st
Century products do.
Modern greases give up and recover their oil component very, very well. The
sludge you are creating is not an improvement.
British weather is extremely moderate from an engineering pov. It is never all
that cold or hot, not enough to make a damn bit of difference in the lubrication
requirements of bicycle parts.
I know you love fussing with this stuff and you're welcome to enjoy this hobby
as you please, but don't pretend that any of this is necessary. Pack the
bearings in any good modern grease, preferably marine grade and forget about
them for the next few years and thousands of miles.
Michael Press
<38427d07-1f30-4000...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
jay <jdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
Consumer Reports is not reliable.
I find, buy, and use an article
that works well, lasts, is a pleasure
to use, and has good features.
Then I see and read an article in
CR where they do not rate the brand
that I consider superior. That is one
way they are unreliable.
--
Michael Press
someone
Calcium soap is the basis for marine grade grease. It is used in
stern tubes. Packing it and forgetting it means it will become
contaminated in a bicycle bearing due to wear particles and external
environmental contamination, refreshing with a cycle oil (high amounts
of antioxidents) gives a throughput of oil which washes away dust etc
which force there way in through the spindle to cup gap. It's a 19th
century design (or is the BSA bearing 20thC?) which calls for 19th
century practise.
Marine grease is the only proprietry grease I would choose. Careful
study of the locally available offerings showed that the calcium
grease (Castrol CL NLGI 1) was the nearest to what I required for
crank bearings. Actually I could have got stern tube grease just as
easily although I was not thinking of replenishing the oil (so
slackening the mix) at the time and the viscocity available is(was)
too thick as it stands for wheel and crank grease on a bicycle in
freezing conditions.
The oiling frequency is not so great (generally as the weather gets
colder) once the mix has settled. It is much less a hassle to oil two
or three times a year than having to strip down a crank bracket every
three years to re-grease.
landotter
> No disguise and with grease there is very little shit out there.
>
> Ron
> *Not necessarilly a cycling brand, but a recognizable brand.
How about JIF, smooth?
Both my real geases seem to work equally well. Cheapo Coastal tub
grease and cheap Lubrimatic white lith for cleaner apps.
RonSonic
Yep, it's pretty simple. Actually I'd just go with the lith on anything on a
bike.
Besides, Coastal was one of the oil for food scam participants.
Yeah, I'm like that. I don't buy at Citgo either.
Jobst Brandt
>>> No disguise and with grease there is very little shit out there.
>>> *Not necessarily a cycling brand, but a recognizable brand.
>> How about JIF, smooth?
>> Both my real greases seem to work equally well. Cheap Coastal tub
>> grease and cheap Lubrimatic white lithium for cleaner apps.
> Yep, it's pretty simple. Actually I'd just go with the lithium on
> anything on a bike.
> Besides, Coastal was one of the oil for food scam participants.
> Yeah, I'm like that. I don't buy at Citgo either.
If I understand your "lithium grease" it is a white grease similar to
what Campagnolo used to ship on their ball bearings. That stuff was
noted for turning to tar in a couple of years and making gooey turning
axles, head bearings and non-clicking freewheels. All that to be
water resistant.
I stay away from that grease, whether it's from Campagnolo or DuPont:
3-in-one ain't any better:
http://www.3inone.com/products/white-lithium-grease/
Jobst Brandt
Nate Nagel
Anyone use Mobil 1 red chassis grease? That's my "go to" grease for
automotive stuff (simply because it's rated for use in both wheel
bearings and steering linkages, so I only have to have one grease gun)
and if I could get away with only stocking one grease I would. However
I didn't feel like experimenting, so pretty much everything rotating and
bicycular that I have is either nonfunctional or packed with Phil Wood
(that's what the LBS had, and it did say "waterproof." Actually it
smells quite similar to Mobil 1, with a little hint of gear oil mixed
in, not that my nose is an accurate analytical tool.) So I guess I'm
committed now, unless I want to flush and clean everything when it comes
time to repack...
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Boyle M. Owl
> I stay away from that grease, whether it's from Campagnolo or DuPont:
>
> 3-in-one ain't any better:
>
> http://www.3inone.com/products/white-lithium-grease/
Texaco Starplex red grease. Sticky - holds balls in place. Very water
resistant. Doesn't turn to putty.
Smells awful, but it's really good.
--
BMO
someone
wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 14:48:13 -0700 (PDT), someone
Unecessary repetitive disassembly risks damage through error.
Simplifying servicing to a few drops of oil when the grease thickens,
refreshes and cleanses the lubricant without risk. Servicing is
minimal in this manner, less than five minutes a year, without risk of
forgetting or error in practice. No washing, exposure to solvents and
no worry over bearing adjustment.
someone
wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:49:19 -0700 (PDT), someone
>
> <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Wear is not equal. Wear is predominantly at the bottom of the cups,
> >it is exagerated by faulty cycling technique. Bearing wear and
> >fatique is an important consideration and specification of size and
> >lubricant to give a good life was established many moons ago. If it
> >were irrelevant then 1/8" balls could be used in all bearings.
> >Variation of application shows load and speed differences which demand
> >variation of bearing and lubrication.
>
> Moments later, they are bearings at the top, the side, etc.
The cup part of the bearing does not rotate, the bottom constantly
bears at least the weight of the legs. For a bearing to function, one
part must always be considered fixed, here, as in fixed to a non-
rotating bicycle frame.
someone
> Ron Sonic wrote:
> >>> No disguise and with grease there is very little shit out there.
> >>> *Not necessarily a cycling brand, but a recognizable brand.
> >> How about JIF, smooth?
> >> Both my real greases seem to work equally well. Cheap Coastal tub
> >> grease and cheap Lubrimatic white lithium for cleaner apps.
