Forum menu
Was reading a thread here about preload on Hope's new EVO cranks and it got me thinking. I love Hope stuff and their cranks are clearly things of beauty, but watching the installation video just reminded me how spot-on Shimano got the design for Hollowtech 2.
Tools require to install and de-install Hope cranks:
- 10mm hex key and a big wrench
- 19mm socket and a big wrench
- Crankset-assembly tool (CNC-machined, Hope-specific)
- Pre-load removal tool (if you want to take it off again)
- Big-ass torque wrench. Not your normal bike one, that's for sure! (70-75Nm is big, even by Sram's standards!)
All this obviously needs a video explaining how the various bits are installed together and there's plenty of scope to get it wrong.
Compare this to the tools required to install and de-install HT2 cranks:
- 5mm allen key
- TL-FC16 (cheap plastic preload thing, costs a couple of quid).
That's it. Needs about 12-15Nm of torque so can be installed without any heavy-duty tools. The exact torque setting won't affect the performance of the crank (within reason, of course) as the preload is all done beforehand, but the chances are you're standard bike torque wrench will be good enough here. No video needed either - my mum could install an HT2 crankset and have a pretty good chance of getting it right.
No disrespect meant to Hope here, but Shimano really did crack the industrial crankset design with HT2 and there's a good reason why they're still using it on pretty much every proper groupset they sell, both road and MTB. IMHO, noone is yet to better it. Personally, I only ever think about this when working on my son's GXP cranks which are just awful by comparison, held together by brute force. And if there's any play in the axle, what do they suggest? Take it apart, put a bit more grease on the splines, and have another go. And don't get me started on the big mud gap right next to the BB bearings where the wavey washer goes!
So, let's hear your suggestions - who has done it better than the big S?
EEwings are pretty simple, though takes a bit of a heave on the Allen key.
You don't even need the plastic tool thing, you can just tap them home with a block of wood, works just as well.
I'm a big HT2 fan, though I think the new xtr cranks moved to another system which doesn't please me, I hope there isn't trickle down to the rest of the range.
The only issue is the chainring, I think the SRAM spiderless design is much better.
Hope in "Good but overrated by fanbois" shocker.
I don't know why, but HT2 (road) cranks always started creaking under me. Tried several sets, even bought a torque wrench and found out I'd been using the right torque anyway… never solved the problem. Went to GXP and they've basically been faultless. And you only need the one allen key, not even a top hat, and there's only one bolt to do up. Tighten it and the crank goes on, loosen it and the crank falls off. Could not be simpler.
So, IME: no 😉
Though (despite brief dalliances with Isis and Octalink, which were both completely shit) I still haven't progressed past square taper on MTBs because they just work so well.
Yes with square taper. But HT2 is the best of the externals. The whole massive torque of the self-extracting nut type crank is a faff.
I’m a big HT2 fan, though I think the new xtr cranks moved to another system which doesn’t please me, I hope there isn’t trickle down to the rest of the range.
News to me. My M8100 cranks (which are more or less identical to the M9100 XTR version) arrive tomorrow and I wasn't expecting them to be any different than the M8000/M9000 ones. Oh well, I guess we'll see when they turn up with an instruction sheet big enough to use as an emergency biking hostel, in 200 different languages, including Esperanto, Klingon and Middle-Earth Elven.
The whole massive torque of the self-extracting nut type crank is a faff.
Basically the same as square taper, no? Plus I'd say it's less of a faff. "Wang it until it stops moving" is a piece of piss, even a gorilla could follow that. "12-15Nm" is a faff, especially when they give you bolts with heads that seem to start deforming at about 14Nm.
I don’t know why, but HT2 (road) cranks always started creaking under me.
Were these push-fit BBs of some description, by any chance? My experience is that the cranks themselves rarely creak, but pushfit BBs (and especially BB30 - the worst of the lot!) can be something of a dark-art to make silent. I've never had a threaded Shimano BB creak in any way.
(FWIW, Loctite 641 is the magic stuff for creaking, push-fit BBs. Wonderful stuff!)
