bearings chromium or carbon
Walt Shekrota
Thanks.
-Walt
Werehatrack
<wal...@penguinacity.org> may have said:
>Is there a difference? Can you use the wrong ones?
Chrome is less likely to corrode. Carbon is generally cheaper.
Functionally, they are indistinguishable in any cycling application.
I tend to buy the chrome balls because I ride in a wet climate.
--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
jim beam
what is the application and how much do you care about cost?
carbon are cheapo, inferior spherodicity, and don't last so long. they
are surface hardened with a soft core which can be good for shock
loading, but not much else.
chrome are through-hardened, much more spherical, long lasting and a
little more expensive.
there are also stainless options which last well in environments such as
cycling. they're pretty much the same as chrome in their mechanical
properties.
datakoll
good question! 1) use soft carbons and change often at 750 miles-
reducing wear on races?
or 2) use USA grade 25 chromium-replace yearly/2000 miles
looks like 2) is the winner. Not only will you NOT change at 750 miles
but bearings will becone less round at rates frequent servicing will
not supplant: Hubs will suffer
Jobst Brandt, author of THE BICYCLE WHEEL, points out: bearings are
self rounding as the hub/bearing/cone is similar to primitive bearing
manufacture methods used by Romans (the machine is reportedly extant
and photo'd-we saw it here) to make toy balls.
One would then believe carbon balls are better as carbon balls would
re-round more effectively than grade 25.
I don't know what to say about that except civilization moved forward
ion the idea fersure.
So if JB shows up here IGNORE HIM ON THIS SUBJECT and get the USA
Grade 25's
those bearings are terrific.
Harris Cyclery sells a package USA grade
also ' loosescrews ' for less chromium chinese bearings
Peter Cole
"Chrome steel" is a steel alloy with 1-2% chromium added for corrosion
resistance. True stainless steels have much more chromium (>12%) and are
much more corrosion resistant, but are much more expensive to make in
the hardness required for bicycle bearings.
Most bicycles use chrome steel balls, they're cheap enough, and have
enough corrosion resistance for most environments. For a bit of added
protection some people pack with marine grease. If you buy balls at a
bike shop you'll almost certainly get chrome steel. They're also
commonly available from broad-line industrial suppliers like
McMaster-Carr. A few bucks buys you a lifetime's supply.
Walt Shekrota
Hi Jobst!
Yes I had the loosescrews up which had created the question. They sell both.
Thanks for the tips!
-Walt
jim beam
> Walt Shekrota wrote:
>> Is there a difference? Can you use the wrong ones?
>> Thanks.
>> -Walt
>
> "Chrome steel" is a steel alloy with 1-2% chromium added for corrosion
> resistance.
in low concentrations like that, no it's not, it's added to harden the
material. it stabilizes a martensitic structure formed in heat treatment.
> True stainless steels have much more chromium (>12%) and are
> much more corrosion resistant, but are much more expensive to make in
> the hardness required for bicycle bearings.
it's not /that/ much more expensive. and it's easy to make hard.
stainless bearing steel, 440C, is produced in massive quantities.
and be careful when saying "true stainless steel". 440C has little
resemblance to your table cutlery.
>
> Most bicycles use chrome steel balls, they're cheap enough, and have
> enough corrosion resistance
again, "chrome steel" is not corrosion resistant, but it has much
improved physical properties over carbon steel. hence its use.
jim beam
it's also worth mentioning, there's little point just replacing the
bearing balls. when bike bearings deteriorate, the cone is part of that
equation. if any replacement is being contemplated, new cones should be
part of that consideration.
Bruce Gilbert
"jim beam" <spamv...@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:qPSdnYAmhc2tXGHa...@speakeasy.net...
Chrome-steel bearings or even stainless work so well and are so cheap, why
would anyone want to mess with less quality? Perhaps intellectual curiosity?
I really don't get it...
Bruce
datakoll
"much improved physical properties"
typical understatment
lotta complaining about the grade 25 price from the lawnmower people
but long term inspections of my hubs that is the same hubs concludes
25's "greatly extend" hub life.
Ben C
> Peter Cole wrote:
>> Walt Shekrota wrote:
>>> Is there a difference? Can you use the wrong ones?
>>> Thanks.