> > Yep, it's pretty simple. Actually I'd just go with the lithium on
> > anything on a bike.
> > Besides, Coastal was one of the oil for food scam participants.
> > Yeah, I'm like that. I don't buy at Citgo either.
>
> If I understand your "lithium grease" it is a white grease similar to
> what Campagnolo used to ship on their ball bearings. That stuff was
> noted for turning to tar in a couple of years and making gooey turning
> axles, head bearings and non-clicking freewheels. All that to be
> water resistant.
The campag fitted grease in my 1988/9 equipment did not turn to tar,
neither did it protect the rear hub too well, it suffered with
corrosion of the cup on the freewheel side. If it had thickened as a
calcium grease does, I'd have paid attention to it sooner, although I
think that 18 months or thereabouts is too short a lifespan for a
grease lubricant in a rear hub bearing with or without 'turning to
tar'.
> I stay away from that grease, whether it's from Campagnolo or DuPont:
>
> 3-in-one ain't any better:
I've had no complaints with 3in1 cycle oil, although I dont know
whether it is still marketed. Another cycle oil brand that has been
good, has been Weldtite, the tyre patch gang. I'm running castor oil
in my freewheel to make an assessment to its suitability as a more
general cycle oil for when I run out of 'cycle oil'. First thoughts
are that it is great for freewheels but does give me a feeling that
there should be a better seal to retain the oil despite castor having
a higher viscosity than the cycle oil. I've been conditioned to using
mineral oil for so long, it's hard to be confident about using a
vegetable oil without documentary evidence to show that a specific oil
or blend has previously been used with success. Sapim market their
race oil which is vegetable based at least (which is the base, I dont
know).
someone
It seems that any grease which is loaded with mineral oil requires
stinky additions to be reliable in cycle bearings. The smell of the
better usual mineral greases was contributary to me seeking
alternatives, hence my choice of calcium grease which is not so foul
because the base is stable and needs less additives to remain
servicable.
someone
wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:51:34 -0700 (PDT), someone
>
>
>
> <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
> >On 20 Sep, 17:12, Still Just Me! <noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com>
> >wrote:
> >> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:49:19 -0700 (PDT), someone
>
> >> <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> >Wear is not equal. Wear is predominantly at the bottom of the cups,
> >> >it is exagerated by faulty cycling technique. Bearing wear and
> >> >fatique is an important consideration and specification of size and
> >> >lubricant to give a good life was established many moons ago. If it
> >> >were irrelevant then 1/8" balls could be used in all bearings.
> >> >Variation of application shows load and speed differences which demand
> >> >variation of bearing and lubrication.
>
> >> But they rotate. The bearings at the bottom do not stay at the bottom.
> >> Moments later, they are bearings at the top, the side, etc.
>
> >The cup part of the bearing does not rotate, the bottom constantly
> >bears at least the weight of the legs. For a bearing to function, one
> >part must always be considered fixed, here, as in fixed to a non-
> >rotating bicycle frame.
>
> retainer (or lack) will have no effect on the process. The bearings
> would still rotate and wear evenly.
The cups do not rotate, they wear at the bottom. This is wear in a
non-round fashion. If you cant get your head around this dont fuzz it
up with the following. Using ball retainers lessens the radial ball
loading at the bottom of the cup. When correct lubrication is
maintained, crank bearings should last (almost) indefinitely. Their
sizing (BSA type) allows for contamination and the increased fatigue
and wear this brings to the bearing element surfaces.
RonSonic
<noEmai...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:36:23 -0400, RonSonic
><rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>Yep, it's pretty simple. Actually I'd just go with the lith on anything on a
>>bike.
>>
>>Besides, Coastal was one of the oil for food scam participants.
>
>Stay away from Chevron too, along with a few others.
They weren't in the oil for palaces scam.
>>Yeah, I'm like that. I don't buy at Citgo either.
>
>Why? Because Bush turned him into a boogey man to throw darts at?
Right, because everybody in the world is sweet and wonderful, except for that
damn Bush. They'd all be right as rain if it weren't for him.
>Yeah, he did nationalize the oil industry in his country. That pissed
>off oil people like Bush. Hey, WTF, odd politics, armed revolts,
>massive payoff requirements, armed revolts, - those are the risks you
>take when doing business in a third world country (or NJ or RI).
>
>But, he was also democratically elected, so he's a step beyond a lot
>of other rulers - and he's way ahead of most of the Arab countries we
>buy from in terms of human rights.
Three words, President for Life.
One man, one vote, one time is not democracy.
Ron
Chalo
>
> But, he [Hugo Chavez] was also democratically elected, so he's a step beyond a lot
> of other rulers - and he's way ahead of most of the Arab countries we
> buy from in terms of human rights.
Worst of all, he was elected by common people, instead of by corporate
oligarchs like a proper United States president. Jeebus never
intended poor people to be able to choose their national leaders
without intensive coaching by rich people; that's why we have to
oppose the popular choice in unusually democratic cases such as the
Venezuelan presidency.
Chalo
someone
wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:28:02 -0700 (PDT), someone
> will be distributed EQUALLY to all the bearings.
>
> Unless you have some strange design that clamps the retainer in place,
> your suggestions concerning uneven bearing wear have no substance at
> all. (Beyond that, your suggestions of the cups wearing more on the
> bottom are also incorrect, we can move on to that next).
That is the crux of it, the cup(part of the bearing) fails at the
bottom and then only by running a failed bearing does the rot spread.
You seem to be unable to accept that the cup is a bearing element.
Wear is not equal, the cup always fails first, at the bottom due to
the higher loading there. The cup contains a bearing track, it is a
bearing, it is part of a bearing unit, balls are balls, not
'bearings'. The term "ball bearings" is a colloquialism for bearing
ball's. I prefer not to ask for bearing balls. Glass hammer, long
weight etc.
