Now worn out two LX hollowtech II chainsets. The first I think may have been my fault for not tightening the bolts evenly on the left crank arm but with the second one I have been very careful when tightening but its knackered as well now after about 18 months. ISIS bottom brackets didn't last very well when I had them so now considering square taper. Is the alloy in the LX HII softer than SLX or XT? What do folks think?
Bike Forum
[closed]
Anybody gone back to square taper chainsets, are Hollowtech II rubbish?
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
What was wrong with square taper anyway ?
Try getting a decent BB in square taper, other than a royce . . .
Like LCD TV's, progress . . . but not as good . . .
Fd
Posted 2 years ago # -
You said ISIS (Race Face, FSA) didn't last, but Shimano used Octalink, and the last XT one I had ran for over two years, before I sold it on the bike.
This one may be roadie, but you get the idea
Looking on CRC you may struggle to find cranks thoughPosted 2 years ago # -
Can't you still get the Shimano BB's? They were all right for what they cost.
Posted 2 years ago # -
2nder for Octalink .Bearings INSIDE out of the way works !
Posted 2 years ago # -
yep - Ive gone back to SqT.
Now use middleburn on a Phil Woods.
Also have an old XT739 SQT crankset on UN72 BB.
I have a few spare UN72s too to keep me going till I retire.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'd be very interested to discover exactly what caused your splines to die, Steven.
HT2 is certainly the future. It's a far stiffer than any square taper system and the many pairs of cranks I've had on various bikes have suffered nothing worse than worn our bearings.
Having said that, I bought a pair of Middleburn cranks a couple of years ago and they are lovely...
And you can indeed still get Shimano square taper BBs for not a lot of money and they still go the distance.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Sorry about that, I used to have a race face chainset before the hollowtech II and went thru a few bottom brackets with that. If I could afford one I'd get a Middleburn but that will have to wait.
Posted 2 years ago # -
As I said, I think I may have killed the first one when I hastily transferred it to a new frame and maybe didn't tighten the bolts on the arm evenly. But I'm only guessing, I thought I'd heard it was possible to ruin the splines this way. The last one has been fine for about 18 months but is goosed now. Been very careful when tightening the bolts on it.
Posted 2 years ago # -
That second one is a weird one.
Did you take it off/put it back on often?
Did you grease/anti-sieze or not the spline before putting the left crank arm on?
Did you use a torque wrench to do up the bolts "equally and evenly"? (Yeah, cos I do. Everytime. Honest...)
Posted 2 years ago # -
Didn't use a torque wrench, did grease them and would only have taken it off to change a chainring which was ages ago.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I ve never left square taper. Too many stories of isis and the like not lasting long....especially when you live 6 miles from the wettest place in England....
I run a Royce sq taper/Middleburn in both bikes. With the chain off the cranks will spin a dozen times with a firm tap on the crank arm.
Posted 2 years ago # -
the cranks will spin a dozen times
Oh cr@p I can't resist.... must resist... but... can't.... nooo......
I don't want to write this but I am compelled: why do people continue to think that the length of time that cranks/pedals/wheels/headsets/children's roundabouts spin for is somehow a measure of their quality?
For those that can't get away from the idea, here's a tip: if you thoroughly degrease your bearings and reinstall them, grease-free, they go round for MUCH longer when you spin them.
Posted 2 years ago # -
4 sets of Middleburns on square tapers here and not so much as a creak out of them. If you buy decent cranks, square tapers are unbeatable. Been on every bike ive had in the last 10 years including the frames i have snapped with no problems at all, downhilling and jumping included. Have a set for sale, 5 bolt though as they are prettier, if anyone wants a life free of crap bearings and constant BB changing.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Can't you still get the Shimano BB's? They were all right for what they cost.
Yeah, £12 on CRC for a decent one.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I never swapped over. I have Middleburn on my Superlight. FSA square taper on my SS commute and My Pinarello has square taper as well....
"If it's not broken, don't fix it"
Posted 2 years ago # -
mccett pics and aprice please to email in profile cheers
Posted 2 years ago # -
far stiffer than any square taper system
bearing in mind the flex in the frame would anybody really notice the added stiffness in the BB/cranks?
I'm a luddite. I'm still on Sq. taper and octalink.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"would anybody really notice the added stiffness in the BB/cranks"
it really was quite noticeable switching from Deore Sq taper to XT HT2 on the same frame.