>>> -Walt
>>
>> "Chrome steel" is a steel alloy with 1-2% chromium added for corrosion
>> resistance.
>
> in low concentrations like that, no it's not, it's added to harden the
> material. it stabilizes a martensitic structure formed in heat treatment.
Is it the same sort of stuff as the "Chrome Vanadium" used for tools?
datakoll
excuse me for asking but why don't you guys search for 'chrome
vanadium' with google?
there are chrome vanadium bolts
jim beam
same principle, yes. not exactly the same composition though.
jim beam
two reasons:
1. cost. on a large production run, a few cents each time adds up.
2. longevity. there are two main elements in modern engineering,
getting something to work, then getting it to /not/ work. cheap
componentry doesn't last. and that's the way it's engineered to be. if
cheap stuff lasted, nobody would ever replace it.
Peter Cole
> Peter Cole wrote:
>> Walt Shekrota wrote:
>>> Is there a difference? Can you use the wrong ones?
>>> Thanks.
>>> -Walt
>>
>> "Chrome steel" is a steel alloy with 1-2% chromium added for corrosion
>> resistance.
>
> in low concentrations like that, no it's not, it's added to harden the
> material. it stabilizes a martensitic structure formed in heat treatment.
>
>
>> True stainless steels have much more chromium (>12%) and are much more
>> corrosion resistant, but are much more expensive to make in the
>> hardness required for bicycle bearings.
>
> it's not /that/ much more expensive. and it's easy to make hard.
> stainless bearing steel, 440C, is produced in massive quantities.
In the current McMaster Carr catalog, for 1/4", grade 25, E52100 chrome
steel bearings are $4.12/100, 440C stainless are $24.80/100.
On the other hand, Tool Supply (EBay) has them for $8 & $12 respectively.
E52100 are listed as C60-67, 440C as C58-65.
I always considered SS to be too much of a splurge for bikes, but at
EBay prices, I guess that's not necessarily true.
440c bearings are almost as strong as chrome (~90%), and almost as hard,
so if the price delta is only 50%, I guess I can't see any reason not to
use them preferentially. Although the only place I've had corrosion
problems is old-style bottom brackets.
> and be careful when saying "true stainless steel". 440C has little
> resemblance to your table cutlery.
I used that term because some people consider "chrome steel" to be an
old term for stainless.
>> Most bicycles use chrome steel balls, they're cheap enough, and have
>> enough corrosion resistance
>
> again, "chrome steel" is not corrosion resistant, but it has much
> improved physical properties over carbon steel. hence its use.
It is not corrosion resistant, but it is less prone to rusting than
straight carbon steel (about 2x from what I've read).
In the book "Bearing Steel Technology" By John M. Beswick, chrome steel
(through hardened) ball bearings were tested against case hardened
carbon steel (3312) balls when running in deliberately dented races. The
case hardened balls had 2-3x the lifetime (time to spall failure).
Not sure that has any significance except to indicate that case hardened
balls aren't completely bad, with a light load they might actually be
better.
* * Chas
"Werehatrack" <rau...@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote in message
news:o7hov3hv2nfa50p8f...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 23:23:36 -0400, Walt Shekrota
> <wal...@penguinacity.org> may have said:
>
> >Is there a difference? Can you use the wrong ones?
>
> Chrome is less likely to corrode. Carbon is generally cheaper.
> Functionally, they are indistinguishable in any cycling application.
> I tend to buy the chrome balls because I ride in a wet climate.
>
> --
NOPE!
The term "Chrome" has nothing to do with corrosion resistance when
referring to loose ball bearings used in bicycles.
"Chrome" ball bearings are made from AISI/SAE 52100 alloy steel that was
developed for use in hardened steel bearings. It contains ~1% Carbon and
1.3% to 1.6% Chrome.
AISI = American Iron and Steel Institute
SAE = Society of Automotive Engineers
http://www.steelmedia.com/chrome-steel-balls.htm#Material
"Carbon" ball bearings are made from lower quality "Carbon Steels" that
lacks the addition of Chrome or other alloying materials found in "Alloy
Steels".
Carbon Steel ball bearings can be made from any non alloy steel from
AISI/SAE 1015 to 1085. Ball bearings made from low carbon 1015-1018 steels
are case hardened which means that they are only hardened on the outside.