Ben C
> On 20 Sep, 23:26, Jobst Brandt <jbra...@sonic.net> wrote:
>> Ron Sonic wrote:
>> >>> No disguise and with grease there is very little shit out there.
>> >>> *Not necessarily a cycling brand, but a recognizable brand.
>> >> How about JIF, smooth?
>> >> Both my real greases seem to work equally well. �Cheap Coastal tub
>> >> grease and cheap Lubrimatic white lithium for cleaner apps.
>> > Yep, it's pretty simple. Actually I'd just go with the lithium on
>> > anything on a bike.
>> > Besides, Coastal was one of the oil for food scam participants.
>> > Yeah, I'm like that. I don't buy at Citgo either.
>>
>> If I understand your "lithium grease" it is a white grease similar to
>> what Campagnolo used to ship on their ball bearings. �That stuff was
>> noted for turning to tar in a couple of years and making gooey turning
>> axles, head bearings and non-clicking freewheels. �All that to be
>> water resistant.
>
> The campag fitted grease in my 1988/9 equipment did not turn to tar,
Nor mine. After 14000km and about 5 or 6 years the stuff in the rear hub
looked like new. It was that white stuff. This was a rougly 1999 vintage
hub. Jobst's info may be a bit out-of-date.
[...]
>> I stay away from that grease, whether it's from Campagnolo or DuPont:
>>
>> 3-in-one ain't any better:
>
> I've had no complaints with 3in1 cycle oil, although I dont know
> whether it is still marketed.
I saw loads of it in Halfords the other day.
[...]
> I'm running castor oil in my freewheel to make an assessment to its
> suitability as a more general cycle oil for when I run out of 'cycle
> oil'.
Are you planning for when the world's oil runs out?
> First thoughts are that it is great for freewheels but does give me a
> feeling that there should be a better seal to retain the oil despite
> castor having a higher viscosity than the cycle oil.
If you want higher viscosity why not just use grease?
Ben C
I've not noticed that, but wouldn't they wear more at the top?
If the bearing is a tiny bit loose, that's surely where the weight of
the bike will be supported. If it's not loose, then it will be supported
all the way round (but you don't pre-load wheel bearings).
someone
The discussion is on crank (bottom bracket) bearings not wheel
bearings. Its the bottom section of cone which fails first on a wheel
bearing. Rotating the axle by 1/6 at regular intervals will do much
to alleviate this should lubrication not be ideal. Whether the
bearing is adjusted with or without preload makes no difference on the
wear position,
Ben C
>> On 2009-09-21, someone <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>> > The cups do not rotate, they wear at the bottom.
>>
>> I've not noticed that, but wouldn't they wear more at the top?
>>
>> If the bearing is a tiny bit loose, that's surely where the weight of
>> the bike will be supported. If it's not loose, then it will be supported
>> all the way round (but you don't pre-load wheel bearings).
>
> The discussion is on crank (bottom bracket) bearings not wheel
> bearings.
My mistake. Yes, those would wear more on the bottom.
> Its the bottom section of cone which fails first on a wheel
> bearing. Rotating the axle by 1/6 at regular intervals will do much
> to alleviate this should lubrication not be ideal.
Which would be easy to do with a wheel-- just take the wheel out and put
it back in. Not really feasible with a bottom bracket.
someone
> On 2009-09-21, someone <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Sep, 23:26, Jobst Brandt <jbra...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >> Ron Sonic wrote:
> >> >>> No disguise and with grease there is very little shit out there.
> >> >>> *Not necessarily a cycling brand, but a recognizable brand.
> >> >> How about JIF, smooth?
> >> >> Both my real greases seem to work equally well. Cheap Coastal tub
> >> >> grease and cheap Lubrimatic white lithium for cleaner apps.
> >> > Yep, it's pretty simple. Actually I'd just go with the lithium on
> >> > anything on a bike.
> >> > Besides, Coastal was one of the oil for food scam participants.
> >> > Yeah, I'm like that. I don't buy at Citgo either.
>
> >> If I understand your "lithium grease" it is a white grease similar to
> >> what Campagnolo used to ship on their ball bearings. That stuff was
> >> noted for turning to tar in a couple of years and making gooey turning
> >> axles, head bearings and non-clicking freewheels. All that to be
> >> water resistant.
>
> > The campag fitted grease in my 1988/9 equipment did not turn to tar,
>
> Nor mine. After 14000km and about 5 or 6 years the stuff in the rear hub
> looked like new. It was that white stuff. This was a rougly 1999 vintage
> hub. Jobst's info may be a bit out-of-date.
Seems that the 'white stuff' varied in its powers when it was the non-
thickening kind, which I believe to be its detriment.
>
> [...]
>
> >> I stay away from that grease, whether it's from Campagnolo or DuPont:
>
> >> 3-in-one ain't any better:
>
> > I've had no complaints with 3in1 cycle oil, although I dont know
> > whether it is still marketed.
>
> I saw loads of it in Halfords the other day.
Specifically "Cycle Oil" or even "Lawnmower Oil"?
> > I'm running castor oil in my freewheel to make an assessment to its
> > suitability as a more general cycle oil for when I run out of 'cycle
> > oil'.
>
> Are you planning for when the world's oil runs out?
Castor oil may indeed be a superior lubricant. it was probably
abandoned from bicycle production due to a cheaper mineral source.
Bike shops being sponsored by the manufacturers would be heavily
influenced in what products are stocked including lubrication medium.
