Removing aluminum screws from Carbon frames

On 2/27/2020 6:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 07:21:21 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 6:49:30 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 17:27:53 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 4:29:03 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:51:49 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . . in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Something I've always wondered about those pressed in BB bearings. In
normal practice pressed in bearings are usually intended to be a one
shot deal. Press them in and leave them for the life of the item, but
from what I read here replacing BB bearings is a common thing to do.
Is there any indication how many times one can replace a BB90 bearing
before the hole becomes sufficiently oversize that the bearing is no
longer held sufficiently tight to prevent movement?
See https://amesweb.info/press-fit/inter...alculator.aspx
for innumerable calculations regarding pressed in bearings and shafts.

No idea, but with CF, you can easily repair the BB ID. I highly recommend Ruckus Composites here in PDX. Here is an example of a more complicated BB repair:

https://ruckuscomp.com/news/2017/07/...racket-repair-

Go to the full restoration gallery and see the pretty bikes: https://ruckuscomp.com/news/2020/01/...-photo-gallery

They did a spectacular job fixing my Norco after a nasty chain-suck injury to the BB and chain stay.

BTW, with BB/PF 30, you can skip the press-in bearings and go with a conversion BB. https://praxiscycles.com/product/shi...f30-68mm-road/ AFAIK, you can't do that with BB90 because external bearings would exceed the width of the Shimano crank spindle.

My Trek BB90 bearings have been great. I haven't replaced them, but they are replaced in exactly the same way as BB30 bearings, which I have installed many times -- and a couple of times replaced unnecessarily because of creaking that was actually coming from my rear axle. I think I have only worn out a few cartridges. Caveat: I may have replaced the bearings on my son's Trek BB90 Emonda because I recall buying the cartridges, but I don't know for sure. Its not like some giant TK undertaking that one remembers, and I don't keep maintenance logs -- particularly not on my son's bikes.

I was just checking the bearings on my commuter, and they're in great shape notwithstanding all the hours riding in the rain. OTOH, I still think BSA threaded BB is perfectly fine, although not indestructible either. I'm not sold on pressfit formats, but I still like them better than loose bearing internal BBs.

-- Jay Beattie.

Yes, I realize that a CF frame could be repaired, easily :-) But
bushing and reboring the BB would require specialized equipment (even
more than drilling a hole :-) although there probably isn't a real
need that the BB be at exactly 90 degrees to the frame. And sooner or
later, what with driving bearings in and out the BB will get loose :-)

To be clear, I'm not aware of anyone having the problem you mention and needing to rebore a CF frame, but who knows. I heard of people munging ordinary threaded BBs in steel frames. I replaced my old-fashioned BBs with about the same regularity as my press-fit bearings.

I'm not aware of any problem which is why I asked the question.

As an aside, I probably shan't live to see it but I wonder whether in
20 or 30 years folks will be chanting the merits of their "classic" 26
year old CF frame :-)

All my steel frames broke, and I got tired of rebrazing them. I have one steel frame left -- an early '70s Raleigh Pro track frame with no chrome. It has a dent in the top tube from when my son, as a 1 year old, accidentally knocked it over while walking around in my basement bike shop. He would pick up tools and walk around with them saying "tool . . . tool." Oddly, he's not that good with tools as an adult.

My God! YOU have a 1970's Raleigh? And you kept it in the garage?
Heresy Sir! Heresy!
It belongs in the living room!


Anyway, and I know this is sacrilege, I'm not that sentimental about any bike. I ride my Raleigh on the rollers and didn't like it that much racing on the track. It's got classic Campy components, and I don't look at them and get excited. There are some art bikes that I would like to own, but not many. When I jump on my bike for a recreational ride, I'm more excited about my destination and getting there as quickly and comfortably as I can. On a sunny dry day, I grab my 15-16lb Trek and go for it. If it broke, I'd buy a new one -- or get a Specialized through my son. Both companies make great bikes (biased product placement). I'm not buying heirlooms. If I broke my current commuter, however, I might buy a steel frame because I think the Soma Fog Cutter, but not because it would outlive me. It looks like a worthy bike with lots of mounts and it can stand up to rack abuse.