Basically the same as square taper, no? Plus I’d say it’s less of a faff. “Wang it until it stops moving” is a piece of piss, even a gorilla could follow that
That's the point. It takes gorilla force to get dub etc off. And when the bb's last 2 months it's a faff.
Were these push-fit BBs of some description, by any chance?
No, normal English threaded cups. It was a bit weird. Still, a bit academic now.
As good as the shimano system is.. I've always preferred the way the raceface cranks fit(direct mount version) 8mm bolt does up and then adjust the preload from the non drive side and gently tighten the Allen bolt.
I quite like GXP, no preloading of anything, no need to be carefull just tighten it up, one tool required.
Quite agree, the Shimano system works so well, easy to install and very reliable.
GXP +1, especially if we're talking only the installation and removal, 1 bolt, no torque wrench just as tight as you can get it with a standard allen key. No adjusting, no preloading, no shims.
Only downside of GXP is no one makes a decent aftermarket BB for it. It relies on circlips on the BB bearings, hope sortof works with the plastic shields but even they wear out. The rest just fall appart as far as I've tried.
Having said that, ive not really had a problem with the SRAM ones, early ones were bad but not had a problem for ages.
Bullseye did it first.
-1 GXP
Sure, easy to fit but the design is poor, as it floats the axle on the DS bearing, places all loads through the NDS bearing, and you can't preload the bearings with any real control. This is why they creak and the BBs don't last, and why SRAM has dropped the design with DUB.
The 1st gen. Hope is clearly a mess design-wise (I have one). Maybe the EVO sorts that.
The only downside to HT2 I've found is that if the pinch bolts seize/round then you are into drilling them out, which never really goes well.
-1 GXP
Sure, easy to fit but the design is poor, as it floats the axle on the DS bearing, places all loads through the NDS bearing, and you can’t preload the bearings with any real control. This is why they creak and the BBs don’t last, and why SRAM has dropped the design with DUB.
-1
The plastic collar they fit on the driveside (on screw in BB's) has no retention feature, so it slowly walks itself out, then wears as it slips, followed by the crank wobbling up and down. I've stuck an o-ring in there, for the BB30 there is a wavy washer. Never seen a wavy washer shipped with 24mm sram cranks...
+0.5
They are cheap though and you can replace the bearings, good replacement bearings do cost more than a new BB though!
I love the Shimano system, it's brilliantly effective.
The GXP, i like the retention/setup, the bearing life i'll wait and see... but at £20 for a BB, if i get 6-8 months i won't complain.
I’ve stuck an o-ring in there, for the BB30 there is a wavy washer. Never seen a wavy washer shipped with 24mm sram cranks…
The original Campag Chorus 11 cranks, the ones with the Hirth joint, where the axle bolts together in the centre using a sort of bolted and splined interface, used a wavy washer under one crank arm to add lateral tension to the system / compensate for the non-adjustability of the axle. It doesn't work very well. To add insult to injury, my cranks eventually fell off when the axle sheared. I replaced them with a set of Dura-Ace cranks.
The Shimano system mostly just works, though I can remember the initial bearings being expensive and prone to wear on mountain bikes. The system used on the old XTR M970 cranks on the other hand, is pretty annoying and requires a special tool for crank removal.
Ball bearings like bbs should not be side loaded / pre loaded. the shimano system does this. I have a raceface with a far superior system where ther cranks are drawn together with a single bolt down a tapered spline to a hard stop. No side loading on the bearings. No pinch bolt needed on the crank. Even ham fisted people cannot wreck it. Bearings last much longer. Standard extractor to remove - and this is with standard external bearings
Because of the side loading and pinch bolts I will not use shimano
I was a bit baffled why HOPE made it so complicated having come from Shimano previously, I did wreck an axle due to not following the instructions properly.
Overall worth it for the bling, I can't tell the difference with the stiffness.
I prefer the XTR 970 setup - similar to the RF one. Bolt the 2 cranks together properly, then fine tune the preload with a threaded collar inside the NDS crank. Looks like the new 12S chainsets have gone back to this.The normal HT2 setup works, just feels a bit unrefined in comparison.