The manufacturers would likely recommend or supply whatever they use
in their factory. I know that vegetable oils were used with success
by some shops, but was so young I did not realise the significance of
knowing precisely which oils in what ratios were used would haunt me
later. I think cod oil was part of the mix, but cannot estimate a
level of certainty to that statement beyond 20%. I'm over 95% certain
that castor oil was used in some proportion. I don't believe it was
necessarily high.
>
> > First thoughts are that it is great for freewheels but does give me a
> > feeling that there should be a better seal to retain the oil despite
> > castor having a higher viscosity than the cycle oil.
>
> If you want higher viscosity why not just use grease?
To apply grease to a freewheel requires dissasembly, or build up
around the latching mechanism may cause it to fail, if pumped in from
the end. Grease unless carefully specified for the bearing in
question with its loadings, speed and temperature in mind can easily
be out of range, viscosity wise in a cycle bearing. The problems are
basically high loads and low speeds. Trying to effect what is
essentially a pumped system on a mini scale is the only way a greased
bearing stands any chance of good longevity over the range of
operating temperatures to which I have previously placed my bicycles.
Sealed bearings with their contained grease help but are limited by
their small reservoir of lubricant.
someone
> On 2009-09-21, someone <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Its the bottom section of cone which fails first on a wheel
> > bearing. Rotating the axle by 1/6 at regular intervals will do much
> > to alleviate this should lubrication not be ideal.
>
> Which would be easy to do with a wheel-- just take the wheel out and put
> it back in.
Er, no. Release the nuts, or fancy gizmo for when your're high on an
alpine mountain and the cold is freezing your monkeys. Twist the axle
and clamp down your nuts, or whatever expression you prefer.
>Not really feasible with a bottom bracket.
It could be, if the design allowed. the BSA design was adopted
because it was simple and cheap to manufacture and install into a bike
frame. The procedure for fitting is quick compared to the previous
offerings. Using a cartridge bearing assembly for the bottom bracket
(today), negates the hand finishing process of facing the bracket,
previously required with BSA type bearings for a good bearing life.
AMuzi
>> But, he [Hugo Chavez] was also democratically elected, so he's a step beyond a lot
>> of other rulers - and he's way ahead of most of the Arab countries we
>> buy from in terms of human rights.
Chalo wrote:
> Worst of all, he was elected by common people, instead of by corporate
> oligarchs like a proper United States president. Jeebus never
> intended poor people to be able to choose their national leaders
> without intensive coaching by rich people; that's why we have to
> oppose the popular choice in unusually democratic cases such as the
> Venezuelan presidency.
Yup, President For Life.
"One Man, One Vote, One Time"
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Ben C
>> On 2009-09-21, someone <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>> > I've had no complaints with 3in1 cycle oil, although I dont know
>> > whether it is still marketed.
>>
>> I saw loads of it in Halfords the other day.
>
> Specifically "Cycle Oil" or even "Lawnmower Oil"?
Oh, no I think was probably just normal 3-in-1 in the traditional tin
can with a rubber proboscis. Didn't know there was a special cycle
variant.
>> > I'm running castor oil in my freewheel to make an assessment to its
>> > suitability as a more general cycle oil for when I run out of 'cycle
>> > oil'.
>>
>> Are you planning for when the world's oil runs out?
>
> Castor oil may indeed be a superior lubricant. it was probably
> abandoned from bicycle production due to a cheaper mineral source.
> Bike shops being sponsored by the manufacturers would be heavily
> influenced in what products are stocked including lubrication medium.
> The manufacturers would likely recommend or supply whatever they use
> in their factory. I know that vegetable oils were used with success
> by some shops, but was so young I did not realise the significance of
> knowing precisely which oils in what ratios were used would haunt me
> later. I think cod oil was part of the mix, but cannot estimate a
> level of certainty to that statement beyond 20%. I'm over 95% certain
> that castor oil was used in some proportion. I don't believe it was
> necessarily high.
Apparently one of the hazards of servicing old watches is getting
botulism from the whale oil that's been sealed inside them for several
decades.
Be careful with those old hubs, people.
>> > First thoughts are that it is great for freewheels but does give me a
>> > feeling that there should be a better seal to retain the oil despite
>> > castor having a higher viscosity than the cycle oil.
>>
>> If you want higher viscosity why not just use grease?
>
> To apply grease to a freewheel requires dissasembly, or build up
> around the latching mechanism may cause it to fail, if pumped in from
> the end.
Also I'm sure I heard you don't want grease actually inside the
freewheel part because it makes the pawls stick.
> Grease unless carefully specified for the bearing in question with its
> loadings, speed and temperature in mind can easily be out of range,
> viscosity wise in a cycle bearing. The problems are basically high
> loads and low speeds. Trying to effect what is essentially a pumped
> system on a mini scale is the only way a greased bearing stands any
> chance of good longevity over the range of operating temperatures to
> which I have previously placed my bicycles. Sealed bearings with their
> contained grease help but are limited by their small reservoir of
> lubricant.
I think the problem's just contamination. If you can keep them properly
sealed they should last practically forever on the original grease--
after all car wheel bearings do these days.
Ben C
>> On 2009-09-21, someone <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> > Its the bottom section of cone which fails first on a wheel
>> > bearing. �Rotating the axle by 1/6 at regular intervals will do much
>> > to alleviate this should lubrication not be ideal.
>>
>> Which would be easy to do with a wheel-- just take the wheel out and put
>> it back in.
>
> Er, no. Release the nuts, or fancy gizmo for when your're high on an
> alpine mountain and the cold is freezing your monkeys. Twist the axle
> and clamp down your nuts, or whatever expression you prefer.
That's what I meant, assuming you're talking about the wheel nuts or the
QR. No need to touch the adjustable cups to change the orientation.