Posted 2 years ago # -
When my external BB went lbefore last winter I put my old Octalink crankds back on, still going strong now; for the average rider external BBs offer no benefit IMO.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yea I gave up a couple of years back, use Middleburn / square taper and its been fit and forget. Would like to get hold of a UN72.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Still using a pre-cartridge Shimano sq taper BB on my SS. the bearings had gone eventually after 17 years, so I bought some more ball bearings for a couple of quid, and serviced the lot. Runs like a dream now.
Square taper on my track bike, too.
And on my road fixed (if I ever get the seized DS crank off...!)
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'd never go back to square taper on a mountain bike. Forever rounding off crank arms etc.
Probably the high end royce or middleburn stuff is all great but at the lower end, ht2 is much nicer. Noticeably stiffer and easier to fit/remove Imho Posted 2 years ago # -
But can you still get UN72's ?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Middleburn on the posh bike and Shimano M442 (£55 RRP inc rings) on the winter filth bike, both square taper.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Square taper BBs seem to last longer for me, and I'm running meagre LX cranks. Problem is sourcing chainrings when they wear out. Just transpanted the whole drivetrain to a new frame and it's still running smooth. I've had to replace 2 or 3 square taper BBs since 1994 I think
Since 2006 I had an ISIS that lasted 2 years (but was really really fooked when replaced- huge play in the bearings) , a HT2 (shimano) that lasted 6 months (seized after one winter) and have now got a hope ceramic HT2 that is still very smooth but hasn't done a winter yet.
Like so many things in life "progress" isn't necessarily better for joe public, it's just a way of flogging more stuff.Posted 2 years ago # -
would anybody really notice the added stiffness in the BB/cranks?
I did when i swaped my square taper road chainset to a GPX one. You could see the chain rings flex when pedaling and more often than not here it as well.
I have a Hone chainset that is 5 years old has been on and off a fair few times (even swaping frames) and the splines on that are as good as new.Posted 2 years ago # -
+1 for HT2.
No issues on 2 sets apart from 1 set of bearings. Cranks are a doddle to remove & new bearings are cheaper than BB's.
I suspect a lot of issues are caused by ham fisted home mechanics & I'm one of those (rounded off cranks & stripped extractor threads). I've found HT2 to be a bit more idiot proof.Posted 2 years ago # -
My theory is that when you bend a 'flexy' crank at the start of the power stroke, you get that power back when it springs back at the end of the power stroke.
For this reason I don't think the flex issue is a problem as it is different to flex in a noodley frame which really is just wasting power twisting tubes.
It makes perfect sense in my head, but that doesn't mean it isn't total bollocks.
Middleburn/Race Face Ti here. Just about to order a Royce though as I need a longer axle for a new frame.
I've had External BB cranks, they were pretty rubbish. Splines were too soft and developed play, the BB was a joke.
Posted 2 years ago # -
My theory is that when you bend a 'flexy' crank at the start of the power stroke, you get that power back when it springs back at the end of the power stroke
I could see this if you were twisting the shaft as it would pull the chian but side ways flex doesn't help drive the chain and just absorbes energy.Posted 2 years ago # -
What do people think of that new BB30 system? Big bearings but on the inside seems like the best of both worlds maybe??
Posted 2 years ago # -
It makes perfect sense in my head, but that doesn't mean it isn't total bollocks
it is total bollocks ignoring the fact the flex won't be in perfect line with the rotational axis (side to side flex), if that theory worked you'd have cracked the conservation of energy conundrum and solved our energy woes with your 100% efficient machine. In reality, you may get some of the transferred energy back via the "spring" return action but much of your output will be lost as heat.
Posted 2 years ago # -
ISIS bottom brackets didn't last very well when I had them
I know they aren't generally flavour of the month but the Superstar ones are pretty good , 2 years without a hitch so far on my P7
Posted 2 years ago # -
I killed the splines on a HT2 - I think its due to overtightening the bolts which then deformed the grippy bit meaning I could get it to grip tigh enough, who knows. Also had another one fail when the granny ring bolt threads on the spider threaded.
Now using a Raceface external bottom bracket which seems to suit my mechanical ineptitude much better.
Posted 2 years ago # -
+1 stiffness increase going to HTII,
very noticeable, i guess if you area very light rider it may not be so obvious
and i dunno about flex in cranks themselves but i notice it on the bb of my octalink commuter especialy when im trackstanding
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