The difference between Shimano and RF is that RF do the bolting together bit on the driveside, which leads to a really bulky crank that I, at least, keep catching my ankle one
Ht2 for the win 🙂
and you can’t preload the bearings with any real control.
It's not supposed to be preloaded.
I agree on the plastic spacer though, it would work better if they just made the bearing the correct size to start with.
Ball bearings like bbs should not be side loaded / pre loaded. the shimano system does this. I have a raceface with a far superior system where ther cranks are drawn together with a single bolt down a tapered spline to a hard stop. No side loading on the bearings. No pinch bolt needed on the crank. Even ham fisted people cannot wreck it. Bearings last much longer. Standard extractor to remove – and this is with standard external bearings
Because of the side loading and pinch bolts I will not use shimano
Posted 6 minutes ago
The shimano system uses ACB's which are meant to be preloaded, it's the same theory that they use in their hubs, because some of the load is axial you need to deal with it. That's why they use those tiny plastic preload adjusters, it's supposed to be just snug enough to preload the bearings. Without preload they would fail pretty quickly as the two races would be trying to slip off each other. It also allowed them to reduce the width of the BB by 2mm as the bearings could be narrower as one 'shoulder' of each race was redundant, meaning effectively bigger bearings, and a bigger area for the NDS crank to clamp onto.
From an engineering perspective the more you look at it the better it gets. Apart from it needed some sort of grease purge or better/replaceable seal.
GXP does it by using one much larger bearing to deal with the side loads, it's bigger than the bearings in things like car gearboxes (which are under big radial loads, but completely isolated from axial loads)!
The genius of GXP was how easy it was to build on a production line. 1 bolt, 1 torque setting. For a production line where saving seconds on an operation is important, that must be almost a minute off the shimano version.
The race face system (depending on which you have, I'm guessing it's the original X-type) uses a whole stack of plastic shims and a rubber X-ring to take up the tolernaces. It was great in use but that wasn't the title of the thread, from an assembly perspective it needs installing and removing 2-3 times to get it right. Which is probably why they appeared on almost zero OEM bikes. Although I guess that could be solved by facing the shells down to exactly 68/73mm to allow a consistent number of shims.
Engineers opinion of gxp.
Always owned Shimano.
Got my first sram rival groupset in 2017, it was ok at first.
Ive had lots of constant niggles and faff with the groupset and don’t like the crank design at all.
Finally found a 96bcd 44t chainring to fit a spare slx crank and will be fitted as soon as it arrives, I will be using a grinder to remove the rival crank with great pleasure 😈
Those instructions are for the old Hope cranks. Hope Evo need a 10mm allen key and that's it.
TJ - the Shimano approach allows a set up free from excessive side loading and without play - that’s the point of the adjuster (exactly like a headset). The early RF set ups had no adjustment and naively relied upon perfect BB shell width etc which is one of the reasons most people got poor beating life from them. They now have a preload adjustment like XTR M970/M9100.
Engineers opinion of gxp.
He really annoys me.
If you asked him for a calculator he'd tell you that sage was better than quickbooks, and swear a lot. Whilst ignoring the fact that you wanted a calculator not an accountancy package and the biggest worry you didn't know you had was whether the input method was was Infix or Reverse Polish notation.
Ball bearings like bbs should not be side loaded / pre loaded
How do you adjust you headset?
Headsets either are cup and cone or axial bearings which can be side loaded - and you do not preload headset bearings - you set them to zero play - I didn't realise shimano bbs were axial. So my mistake
My preferred system is octalink. BY far the best system I have used. The race face I like tho.
I've got HT2 and GXP.
I've not really had any issues with either. I've had to re-tighten GXP cranks after they have been installed, but you generally only have to do this once.
The only downside to HT2 I’ve found is that if the pinch bolts seize/round then you are into drilling them out, which never really goes well.
I've had to cut an ancient LX crank off after one of the bolts rounded out, but I can't really blame the crank for this.