Bill Sornson
>> Still Just Me! wrote:
>>> But, he [Hugo Chavez] was also democratically elected, so he's a
>>> step beyond a lot of other rulers - and he's way ahead of most of
>>> the Arab countries we buy from in terms of human rights.
> Chalo wrote:
>> Worst of all, he was elected by common people, instead of by
>> corporate oligarchs like a proper United States president. Jeebus
>> never intended poor people to be able to choose their national
>> leaders without intensive coaching by rich people; that's why we
>> have to oppose the popular choice in unusually democratic cases such
>> as the Venezuelan presidency.
> Yup, President For Life.
> "One Man, One Vote, One Time"
Hey, he hasn't /completely/ shut down the one remaining TV channel that
voices opposition to his policies. (Yet.) He merely has tried smoking the
workers there out of the building as a friendly warning to keep it low key.
Helluva guy.
BS
P. Chisholm
Faux news, righto. Beck has all the answers. He's more looney than
Pelosi.
Yep, he's gonna censor Faux news, right after setting up the death
panels to pull the plug on Granny.
Gonna be a long 7 years for ya Bill, about as long as the BS that was
spewed by the tremendous Cheny/Rummy/Wolfy team(I ignore Bush since he
was AWOL for most of his term.
I only hope Palin runs. It will be grand entertainment.
Bill Sornson
>>> Yup, President For Life.
>>> "One Man, One Vote, One Time"
>> Hey, he hasn't /completely/ shut down the one remaining TV channel
>> that voices opposition to his policies. (Yet.) He merely has tried
>> smoking the workers there out of the building as a friendly warning
>> to keep it low key.
>> Helluva guy.
>> BS
> Faux news, righto. Beck has all the answers. He's more looney than
> Pelosi.
What does that have to do with Hugo Chavez?
> Yep, he's gonna censor Faux news, right after setting up the death
> panels to pull the plug on Granny.
What does that have to do with Hugo Chavez?
> Gonna be a long 7 years for ya Bill, about as long as the BS that was
> spewed by the tremendous Cheny/Rummy/Wolfy team(I ignore Bush since he
> was AWOL for most of his term.
What does that have to do with Hugo Chavez?
> I only hope Palin runs. It will be grand entertainment.
What does that have to do with Hugo Chavez?
Bill "what does ANY of that have to do with Hugo Chavez?" S.
someone
wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 01:27:37 -0700 (PDT), someone
> using a retainer will change BALL bearing wear in some way (If you
> have not suggested that, please correct me).
>
YAWN!
> As I said, I will accept your hypothesis that the cups wears at the
> bottom first if you like, if only to get us to the crux of this issue.
>
> Now, please explain how having a bearing retainer affects the wear on
> the BALL bearings in any way. Retainers do not normally mount to the
> cups or races and are free to rotate. The wear on the bearings will be
> equal - the "two at the bottom" don't remain there.
someone
> Oh, no I think was probably just normal 3-in-1 in the traditional tin
> can with a rubber proboscis. Didn't know there was a special cycle
> variant.
Was available originally in a green can, later in a yellow can. Not
seen any in five years. Weldtite worked well before I got the yellow
can 3in1. I guess any of the older large brand cycle trade who offer
"cycle oil" will be good. Basically, thick, non-clogging, and high in
antioxidents.
> Apparently one of the hazards of servicing old watches is getting
> botulism from the whale oil that's been sealed inside them for several
> decades.
I thought they always used almond for watch oil. First I've heard
using, spermacetti oil?
> > To apply grease to a freewheel requires dissasembly, or build up
> > around the latching mechanism may cause it to fail, if pumped in from
> > the end.
>
> Also I'm sure I heard you don't want grease actually inside the
> freewheel part because it makes the pawls stick.
different words, same meaning.
>
> > Grease unless carefully specified for the bearing in question with its
> > loadings, speed and temperature in mind can easily be out of range,
> > viscosity wise in a cycle bearing. The problems are basically high
> > loads and low speeds. Trying to effect what is essentially a pumped
> > system on a mini scale is the only way a greased bearing stands any
> > chance of good longevity over the range of operating temperatures to
> > which I have previously placed my bicycles. Sealed bearings with their
> > contained grease help but are limited by their small reservoir of
> > lubricant.
>
> I think the problem's just contamination. If you can keep them properly
> sealed they should last practically forever on the original grease--
> after all car wheel bearings do these days.
It would be nice to be able to buy a frame with fitted for life crank
wheel and steering bearings. It would simplfy the wheel structure, it
having frame secured bearings.
Nate Nagel
> It would be nice to be able to buy a frame with fitted for life crank
> wheel and steering bearings. It would simplfy the wheel structure, it
> having frame secured bearings.
fitted for life... of what?
One truism, I've discovered - if you keep something long enough, it will
eventually fail.
nate
(there are some items that fail after such a long time as to be
essentially "everlasting" e.g. an 80's era Volkswagen 4-cylinder
engine... I've always sold mine on before any engine issues, to my
regret now that I can't find 'em anymore, at least not for a couple
hundred bucks... I don't think bicycle bearings are in that category
however...)
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Nate Nagel
well, really, the question originally posed (although I probably didn't
clarify) is which would reduce wear *overall* not just on the balls.
Actually to be specific, I'm more worried about cup and axle wear,
because those are the hard to find bits - I can always get more bearing
balls; I don't see those going out of production any time soon.
nate
someone
> someone wrote:
> > It would be nice to be able to buy a frame with fitted for life crank
> > wheel and steering bearings. It would simplfy the wheel structure, it
> > having frame secured bearings.
>
> fitted for life... of what?
