Those were the two main drivers that led to the long-term solution.”įarver knew the best solution was a threaded option, but going back to something like outboard bearing designs (think SRAM GXP) wasn’t practical because so many of his customers already owned cranksets with bigger spindles, which have their own advantages, primarily stiffness. ![]() “That feedback I was getting just got really frustrating, and from the mechanic’s standpoint, shipping one of our bikes to a shop somewhere in the country, having a BB that’s too big and the frame might be undersized, you could damage the frame. Of course, Farver, like just about every other manufacturer who transitioned to PF30, or worse, early versions of BB30, eventually started getting angry phone calls from customers who were experiencing consistent creaking. It also allows bigger tube diameters to increase stiffness and decrease weight.” The bigger area you have to work with, the more accessible it is from a CAD standpoint. “When we’re designing the shape of the frame, the BB is an area of a lot of complex curves. “When I first designed the Argonaut frame, I wanted to use PF30 because it gives you a nice big canvas on which to work for the layup,” says Farver. Understanding why T47 is a leap forward requires some thought as to why it came about in the first place. And once I rolled my eyes back into place, it occurred to me that this is likely to work, and work well - but customers will, of course, bear the expensive brunt of progress. That’s T47, a bottom bracket with big bearings that thread in easily to the bottom bracket shell. Now take away the disadvantages of the system: the minuscule tolerances that need to be just right in order to get a creak-free interface, a perfectly straight installation to avoid damaging the BB shell, and all the tools needed to get the bearings in and out, again without damaging the frame. What exactly does this mean for you, the rider? Think of the benefits of PF30: bigger bearings for longer life, larger bottom bracket shells for improved lateral stiffness, and a larger area that accommodates an array of tube shapes to tailor ride quality. As in, it screws into the frame just like English bottom brackets we knew and loved. It’s called T47, and it’s a thread-in solution to PF30. Let’s call it a re-imagining, because this new iteration is something we’ve seen before, something we know works. There hasn’t been much of that in the last several years since a slew of press-in bottom brackets hit the market, each iteration as flawed as the next. So let’s start with that skepticism: First off, it’s not a standard, because that word implies some sort of consistency across brands and platforms. Another bottom bracket? Unless it threads into the BB shell, I didn’t want to hear about it. ![]() Yeah, my eyes were rolling when I heard the news too. So he, along with Chris King components, set about creating an alternative to PF30. Problem is, with imperfect technology standards like PF30, that pursuit is impossible. GUERNEVILLE, California (VN) - Ben Farver, founder of Argonaut Cycles, wants to make the perfect road bike. Heading out the door? Read this article on the new Outside+ app available now on iOS devices for members!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |