I saw this and I can't really understand why 28.99?!?! I think we were just living with 24, 24/22 and 30 for too long now!

 

I saw this and I can't really understand why 28.99?!?!

Because they want to sell you a bottom bracket, rather than having you use your existing 30mm RF/Hope bb.

Sorry SRAM, it's a NO from me.

 

Interesting concept. Hopefully it truly simplifies the crank/BB game.

Biggest takeaway from the video, prior to applying for a job at SRAM one should grow a mustache. Maybe even put a picture of you with said mustache in your resume or additional documents.

 

Biggest takeaway from the video, prior to applying for a job at SRAM one should grow a mustache. Maybe even put a picture of you with said mustache in your resume or additional documents.

Funny. I think that only applies to the SLO facility featured in the vid. I know several people who work for SRAM in Indianapolis, and they don't "style" their facial hair, if they have any at all.

 

Shimano has been using a 24mm spindle like forever. I guess if it ain't broke...why fix it?

 

I've been a fan of Shimano cranks for awhile. Things Shimano has long missed the boat on:

removable spiders for direct mount 1x rings. Much better for rings smaller than 30t, imo.
longer spindles for fatbikes
introducing funky/proprietary new bcd patterns every few years just to be annoying. to be fair, SRAM and other companies are also guilty of this.

I don't really care so much what spindle diameter my crank uses. With that said, I wouldn't want to use a 24mm spindle on a frame with a bb shell standard that would require me to use spacers/adapters to get it to work with a bb like with bb30/pf30. I just want to buy a crank and a bb and have them work together in my frame. I'm also not a fan of compromising on the bearings the way RF did with their bb that fits 30mm spindles into bb86/92 frames. I've found a bb from another company that is better than Race Face's, but still...the RF one still exists and still sucks.

It seems to me that both SRAM and Shimano have been losing out on the midrange and better OEM market for cranks, particularly to the RF Aeffect. I have to wonder if this is at least in part a move by SRAM to start grabbing some of that OEM market back.

 

I read that this morning. Interesting and I do like the concept of trying to simplify parts selection and interchangeability. I've been running "old school" screw in BB's on my bikes forever. I'm still running my Action-Tec Ti BB with old school square taper Race Face crankset (94/52mm). I like being able to build up my set up and adjust my chainline.

It's been getting harder and harder to find frames that allow this. I bought in to Race Face's Cinch setup because again, I can machine spacers and preload the bearings for what ever application I might have.

This new SRAM set up also allows bearing preload adjustment which I think is a great thing.

 

My judgment on this all hinges around the BB quality. If there's no real improvement there for value for performance, then this is lame.

 

SRAM is basically copying Cinch with a smaller spindle.

 

I believe you mean Hollowgram.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

This will essentially replace the 24/22 and 30 spindle options at least on the mountain bike side. There's no reason to 'upgrade' to this but it's way easier for SRAM and the frame manufacturers. It comes close to cutting the number for crank SKU's in half and will make life easier in the long run. If you buy a new bike later this year it could come with this and someday you will need to replace the BB bearings. Until then there's no reason to get upset at anybody.

 

It comes close to cutting the number for crank SKU's in half and will make life easier in the long run.

Is there a reason why this couldn't happen with the existing 30mm applications?

 

If they can't make it better...then make it different.:cornut:

 

Kill List

 

DUB does not look compatible with my Scorpion stand.

 

A definite consideration!! Scorpion stands ROCK!!

 

On the other hand, if their lock ring is better than the bullshit plastic raceface one with the tiny allen screw that's impossible to get to, and if you can impossible not to strip, they might be worthwhile...

 

I hate this. The BBs for the old stuff aren't going away anytime soon. And Sram will probably continue to manufacture 24 and 30.

To me, 24 is best. Give me the biggest bearing possible, I say. My XTR crank in a PF30 frame, with a Wheels threaded BB has been perfect. Insanely smooth, low drag. Even after a season of destroying it in the bike park, and dirty trail riding.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

I hate this. The BBs for the old stuff aren't going away anytime soon. And Sram will probably continue to manufacture 24 and 30.

To me, 24 is best. Give me the biggest bearing possible, I say. My XTR crank in a PF30 frame, with a Wheels threaded BB has been perfect. Insanely smooth, low drag. Even after a season of destroying it in the bike park, and dirty trail riding.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

To me, the strength-to-weight ratio of the 30mm axle is better and allows for a stiffer and lighter crank, it's just about having enough room for the bearings, which we did, until the stupid BB92 standard came along, which was essentially no-mans-land if you wanted to run a 30mm spindle crank, not enough room really for proper bearings and a shell. Even 24 isn't all that, as you know they moved the bearings outboard to make them big enough. And the 30mm could be stepped down anyway.

 

Are bearings with a 29mm ID even common?

Looks like they planned to have a shim between the bearing and spindle to prevent metal-to-metal contact like Shimano BBs, with an o-ring on the spindle side, but hard to tell if it made it to production BBs.

- Can see that the black part isn't a black oxide metal treatment, but the slim shim, with the stainless bearing ID showing under it.

Okay, so looks like they'll be using a bearing with a ID of at least 30mm. The shim could be 0.5mm. This shim is a big deal, as not having metal-to-metal contact means less risk of creaking. It also acts as a labyrinth seal that doesn't cause extra drag, allowing you to spray away with a hose with less risk, which will kill a bearing in short order. I question the durability of a 0.5mm shim though.

Looks like they know their market well, the weight weenies: XX1 is 490gg including PF92 BB, lighter than RF Next SL.

At least some coverage bothered to pass along the message that the bearings are less durable than GXP.

 

Are bearings with a 29mm ID even common?

That's also what I'm wondering.
Are bearing manufacturers going to start making a new bearing, just increase the id of the inner race, shim, or are they already common?

 

How can you tell it's not Scorpion compatible? There's an opening on the NDS side.

I'm also one that runs Shimano by choice. Not going to spend over 2.5x more to shave weight where it has hardly any effect.

 

It's a bummer. I doubt they are that much stiffer or better. If they stop making BBs for the older SRAM 24mm cranksets then they will be obsolete. I have XX and X0 carbon cranksets that may become expensive carbon paperweights in the near future.

 

Well, I'm still really happy on my "9spd", M760, 4 bolt crank from 2005, have swapped it from frame to frame and still going strong, have bought a couple more and one LX570, BBs are cheap, never felt any flex, but then again I don't weigh over 200lbs. Did pick up a newer M770, 180mm length crankset 1.5 years ago just to try what difference 5mm might make, still run all my bikes with a double, so no fuss on fitting middle ground chainrings or compromising gear range.

Basically, like the rest of the "geniuses", they can go fvck themselves and their proprietary products.

 

Well, I'm still really happy on my "9spd", M760, 4 bolt crank from 2005, have swapped it from frame to frame and still going strong, have bought a couple more and one LX570, BBs are cheap, never felt any flex, but then again I don't weigh over 200lbs. Did pick up a newer M770, 180mm length crankset 1.5 years ago just to try what difference 5mm might make, still run all my bikes with a double, so no fuss on fitting middle ground chainrings or compromising gear range.

Basically, like the rest of the "geniuses", they can go fvck themselves and their proprietary products.

At least they said they'll still make the GXP BBs for 3 more years, but yeah. Eff that noise. I'm still on 10spd with no plans to change and my next build is going back to 2x.

 

You guys get worked up over all kinds of ****.

I'm still getting parts for my 1985 Bridgestone, and you're worried about being forced into something new?

 

- More PF92 structural design, taking advantage of the extra width (Kona Honzo CR)

- S-Works Epic HT PF30 comparison

New coverage with words right from the maker: Deep dive into SRAM's new DUB system - Mtbr.com

"What makes the bearings more durable if they are smaller bearings vs. the bearing system they are replacing?"
"In all of our development, lab testing and field evaluation of the DUB BB we found that the durability of the bearings on a bicycle bottom bracket are much more influenced by the sealing and contamination of the system vs. the size of the balls. We found that smaller ball sizes can far surpass the durability of larger ball sizes if the smaller balls are sealed better from contamination. It is the contamination that almost always is the cause of poor durability in a bicycle bottom bracket. And that is exactly why we did not follow some of our competitors and just use a 30mm system that limits sealing in certain configurations. We needed the extra room for proper sealing to ensure our BB durability."

Having that extra space between the crank arm and BB, needing a preload adjuster and spacer(s), probably doesn't help.

 

Super educational thread!!
Pertinent to me as I'm pondering going into the nether world of PF92. Or just retreating to PF30 or ancient times BSA. LOL

 

Lots of skepticism it seems?!? I’m down for it...looks like a good all in one system to me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Me thinks I’m just gonna get an XT crankset and not worry about my cranks.

 

Me thinks I'm just gonna get an XT crankset and not worry about my cranks.

This x 1000. Shimano had had interchangable bbsfor years, and they make the best aluminum cranks in the business. Carbon fiber is wonderful stuff, but not convinced it's the best material to make cranks from.

 

To me, the 28.99mm spindle is just amusing. Its not 28 or 29, but 28.99mm. Haha. The .01mm can't be significant because it is so minute. The thickness of a piece of paper is gigantic (.1mm) compared to .01mm. I don't think they can get their tolerances within .1mm let alone .01mm.