GXP allowed smaller chainrings from the get go which was handy for 1 x systems with a 29er, although this isn't an issue with newer Shimano cranks with the smaller BCD.
If i was ordering new cranks today I'd probably go back to Shimano
GXP allowed smaller chainrings from the get go which was handy for 1 x systems with a 29er, although this isn’t an issue with newer Shimano cranks with the smaller BCD.
Did it?
There's nothing inherent to the shimano design that would preclude omitting the spider and having a direct mount.
Small chain rings aside direct mount has the disadvantage that you can't change the chainring without taking the crank off.
I kinda suspect direct mount is another thing that SRAM did to help OEM's, the SRAM crank box is about 1/5th the size of the shimano ones (and is rectangular so stacks!) , and that probably matters when you're a production engineer. A bit like shimano and centerlock.
My preferred system is octalink.
IME the bearings lasted no time at all (though longer than Isis, which was due for replacement by the time you’d got to the end of your street) and, of all the systems, it was the easiest one to accidentally knacker, usually by either forgetting to fish out the small washer that always got stuck in there, or forgetting to put it back in again.
It also gave square taper a problem by introducing a new tool that looked almost identical but would strip your threads if you accidentally used it on a square taper crank. (Which reminds me, I really must throw my Octalink tool away before I do that again.)
But other than needing constant replacement and making replacement prone to expensive errors if you weren’t paying close attention, yeah, loved it 😉
Not my experience Bez. I have octalink on the tandem that has done many thousands of miles and my standard tool works fine. ( it does have a bit yo can remove for square taper)
Didn't like RF, the hard stop sounds like a good idea in theory, but you needed to hang off the Allen key in a way that meant if you slipped you'd mangle the bolt or your knuckles.
Don't mind SRAM DUB, easy install, no worries with it so far, although BB has only lasted a year, so that's a bit disappointing
Shimano seems the best of the bunch for me, easy install, long life, wide range of aftermarket BB (although have made an XT last 3 years, so not really an issue. Wish Shimano did a better range of spiderless though
All this obviously needs a video explaining how the various bits are installed together and there’s plenty of scope to get it wrong.
After you've translated it from Lancastrian to English.
Shimano system has never given me any trouble, but theres a gap in the market for a low range torque key for the preload and bleed ports on brakes too. Why specify 0.5nm or 1.5nm when nobody's got a torque wrench that goes that low.
Rounding off hollowtech II bolts purely comes down to bad tools or technique, my mate rounds off bolts because he's applying force incorrectly like a ham fisted ape. I use uberbikes ti bolts torqued to 13nm without issue by applying pressure down through the bolt head and not just wrenching on the end like an orangutan.
I don’t know why, but HT2 (road) cranks always started creaking under me. Tried several sets, even bought a torque wrench and found out I’d been using the right torque anyway… never solved the problem.
It was probably your BB.
Or your saddle.
Think what you will, I agree with hambinis opinions due to my experience of constant niggles and problems with not only the crank but the full sram rival group set.
I’ve always been confused how a £700 group can be found on a low end £1000+ bike, I can’t help but think that the business model is that once you’ve got a sram hydro groupset your stuck with it and you will be stuck with the cost of buying new replacements at full RRP which is far cheaper than replacing all of it for a decent (Shimano) groupset
I will never be a beta tester for sram again, bit of research suggests a fair few unhappy customers.
Having the hope crankset is the main reason i won't buy any more hope items, i learnt to stop buying the brakes a while ago, but buying a bike that had the cranks has made it a simple choice not to buy anything hope ever again.
The hope crank is great looking especially with the direct mount ring and works fine when fitted.....but I can contest to the major faffage of installation as I did mine on my new frame yesterday. I've had the cranks for about a year and have had them off about 4 times now. The first time I fitted them myself and they came loose so got a shop to fit them. The chainring broke so I re-fitted them myself and it was fine then took them off due to a knackered BB...(frickin hope one is shite). The torque you have to give the main wedge bolt is insane, plus the Welly you need to get the crank on the spline in the first place. Then there's the play adjustment ring which is crap and on my new frame only has about half a turn before it's against the crank arm. And I've rounded off 4 of the tiny grub screws that pinch it up (these are made of actual cheese). Getting the bloody things off is a faff as well. So on this basis I'm in the market for some new shimano,s next time as like stated above they work fine and are a piece of piss to fit.