Higher carbon steel ball bearings made from 1060-1085 steel are through
hardened.
Fatigue resistance is the biggest difference between alloy and carbon
steels.
For the few pennies more it's not worth messing around with Carbon Steel
ball bearings.
Ball bearing Grades refer to measurements of roundness, diameter and
surface roughness. Grade 25 is a good quality for use in loose bearings in
bikes.
http://americandad.biz/gradechart.htm
Chas.
* * Chas
"Peter Cole" <peter...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:oj1Lj.3204$XC1.161@trndny08...
The 1.3% to 1.6% chrome in 52100 bearing steel has nothing to do with
corrosion resistance. Chrome is added to steel in small quantities to
increase strength and hardenability. The chrome mixes with carbon in the
steel to form chrome carbides.
It takes much higher levels of chrome for corrosion resistance. Stainless
steels or corrosion resistant steels contain at least 10% chrome plus
other alloys.
Chas.
* * Chas
The premise behind ball bearings is to reduce rotational friction. As
such, dented races defeat the purpose of a ball bearing which is designed
to run in a smooth track.
If these results are true then case hardened ball bearing would be a
better choice for use in a worn out headset.
Case hardening is commonly used in sliding applications such as the shafts
in a transmission rather than the continuos rotation of a bearing.
Headsets are thrust bearings with heavy axial loading with very little
radial or rotational forces. Almost every frame that I've worked on needed
to have the head tube and fork crown faced for proper headset alignment. I
think that poor headset fit is a major cause of premature race failure.
Chas.
* * Chas
"Ben C" <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote in message
news:slrnfvpij9....@bowser.marioworld...
* * Chas
"Ben C" <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote in message
news:slrnfvpij9....@bowser.marioworld...
Chrome bearing steel has the properties of high hardness for wear
resistance and high strength.
Chrome Vanadium steel is a different kind of alloy steel designed for
moderate hardness without brittleness as required in hand tools.
Chrome adds strength and hardenability to steel plus corrosion resistance
in amounts above 10%. Vanadium is one of the elements added to impart
toughness to steel.
Chrome Vanadium steels contain between .6% and .95% chrome plus .1% to
.15% vanadium by weight. It doesn't take a lot of alloy to impart
significant changes in alloy steels.
http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/carbonsteelalloys.htm
Chas.
Peter Cole
> "Peter Cole" <peter...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:oj1Lj.3204$XC1.161@trndny08...
>> Walt Shekrota wrote:
>>> Is there a difference? Can you use the wrong ones?
>>> Thanks.
>>> -Walt
>> "Chrome steel" is a steel alloy with 1-2% chromium added for corrosion
>> resistance. True stainless steels have much more chromium (>12%) and are
>> much more corrosion resistant, but are much more expensive to make in
>> the hardness required for bicycle bearings.
>>
>> Most bicycles use chrome steel balls, they're cheap enough, and have
>> enough corrosion resistance for most environments. For a bit of added
>> protection some people pack with marine grease. If you buy balls at a
>> bike shop you'll almost certainly get chrome steel. They're also
>> commonly available from broad-line industrial suppliers like
>> McMaster-Carr. A few bucks buys you a lifetime's supply.
>
> The 1.3% to 1.6% chrome in 52100 bearing steel has nothing to do with
> corrosion resistance. Chrome is added to steel in small quantities to
> increase strength and hardenability. The chrome mixes with carbon in the
> steel to form chrome carbides.
From the site you cited upthread:
" Chrome Steel Balls Vs Carbon Steel Balls
For better performance and life in most of the above applications chrome
steel balls instead of ordinary carbon steel ball (round / spherical)
are preferred. These steel balls have better ***corrosion resistance***,
hardenability and toughness. "
> It takes much higher levels of chrome for corrosion resistance. Stainless
> steels or corrosion resistant steels contain at least 10% chrome plus
> other alloys.
Corrosion resistance is a matter of degree.
Since carbon steel and chrome steel balls seem to be made to identical
hardness, I don't think that's an advantage. Toughness/fatigue/strength
sure, perhaps enough to mandate use in bikes, perhaps not.