The frame. If the frame is still servicable and otherwise generally
cared for, the manufacturer (fitter) remains responsible for the
bearings. It may encourage gross overloading of the bicycle but would
sway buyers looking for a long term solution despite higher costs at
purchase or 'servicing'. probably an ideal solution for the city
street hire bike.
someone
You can do nothing economical about rotating the cups. You can put in
proper bearing shop balls, you know, good grade, not liable to
cracking, perfectly spherical and all the same dimension, from one
sealed pack. Clean out everything with kerosene. Put the new balls
in the cages with calcium grease, put them in the cups and fill up
with grease. Drill oiling hole in BB shell if there is not already
some access. Use a hole size you can plug up with a toothpick or
similar disposable plug. Clean out shell completely, attention to
clear threads, no grease here. Use light oil on threads of shell and
cups, install fixed cup with proper tool, tightly using all your
weight on 14" tool. Install BB sleeve and axle. Install adjustable
cup again with light oil. Dont worry too much about adjustment yet,
just get it finger tight and nip up the lockring. Twist the axle in
your fingers and note the resistance, if it feels a little stiff, you
can add oil throught he BB shell now. Use a syringe and needle to
poke through the BB liner and oil one side with about 2ml oil, spin
the axle until the resistance starts to reduce. Flip frame to other
side and do the other side of the bearing. Now with the spindle freed
up and spinning without any significant grease drag, tighten up the
adjustable cup until you feel an increase in resistance as you spin
the spindle. Lock it in this position and check for a slight
resistance but no lumpiness. Fit cranks and check for play when
rocking them, there should be none, tighten a little more if you find
any, carefully, not to tighten too much. Use a lock ring spanner
(edge pin spanner) to tighten does not need to be bike specific. If
your not bothered about scratching your frame, water pump pliers will
do here.
Use of a cycle specific oil for topping up the BB bearing when
resistance to rotation becomes obvious with the chain off. When you
spin the cranks, they'll stop in less than a dozen rotations rather
than a hundred plus. The calcium grease binds as it loses oil unlike
other greases so gives a feedback of when to relubricate. Simple
addition of oil from the middle of the bearing will help to ikeep a
positive flow of waste lubricant to the outside , so preventing the
ingress of dirt. I've been using this method over ten years and
although I was going to take a peek at how everything looked, the fact
that the grease will still bind means there is enough still there.
When I have oiled to excess, the seepage is clean. When the cranks
are turned with a stethescope on the BB shell, there is no scraping or
rumbling. I have decided it can stay as it is until the grease does
not rebind or another ten years pass and I'll reconsider. The BSA
type bearing will last if well lubricated, this was previously.
So its basically each month as the winter approaches, slip the chain
off and spin the cranks. 100+ and everthing is good, leave it alone.
Less than a dozen, add 2ml oil to each side working the oil in by
spinning the crank with the frame banked over, each side seperately.
If you fall in the middle, ie 12 to 100 then either leave alone,
making sure you check again within the month or add a proportional
amount of oil to each side. The tiny amounts may seem fiddly, but
it's to prevent the unecessary loss of grease, which will slacken and
be lost with the oil if you repeatedly flood the bearings. The
feedback method is particularly good in harsh environments where there
are gross temperature changes between the seasons. The exact amounts
may vary according to which particular grease you use (of calcium
soap) and how much of it you actually loaded. Larger amounts are
preferable (load the cup full or overfill) and will lead to extended
oiling intervals. Oiling from the centre ensures there is no dirt
ingress from the spindle ends. It's quite possible to load the whole
BB shell with grease but I doubt it would be an overall improvement
for the changes in viscosity due to temperature would have the grease
pouring out in the summer after correctly oil loading in the winter.
If you are to keep yourbike outside, this is the way to go, after a
couple of years the grease being held will stabilize and will stop
oozing in the summer.
Long explanation, very little time in execution. Two or three oilings
a year dependent on environment.
someone
wrote:
> better load distribution without a cage, but the key issue is dirt in
> the bearings. Get it in there, they wear fast. Keep it out, they don't
> really wear.
simpleton. there is more to bearing design and dimensioning than the
number and size of balls.
someone
wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:41:45 -0700 (PDT), someone
> bearing cage is going to reduce wear, despite being asked at least six
> times.
>
> I'll assume at this point that since you have moved to calling ma
> names, that you have no answer or support for your suggestion.
It does reduce wear because it loads the balls more evenly and I've
explained why in detail, yet you still prefer your simplistic
erroneous approach. I'm bored with it.
someone
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:36:44 -0700 (PDT), someone
> equally in the race whether in a cage or loose. Wear will not be
> reduced with a cage. In fact, it might be increased because there are
> typically 10% less bearings to support the load.
>
> If you'd like to contradict that with some engineering studies and
> make it more complex, have at it. Somehow I don't think you have any.
The issue is not that simple, the cages in a good bearing help
mitigate wear. Having the balls rolling at a constant speed is only
possible with a cage. No cage, means the balls are locked together
with little lubricant between them or spinning across the gap, this
disparity accelerates wear.
someone
wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:20:39 -0700 (PDT), someone
> "locked together". Second, even when they touch there's lubrication.
> Third, the load is at a level that is infinitesimal compared to the
> load they are under between the cone and race.
>
> Your suggestions are utter nonsense.
The balls can be locked together if the bearing is filled with them.
Then, taking one out leaves a large gap. This gap must be bridged as
the balls pass under the axle for each and every ball, this causes
early fatigue of the bearing tracks and promotes wear in a
contaminated environment. The fact that you get longer life than
leaving the bearing as is, is because by throwing away the cage, you
cannot leave grit on the cage to recontaminate the bearing. Proper
cleaning of a cage is essential for its use and re-use. Cack handed
numbskulls should continue to throw away the cage. Caged bearings are
for use by knowledgable and skilled mechanical engineering technicians
only.