Having had a few burglaries at my house over the years, my
1953 Raleigh is in my bedroom when I am there.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:30:28 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/27/2020 6:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 07:21:21 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 6:49:30 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 17:27:53 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 4:29:03 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:51:49 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . . in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Something I've always wondered about those pressed in BB bearings. In
normal practice pressed in bearings are usually intended to be a one
shot deal. Press them in and leave them for the life of the item, but
from what I read here replacing BB bearings is a common thing to do.
Is there any indication how many times one can replace a BB90 bearing
before the hole becomes sufficiently oversize that the bearing is no
longer held sufficiently tight to prevent movement?
See https://amesweb.info/press-fit/inter...alculator.aspx
for innumerable calculations regarding pressed in bearings and shafts.

No idea, but with CF, you can easily repair the BB ID. I highly recommend Ruckus Composites here in PDX. Here is an example of a more complicated BB repair:

https://ruckuscomp.com/news/2017/07/...racket-repair-

Go to the full restoration gallery and see the pretty bikes: https://ruckuscomp.com/news/2020/01/...-photo-gallery

They did a spectacular job fixing my Norco after a nasty chain-suck injury to the BB and chain stay.

BTW, with BB/PF 30, you can skip the press-in bearings and go with a conversion BB. https://praxiscycles.com/product/shi...f30-68mm-road/ AFAIK, you can't do that with BB90 because external bearings would exceed the width of the Shimano crank spindle.

My Trek BB90 bearings have been great. I haven't replaced them, but they are replaced in exactly the same way as BB30 bearings, which I have installed many times -- and a couple of times replaced unnecessarily because of creaking that was actually coming from my rear axle. I think I have only worn out a few cartridges. Caveat: I may have replaced the bearings on my son's Trek BB90 Emonda because I recall buying the cartridges, but I don't know for sure. Its not like some giant TK undertaking that one remembers, and I don't keep maintenance logs -- particularly not on my son's bikes.

I was just checking the bearings on my commuter, and they're in great shape notwithstanding all the hours riding in the rain. OTOH, I still think BSA threaded BB is perfectly fine, although not indestructible either. I'm not sold on pressfit formats, but I still like them better than loose bearing internal BBs.

-- Jay Beattie.

Yes, I realize that a CF frame could be repaired, easily :-) But
bushing and reboring the BB would require specialized equipment (even
more than drilling a hole :-) although there probably isn't a real
need that the BB be at exactly 90 degrees to the frame. And sooner or
later, what with driving bearings in and out the BB will get loose :-)

To be clear, I'm not aware of anyone having the problem you mention and needing to rebore a CF frame, but who knows. I heard of people munging ordinary threaded BBs in steel frames. I replaced my old-fashioned BBs with about the same regularity as my press-fit bearings.

I'm not aware of any problem which is why I asked the question.

As an aside, I probably shan't live to see it but I wonder whether in
20 or 30 years folks will be chanting the merits of their "classic" 26
year old CF frame :-)

All my steel frames broke, and I got tired of rebrazing them. I have one steel frame left -- an early '70s Raleigh Pro track frame with no chrome. It has a dent in the top tube from when my son, as a 1 year old, accidentally knocked it over while walking around in my basement bike shop. He would pick up tools and walk around with them saying "tool . . . tool." Oddly, he's not that good with tools as an adult.

My God! YOU have a 1970's Raleigh? And you kept it in the garage?
Heresy Sir! Heresy!
It belongs in the living room!


Anyway, and I know this is sacrilege, I'm not that sentimental about any bike. I ride my Raleigh on the rollers and didn't like it that much racing on the track. It's got classic Campy components, and I don't look at them and get excited. There are some art bikes that I would like to own, but not many. When I jump on my bike for a recreational ride, I'm more excited about my destination and getting there as quickly and comfortably as I can. On a sunny dry day, I grab my 15-16lb Trek and go for it. If it broke, I'd buy a new one -- or get a Specialized through my son. Both companies make great bikes (biased product placement). I'm not buying heirlooms. If I broke my current commuter, however, I might buy a steel frame because I think the Soma Fog Cutter, but not because it would outlive me. It looks like a worthy bike with lots of mounts and it can stand up to rack abuse.


Having had a few burglaries at my house over the years, my
1953 Raleigh is in my bedroom when I am there.

On a wall hanger so visitors can admire it? Or just shoved under the
bed.
--
cheers,

John B.