Rounding off hollowtech II bolts purely comes down to bad tools or technique
Not 'purely' those two options. It can also come down to seized bolts too. Crank bolts can have a pretty hard life, in terms of spray etc. I've serviced a few mates' bikes and the bolts can be pretty solid by the time I get to them (with decent tools).
But other than needing constant replacement and making replacement prone to expensive errors if you weren’t paying close attention, yeah, loved it 😉
Ha! If you think Octablink was bad, what about... ISIS? Arguably the worst bottom bracket design imaginable with its oversized spindle and consequently teeny tiny little ball bearings doomed to fail within weeks. Remember all the 'special' uprated ISIS BBs that were supposed to last months rather than weeks, but didn't. The rare, hard to find SKF ones, which were almost useable. Dear god, just a horrible. horrible thing. What were they thinking?
Ha! If you think Octablink was bad, what about… ISIS?
I think I mentioned it in the same post 😀
Yeah, worst BB design ever (though at least the crank splines were more robust than Octalink ones). My wife's bike must have the only remaining specimen in the world, it's been in there for about 15 years, although it's not really done loads of miles 🙂
I’ve got Look BB65 on one bike which sometimes seems like genius but the tools required to remove and reinstall are ridiculous (not changed bearings yet so that fun awaits). I also needed to buy a special 14 (fourteen!) mm Allen key for a set of campag cranks. For me the big S and HT2 just works with no faff
The HT II is by far the most elegant solutions to installing a crank closely followed by the Race Face system that had those big chunky splines and that was effectively self extracting.
I'd rather rely on the RF splines for ham footedness but the Shimano is so simple.
I think I mentioned it in the same post 😀
I've been subliminally conditioned to block out any reference to ISIS. The whole Islamic State thing was problematic for me, I couldn't work out why a failed bottom bracket standard was dominating international news 🙁
EEwings are pretty simple
Bet they look grand on the Santa Cruz Ebike 🤪
Shimano is favoured here too.
I'm never going with SRAM BB's (or other groupset) again if I can help it, Octalink was better in many ways than square taper, but those tiny bearings...
I'm ignoring pushfit, I've got one again and I'm waiting to see how quickly it dies...
Ah yes, I remember fitting an SKF ISIS BB, lasted a good year. Weighed a ton though, but better than the 4 week life expectancy of the OEM Race Face.
Edit - actually I did have a broken shoulder for a third of that year, which probably helped the BB life.
Yes, I also favour Shimano's HT2 crank fastening - if only it could be combined with Race Face's Cinch chainring attachment I would die a happy man.
Think what you will, I agree with hambinis opinions
Just because he's a dickhead doesn't make him wrong about Sram stuff being a bit flimsy.
I can only think of one part where Sram have had the edge over Shimano on durability, and that's their GX-lever cassette.
Was chatting to a (mostly road bike) mechanic the other day and he said that he likes the SRAM cranks best because he never sees any spline damage on them, but he sees a few HT2 cranks with stripped splines.
Cha****ng - 12spd Shimano stuff has spline on chainrings kinda like they had on M950 and M740 series stuff in the 90s but single ring now obviously.
Cha****ng – 12spd Shimano stuff has spline on chainrings
Sounds good.
Part of the satisfaction of the RF system is that you use a cassette tool to nip the chainring up IIRC.
Tool comes with the cranks.
Though (despite brief dalliances with Isis and Octalink, which were both completely shit) I still haven’t progressed past square taper on MTBs because they just work so well.