You ASSume too much, you're foolish and you're ignorant. ;-]
pffff
Bill Sornson
> On 25 Sep, 04:50, Still Just Clueless! <noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com>
> wrote:
>> Your suggestions are utter nonsense.
> You ASSume too much, you're foolish and you're ignorant. ;-]
Nicest thing said to him/her/it today.
BS (only perhaps)
someone
wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 09:55:37 -0700 (PDT), someone
> seats of the pants hypothesis.
That the half hearted mechanic does not clean out ball retainers
completely. What sort of engineering covers your lazy arse?
AMuzi
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 09:55:37 -0700 (PDT), someone
>
>>> Your suggestions are utter nonsense.
>> The balls can be locked together if the bearing is filled with them.
>> Then, taking one out leaves a large gap. This gap must be bridged as
>> the balls pass under the axle for each and every ball, this causes
>> early fatigue of the bearing tracks and promotes wear in a
>> contaminated environment. The fact that you get longer life than
>> leaving the bearing as is, is because by throwing away the cage, you
>> cannot leave grit on the cage to recontaminate the bearing. Proper
>> cleaning of a cage is essential for its use and re-use. Cack handed
>> numbskulls should continue to throw away the cage. Caged bearings are
>> for use by knowledgable and skilled mechanical engineering technicians
>> only.
>>
>> You ASSume too much, you're foolish and you're ignorant. ;-]
>>
>> pffff
>
> seats of the pants hypothesis.
Why should today be different?
Frank Krygowski
> On 25 Sep, 04:50, Still Just Me! <noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> > Total nonsense. First there's space between the balls, they are not
> > "locked together". Second, even when they touch there's lubrication.
> > Third, the load is at a level that is infinitesimal compared to the
> > load they are under between the cone and race.
Correct.
> The balls can be locked together if the bearing is filled with them.
> Then, taking one out leaves a large gap.
Wrong. Bearing balls are never jammed into an assembly, so they won't
be locked together. There is always one gap, and the gap is always
less than the space required to fit in one more ball - because if
there were space for another ball, you'd put one in!
The size of the one gap in a bearing without a retainer is typically
about the size of _each_ gap in a bearing with retainers. But with
the retainer, you've got as many gaps as bearing balls.
"Someone" seems unaware that bearing capacities are very well
understood. Ball bearings are used in countless devices. The
bearings are commodities, they obey the same rules no matter who makes
them, which is why one manufacturer's offering can be replaced by a
practically identical one from a different manufacturer.
He also seems unaware that modern lubricants allow things like wheel
bearings in automobiles to last tens of millions of revolutions in
temperatures far more extreme and at speeds far higher than those seen
by bike parts. There's no need for custom-blended greases, whale oil,
or any of the rest. There's no need for alchemy.
- Frank Krygowski
Jobst Brandt
> Correct.
Frank, you are treading on religious territory, that area of science
that is in opposition to common bicyclist's belief. You could become
expelled from the Church as Galileo was or for that matter the way
Tesla was by Edison. Even Darwin could not avoid these strictures or
for that matter Albert Einstein who was denounced for not having done
the research to support his "Special relativity or (E=m*c**2)"
Science is a dangerous subject as we see in friction, Brinelling,
fretting, or lubrication.
Don't mess with the faithful, you atheist!
Jobst Brandt
Andre Jute
The word you want is not "atheist" but "heretic".
I recognize these cyclists. We have them in hi-fi too: they honestly
believe that they can hear a sonic difference between two pieces of
wire...
> Jobst Brandt
Seeing how it's Krygo, I say, "Show him the instruments." (1)
Andre Jute
Pity would be wasted on some
(1) Engineers and other poorly educated people commonly believe that
the Inquisition tortured people. Not so. The Dominicans would merely
"show him the instruments" and asked him to recant -- it was at this
stage that Galileo thought better of life among the stars. The next
stage was for the Inquisition to "relax" the alleged heretic to the
civil authorities, who would conduct the torture under the supervision
of the Dominicans, who oversaw these entertainments to ensure that on
one's religious rights were abrogated.
someone
The discussion is about 'cup and cone' cycle bearings, not sealed
cartridge bearings. The precision and finish of a standard cartridge
bearing and its protection against adverse environmental conditions is
what gives it generally superior longevity. If the seal is not
maintained, the bearing will fail quicker for the same level of
contamination. Some feel the drag of the seals to be too great on a
bicycle when used for racing. The traditional cup and cone bearing
units are still available and function better when using the
appropriate knowledge. Straight oil is the best lubricant for racing
purposes and equipment designed to use oil specifically will far
outlast the alternatives when the lubricant is replenished as required
to maintain bearing cleanliness.
The speeds and loads of a cycle bearing are extreme, check the tables
for bearing lubrication recommendations, cycle bearing are off the
scale, being highly loaded at extremely low speed. It's the low speed
which messes up normal greasing practice for ball bearings. Bicycles
are not motor cars. Bicycle bearing size has been established as a
compromise for the conditions in which it operates which are different
than a motor car, namely bicycles have a limited power source so their
efficiency must be of the highest order. They also rotate at a much
more sedate pace, in general. It surprises me that these differences
between bicycles and cars have not registered in your mind. Most
children above the age of five can tell you that cars are bigger and
faster than a bicycle. Give them another couple of years and they'll
tell you that cars are heavier. By the age of eleven, some may even
realise the benefit of making a bicycle lightweight, but will not
think this totally appropriate for a motor car. Most adults who have
put their mind to it would agree with the childrens considered
opinion. It's not a good idea to use car wheel bearings on a bicycle,
they are too heavy for the application.