On 2/27/2020 8:05 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:30:28 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/27/2020 6:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 07:21:21 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 6:49:30 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 17:27:53 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 4:29:03 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:51:49 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . . in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Something I've always wondered about those pressed in BB bearings. In
normal practice pressed in bearings are usually intended to be a one
shot deal. Press them in and leave them for the life of the item, but
from what I read here replacing BB bearings is a common thing to do.
Is there any indication how many times one can replace a BB90 bearing
before the hole becomes sufficiently oversize that the bearing is no
longer held sufficiently tight to prevent movement?
See https://amesweb.info/press-fit/inter...alculator.aspx
for innumerable calculations regarding pressed in bearings and shafts.

No idea, but with CF, you can easily repair the BB ID. I highly recommend Ruckus Composites here in PDX. Here is an example of a more complicated BB repair:

https://ruckuscomp.com/news/2017/07/...racket-repair-

Go to the full restoration gallery and see the pretty bikes: https://ruckuscomp.com/news/2020/01/...-photo-gallery

They did a spectacular job fixing my Norco after a nasty chain-suck injury to the BB and chain stay.

BTW, with BB/PF 30, you can skip the press-in bearings and go with a conversion BB. https://praxiscycles.com/product/shi...f30-68mm-road/ AFAIK, you can't do that with BB90 because external bearings would exceed the width of the Shimano crank spindle.

My Trek BB90 bearings have been great. I haven't replaced them, but they are replaced in exactly the same way as BB30 bearings, which I have installed many times -- and a couple of times replaced unnecessarily because of creaking that was actually coming from my rear axle. I think I have only worn out a few cartridges. Caveat: I may have replaced the bearings on my son's Trek BB90 Emonda because I recall buying the cartridges, but I don't know for sure. Its not like some giant TK undertaking that one remembers, and I don't keep maintenance logs -- particularly not on my son's bikes.

I was just checking the bearings on my commuter, and they're in great shape notwithstanding all the hours riding in the rain. OTOH, I still think BSA threaded BB is perfectly fine, although not indestructible either. I'm not sold on pressfit formats, but I still like them better than loose bearing internal BBs.

-- Jay Beattie.

Yes, I realize that a CF frame could be repaired, easily :-) But
bushing and reboring the BB would require specialized equipment (even
more than drilling a hole :-) although there probably isn't a real
need that the BB be at exactly 90 degrees to the frame. And sooner or
later, what with driving bearings in and out the BB will get loose :-)

To be clear, I'm not aware of anyone having the problem you mention and needing to rebore a CF frame, but who knows. I heard of people munging ordinary threaded BBs in steel frames. I replaced my old-fashioned BBs with about the same regularity as my press-fit bearings.

I'm not aware of any problem which is why I asked the question.

As an aside, I probably shan't live to see it but I wonder whether in
20 or 30 years folks will be chanting the merits of their "classic" 26
year old CF frame :-)

All my steel frames broke, and I got tired of rebrazing them. I have one steel frame left -- an early '70s Raleigh Pro track frame with no chrome. It has a dent in the top tube from when my son, as a 1 year old, accidentally knocked it over while walking around in my basement bike shop. He would pick up tools and walk around with them saying "tool . . . tool." Oddly, he's not that good with tools as an adult.

My God! YOU have a 1970's Raleigh? And you kept it in the garage?
Heresy Sir! Heresy!
It belongs in the living room!


Anyway, and I know this is sacrilege, I'm not that sentimental about any bike. I ride my Raleigh on the rollers and didn't like it that much racing on the track. It's got classic Campy components, and I don't look at them and get excited. There are some art bikes that I would like to own, but not many. When I jump on my bike for a recreational ride, I'm more excited about my destination and getting there as quickly and comfortably as I can. On a sunny dry day, I grab my 15-16lb Trek and go for it. If it broke, I'd buy a new one -- or get a Specialized through my son. Both companies make great bikes (biased product placement). I'm not buying heirlooms. If I broke my current commuter, however, I might buy a steel frame because I think the Soma Fog Cutter, but not because it would outlive me. It looks like a worthy bike with lots of mounts and it can stand up to rack abuse.


Having had a few burglaries at my house over the years, my
1953 Raleigh is in my bedroom when I am there.