Peter Cole
> "Peter Cole" <peter...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> In the book "Bearing Steel Technology" By John M. Beswick, chrome steel
>> (through hardened) ball bearings were tested against case hardened
>> carbon steel (3312) balls when running in deliberately dented races. The
>> case hardened balls had 2-3x the lifetime (time to spall failure).
>>
>> Not sure that has any significance except to indicate that case hardened
>> balls aren't completely bad, with a light load they might actually be
>> better.
>
> The premise behind ball bearings is to reduce rotational friction. As
> such, dented races defeat the purpose of a ball bearing which is designed
> to run in a smooth track.
The premise was to simulate the typical wear related damage seen in
bearing races. Such wear comes from race denting from both externally
introduced particles and/or the particles from wear itself.
> If these results are true then case hardened ball bearing would be a
> better choice for use in a worn out headset.
Only if ball fatigue (spalling) was a factor in bearing lifetime.
>
> Case hardening is commonly used in sliding applications such as the shafts
> in a transmission rather than the continuos rotation of a bearing.
>
> Headsets are thrust bearings with heavy axial loading with very little
> radial or rotational forces. Almost every frame that I've worked on needed
> to have the head tube and fork crown faced for proper headset alignment. I
> think that poor headset fit is a major cause of premature race failure.
These days cassettes and even chains have gotten more expensive than
headsets, while even cheap headsets seem to be of much better quality.
As a result, I don't give them much thought. I suppose it's only a
matter of time before all bike bearings become assemblies and all these
issues become irrelevant.
datakoll
in the beginnig, question was carbon or Harris at 400% markup.
looking backwards, question was: why is carbon listed as a cycle
bearing?
leaving the chrome vanadium ball bearing to the Brandt Speculation and
brittle stainless to the Great Un-lubed
then only grade 25 hi chromium is relevant given time/labor/
intelligence or low chrmium if multiple rebuilds are suspected over
long mileages.
right?
only reason I asked the same question was the listing's existance
enevelope pohlease:
the LBS is using carbon bearings
* * Chas
It was late. I should have qualified my statement. I was talking about old
style 1" headsets. Custom frame builders, primarily in the US did a lot to
improve frame preparation quality. I've not worked on any bike newer than
the mid 90s so I don't know how well later model bikes are prepared for
headsets.
I agree, assemblies can be made much cheaper and better than loose bearing
cup and cone setups.
Chas.
* * Chas
" ***corrosion resistance*** " Advertising hyperbole....
Chas.
Peter Cole
> "Peter Cole" <peter...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> For better performance and life in most of the above applications chrome
>> steel balls instead of ordinary carbon steel ball (round / spherical)
>> are preferred. These steel balls have better ***corrosion resistance***,
>> hardenability and toughness. "
> " ***corrosion resistance*** " Advertising hyperbole....
Not entirely, from what I've read. The improvement is modest compared to
stainless, but significant...
Werehatrack
Then why, pray tell, do carbon balls develop surface corrosion within
hours (sometimes minutes) when water gets into the bag, but chrome
ones remain pristine for a useful period? I've had bags of both get
rained upon at the same time, when someone left the bearing box
outside; I stopped buying carbon balls becase they always rusted
before I could get them completely dried off. With the loading that
is present in a bicycle bearing assembly, the hardness difference is
unimportant; these bearings will never see a significant fraction of
their limits. But the chrome balls survive where the carbon ones
fail, and the observed resistance to corrosion (in hubs and other
locations that are at best poorly sealed if at all) is the only factor
I can see which explains it.
datakoll
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:30:21 -0700, "* * Chas"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Werehatrack" <raul...@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
fileum then report back
Sam
> With the loading that
> is present in a bicycle bearing assembly, the hardness difference is
> unimportant; these bearings will never see a significant fraction of
> their limits. But the chrome balls survive where the carbon ones
> fail, and the observed resistance to corrosion (in hubs and other
> locations that are at best poorly sealed if at all) is the only factor
> I can see which explains it.
As the load is often being exerted on a single ball, they will regularly be working near their limits.
The "Chrome" in your bearings does give some corrosion resistance, but also gives significant improvements in toughness (not Hardness)i.e. they can distort and rebound under load without reaching the shear point.
If you're that troubled by rust, use grease designed for boat trailer bearings.