I have just gone back to square taper for first time in over 10 years (changed to a steel track frame and modern cranks look too bulky and sadly that matters to me)
Have to say a square taper is not any harder to fit than an HT 2 and time will tell if my memories of the BBs lasting a lot longer are true
Have to say a square taper is not any harder to fit than an HT 2 and time will tell if my memories of the BBs lasting a lot longer are true
I remember the old square-taper BBs lasting almost forever, but they were also brutally heavy as I believe the axles were nearly always solid due to the nature of the square taper fit. Also, much like the GXP cranks, they are just held together with brute force (i.e. a very tight bolt), which just feels an inelegant solution. I've also found that OEM HT2 bearings (even the cheaper grade ones) last absolutely ages, and are cheap as chips.
I'm enjoying this thread, but (with the possible exception of RF), I remain convinced that no other manufacturer has got close to HT2 for usability vs price vs vs weight vs reliability.
My Middleburn ones are pretty nice, but a little more difficult to install than HT2 - the preload adjuster can be a bit difficult to work with - gets stuck a lot.
I've got both SRAM (Force1 GXP) and Shimano (XTR/DA) both of which use CK BBs of various types. Both are very easy to install and seem to work just fine. The only problem I've had is when using a Force1 crankset on my Niner's Biocentric BB and finding that the end plates on the BB changed the BB width just a little. The result was that you couldn't tighten the SRAM crank fully as the force on the bearing created tremendous drag. It could only be fixed by removing one of the caps and adding a thinner spacer. The Shimano DA9000 crank worked fine.
As per bearing design(which I know far too much about...)
GxP is horse shite . .one floating one locked bearing..that industrial machinery bearing design type of territory..
Square taper ..indestructible ..at the cost of weight and easy fitting but needs less precise frame alignment and Frankely just works..
Ht2..its balanced ..easy to fit and adjust..they are axial bearing making side loading neccisary to take up play..but they are cheap and not noted so far..can REPLACE square taper without anything other then bb facing on the frame in preperation(can just put them in but misalignment may be a problem..)..
Hope ..no idea not read into designs but one two piece cranks without pinch bolts are kind of annoying and done up STUPIDLY tight almost as much as wheel bolts on a car..
Pah! Properly fitted cotter pin cranks are the go...
no idea not read into designs but one two piece cranks without pinch bolts are kind of annoying and done up STUPIDLY tight almost as much as wheel bolts on a car..
Try doing up the bolts holding the hub itself on.
It was something silly like a 1.3/4 socket, with a 3/4 drive, and a torque so high I just calculated it from my bodyweight on a length of scaffold pole because it was way beyond any torque wrench I had!
I remember the old square-taper BBs lasting almost forever, but they were also brutally heavy as I believe the axles were nearly always solid due to the nature of the square taper fit.
The Token square taper I just fitted was 210 grams BUT the cranks arms were 80 grams lighter than the Hollowtech 105 arms (which are pretty light for two piece) so net gain was around 30 grams.
I was actually expecting it to be much more than that. If the BB does end up lasting for many years I will be happy with the 'backward' change.
Square taper ..indestructible
I'm no destroyer of equipment, but I've managed to break 2 square taper BBs. I always thought the HT2 solution was pretty elegant really wider, stronger, fitted any frame (at the time), and simple to install for the home mechanic
I can't argue with it, I love Shimano cranks.
Needs 1 very simple, cheap, easy to find tool and a hex key. If you're not a complete oaf it's almost impossible to do it wrong. (I've done it wrong).
People used to moan about HTII BBs dying, well maybe, I'd generally get a year out of one, and yeah if I had to nitpick it seems as if they went from perfect to seized over-night some how, but you knew it didn't matter what bike shop you went into, they'd have one, on the shelf, even if they charged RRP for them, they were still cheap and it took about 10 mins to change.
My DUB one is still a mystery to me, they seemed hard to find, at least a year ago when I first got it, the outer thing fell off so I can't actually remove my crank unless I can find another one, or borrow a friends and for some reason I need a breaker bar to get it off and an automotive torque wrench to replace it - also, I believe "because SRAM" my BB tool won't fit it, I need another, which I can't seem to find.
Were these push-fit BBs of some description, by any chance?
No, normal English threaded cups. It was a bit weird. Still, a bit academic now.
I have found HT2 needs checking after a ride or two even if you're using a torque wrench for the pinch bolts.
GXP is fine from an installation point of view, it's just you end up doing it about ten times as often as HT2.
I’m a big HT2 fan, though I think the new xtr cranks moved to another system which doesn’t please me, I hope there isn’t trickle down to the rest of the range.
My M8100 cranks (which are exactly the same design as the M9100 - XTR - cranks, just slightly different materials and finish) just turned up. They are completely standard HT2, identical to the M9000 XTR ones that are coming off.
The shimano 2-bolt's definitely the best I've ever used... But it does have one massive issue, which is the preloading- it's dependent on not being overtightened, but overtightening is basically what mountain bikers do best. I mean, people go out and buy metal tools for the end bolt because they don't think the plastic one is strong enough, even though it's basically just fingertight.
So for those reasons I reckon anything with an actual torque value has an advantage, when put in the hands of hamfisted gorillas, ie us.
It's mentioned up there somewhere but Shimano took (and refined) the Bullseye design. They had to wait for Bullseyes U.S patent from the late 70's to expire before they could release it. Definitely my favourite design!
HT2 fan here. No special tools needed (you can do up the plastic preload by hand if it really comes to it), bolts are at a sensible torque. If you can't use a torque wrench as standard L shaped Allen key will be close enough.
Yes, it's great to be able to do stuff properly at home but if it can be done in a campsite on holiday with a minimal toolkit all the better.
Add one of these your travel toolkit and you can do the BB as well
New Hope still seems to need 50nM torque and the tiny bolt on the preload head looks likely to be an issue.
The old Raceface relied on a few plastic spacers (that inevitably went missing when you removed the cranks).
My experiences of Square taper weren't good. BB's were a nightmare to get out IME and very easy for someone to knacker the crank by riding it when loose.
it does have one massive issue, which is the preloading- it’s dependent on not being overtightened, but overtightening is basically what mountain bikers do best
Err, never overtightened any of the dozens of HT2 cranks I've fitted and never seen anyone else suffering from doing it.
Hardly a "massive issue".
Square taper ..indestructible ..at the cost of weight and easy fitting but needs less precise frame alignment and Frankely just works..
Until the cranks seize on solid, or the threads strip.
Err, never overtightened any of the dozens of HT2 cranks I’ve fitted and never seen anyone else suffering from doing it.
Which is the reason the preload cap is plastic - the teeth mash before you can really overload the bearings.
It just seems nice and intuitive to me, no need for a torque wrench on the bolts either.
My M8100 cranks (which are exactly the same design as the M9100 – XTR – cranks, just slightly different materials and finish) just turned up. They are completely standard HT2, identical to the M9000 XTR ones that are coming off.
FC-M9100 XTR is not the same
https://si.shimano.com/pdfs/dm/DM-MAFC002-05-ENG.pdf
Square taper ..indestructible
Not really, easy to snap landing drops and the alloy square in the cranks always wallowed out.
Upgrading from square to isis was great for me, stopped snapping BB axles and wearing out crank arms. Gigapipe BBs lasted ok for me.
Hollowtech is great, it just works, affordable, strong, reasonable weight. Also caters for slight differences in frame widths eg 67.5 or 68.5 rather than 68mm dead on.
chakaping
Subscriber
Err, never overtightened any of the dozens of HT2 cranks I’ve fitted and never seen anyone else suffering from doing it.
It's the main reason some people go through bottom brackets like mad.
But of course you won't see any downsides of overtightening if you don't overtighten- that's hardly the point.
FC-M9100 XTR is not the same
So it isn't! Well, the M8100 in my hand certainly is the same as the old M9000, so this particular innovation hasn't trickled down. To be fair to me, I'm yet to see a pair of these in the flesh as the early supply problems and somewhat sturdy pricing has made it a pretty rare sight.
I'm actually surprised they've done this as it presumably increases the Q-factor of the cranks by a few mm, something that is not usually desirable. Wonder if the crank profile also changed to compensate?
45-55 Nm seems like a fair amount of torque, though I can’t remember how much the FSA BB30 cranks on my last bike needed.
I wonder why they changed it?