If there is no need for alchemy, why a 'modern lubricant'? This is
where the alchemy is. I do suggest that bicyclists use cycle oil
because it should contain an excess of antioxidants. Much error can
be avoided by using a simple oil in adequate quantity. Replacement of
grease only after it has dried out or is obviously dirty means the
bearing has already suffered from uneeded damage.
Frank Krygowski
>
> The discussion is about 'cup and cone' cycle bearings, not sealed
> cartridge bearings.
The fundamentals of the physics are the same.
> The precision and finish of a standard cartridge
> bearing and its protection against adverse environmental conditions is
> what gives it generally superior longevity.
Agreed, but cup and cone give completely satisfactory service for the
vast majority of cyclists; and your talk has been all about retainers
and kitchen chemistry, not increasing precision or environmental
sealing. Your rituals are extremely unlikely to cause a significant
improvement.
> The speeds and loads of a cycle bearing are extreme, check the tables
> for bearing lubrication recommendations, cycle bearing are off the
> scale, being highly loaded at extremely low speed.
Is that why they never last more than a week?
> If there is no need for alchemy, why a 'modern lubricant'?
Maybe I should have been more specific. There is no need for kitchen
alchemy done by amateurs based only on their confident, but wild,
guesses. There are armies of industrial specialists with pertinent
technical educations, using laboratories full of chemicals and test
equipment, who base their entire professional careers on getting
lubrication right. They've been at this job for decades. You're not
likely to think of anything they haven't.
Not that all the above should stop you trying. Just don't post it as
fact unless you've got a) much more convincing logic, and/or b) proof
in the form of measured test data.
- Frank Krygowski
someone
Fact are; Cycle bearings are rough when new. Putting grease in them
keeps them quiet when a purchaser tests them as well as protecting
them while in storage. Oil lubricates a typical cycle bearing in a
superior manner than the grease put there for manufacturing, storage
and sales purposes. One time the grease on parts was just a
protective coating for storage and you could feel how rough the
bearings were before the shop cleaned and filled them. There is no
grease when used in a direct comparison with oil outperforms it,
because grease used on its own, must either have the bearings
disassembled on a regular basis for swapping the grease because of
contamination, by wear and ambient environment, and deterioration of
its performance. The onnly alternative to disassmbly is to flush with
paraffin oil and so you may as well just use a lubricating oil to
start with if your bearings are already suitably ported.
Using oil initially does not feel so good, but it will improve rather
than the gradual breakdown of a greased cycle bearing due to
manufacturing contamination and wear particles being trapped in the
initial grease. A cycle bearing is superior to a cartridge as long as
that cycle bearing is oiled to keep it clean. Once the tracks have
worn in and are smooth, new balls and fresh grease may be used if of
the correct consistency. Real world experience dictates my method not
guesswork. I've used various greases in cycle bearings, some better
than others, but those bearings which have been oiled from day one and
kept wet have not failed where all other bearings have failed when
used with grease exclusively.
Frank Krygowski
> Real world experience dictates my method not guesswork.
Show us the data. We can then pass it on to professional lubrication
and bearing engineers, who will be very thankful to you for
demonstrating that they've had it all wrong for many decades. Despite
their apparent success, that is.
- Frank Krygowski
someone
> On Sep 26, 8:05 pm, someone <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Real world experience dictates my method not guesswork.
>
> Show us the data.
I'll repeat it, because unfortunately you seem to have edited it out.
All bearings which have had some additional oil from day one and
continued with oil lubrication are in good to excellent condition.
All bearings which had been run on grease alone and had never seen any
additional oil all failed within three years. This was despite using
bicycle grease in a tube or a pot or automotive grease of various
types.
We can then pass it on to professional lubrication
> and bearing engineers, who will be very thankful to you for
> demonstrating that they've had it all wrong for many decades. Despite
> their apparent success, that is.
If they told you to oil the bearings, the manufacturers would have to
supply a higher grade bearing. It's better for them, they dont say.
It's better for the user to realise the bearing is rough and it needs
to wear in, but grease will lead to fatigue, quickly. Changing to oil
and replenishing before contamination is high will mean the bearing
will last.
Ben C
But how do we know they aren't all either blinded by religion or really
working for the marketing department?
Frank Krygowski
Trevor, the only piece of data in that post was: "three."
- Frank Krygowski
Frank Krygowski
:-) Ah! The conspiracy is revealed! Huge teams from marketing
departments are sneaking into everyone's garage every couple weeks.
Under cover of darkness, they secretly inject Trevor's concoctions
into all the cars' front wheel bearings!
- Frank Krygowski
someone
Presenting an attractive product following three months on the ocean
waves dictates that grease be used and be contained. No doubt there's
a town in India with all engineering skills together as was
Birmingham, which manufactures all the bicycle components and
assembles them with a handful of sloppy grease. But those same bikes
are oiled in use. High technology for the Victorian era, not really
bettered, just different values in the western world today.
Attempting to lubricate a bearing as well as anextra shot or two of
oil is a difficult task in the confines of a sealed cartridge bearing
to suit a bicycle. My argument is not just the longevity of the
bearing in general, but the servicing time which is spent to replace
it every X years or miles.
jim beam
as opposed to the religionists that want us take "stress relief" on
faith with no evidence?
as opposed the religionists that want us to accept "fretting" on
bearings, even though the religionist has failed to read their bible
properly and failed to do the hardness testing that proves them wrong?
as opposed the religionists that want us to accept the myth of
anodizing and rim cracking, even though the evidence contradicts?
as opposed the religionists that think increasing spoke tension
increases wheel strength, even though aluminum rims have tensile
strength as well as compressive?
as opposed the religionists that think they can eliminate metal fatigue
in materials that don't strain age?
as opposed the religionists that can't do the math for brake cable
elasticity?
[etc]
jobst brandt, thy name is "hypocritical bullshitter"