On a wall hanger so visitors can admire it? Or just shoved under the
bed.

Leaning against the wall, where there's a grey area from my
handgrip.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 10:17:06 PM UTC+1, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/27/2020 10:50 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 9:50:17 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 12:51:52 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on..

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . . in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, I'm tired of explain things to you. If you don't know what you're talking about just F off.

Explain what crank you're using? O.K. Fine with me. Continue muddling on.

-- Jay Beattie.

Pardon me for getting ****ed off. I said that Trek uses non-standard BB90 bearing sizes slightly wider than the usual BB90.

No. It's a standard 7mm (24X37X7) width bearing except for GPX, which is 8mm drive side. See e.g. https://wheelsmfg.com/enduro-24-x-37...d-bearing.html I find it hard to believe Trek is using a 7.3mm bearing. Why would they produce an expensive, non-standard size bearing instead of using a thicker bearing shield or shim?

Also inside there are tubular covers that are asymmetrical - one side is of a larger diameter than the other so that they fit together one inside the other. This also means that the facing on one side is of a larger diameter than the other. So maybe they can be reversed though that seems a bit unlikely to me.

Like I said, that is not a structural element and does not affect the bearing seat. I suppose it could be misinstalled somehow and prevent the bearings from seating, but it would be obvious before the bearings went in that the sleeve flanges were not seated.

The crank as I said before is a standard Ultegra FC-R8000.

The three upper class Trek road bikes - the Domaine, Madone and Emonda are all made in Wisconsin.

Nope. The top end is made in Taiwan, and Project One are painted/finished in Wisconsin. I have one -- purchased directly from my friends at Trek. Awesome bike.

snip

As for your later comments - I never said nor implied that it was a "giant undertaking". I said that you have to buy a 24 mm axle bearing removal tool (most of them are for 30 mm axles) and a bearing press. The removal took is cheap and effective but the press comes in all grades from absolute trash (a bolt, two washers and a nut) to large complex fits-all press that runs several hundreds of dollars. I just had a quote on my impending tooth implant for over $5,000. Spending $300 for a set of tools that would be used twice in the rest of my life is pretty silly don't you think? When a shop charges you $20 to replace the bearings?

You were going on about your crank arm hitting the chainstay and the need for odd-ball bearings and the possibility that the bearing "cups" were in backwards, etc., etc. -- all strange complaints for a simple bearing install. Yes, if you don't want to buy the tools, then have a shop do the install. If you own a headset press, all you need a https://www.biketiresdirect.com/prod...SABEgIKI_D_BwE

The usual reason for a left arm hitting the stay is that the crank is not seated. Whack the right side. If, after the crank is seated, there is still lateral play, then you should get some shims from Wheels MFG. And if the Trek shop is doing the bearing install, they can manage all this anyway. I can't comment on the Di2 routing because my Emonda is cable shift.

-- Jay Beattie.

Huh. Just as an added data point, I've replaced the crank bearings
twice [1] in my Domane and never needed a bearing press. My bearings
pressed in by hand just fine.

[1] At least once due to a noise that turned out to come from elsewhere.

Mark J.

That is not good for a Shimao crank/bearing.

Lou

On Friday, February 28, 2020 at 12:40:33 AM UTC-8, wrote:
snip

Huh. Just as an added data point, I've replaced the crank bearings
twice [1] in my Domane and never needed a bearing press. My bearings
pressed in by hand just fine.

[1] At least once due to a noise that turned out to come from elsewhere.

Mark J.

That is not good for a Shimao crank/bearing.

This might be what TK is thinking about: https://www.enduroforkseals.com/prod...24371-LLB.html

Enduro, and maybe others, makes a 37.1mm OD bearing for sloppy-fit Trek BB90 bottom brackets. Its still a 7mm width bearing, except for GPX drive-side.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2/28/2020 12:40 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 10:17:06 PM UTC+1, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/27/2020 10:50 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 9:50:17 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 12:51:52 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . . in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, I'm tired of explain things to you. If you don't know what you're talking about just F off.

Explain what crank you're using? O.K. Fine with me. Continue muddling on.

-- Jay Beattie.

Pardon me for getting ****ed off. I said that Trek uses non-standard BB90 bearing sizes slightly wider than the usual BB90.

No. It's a standard 7mm (24X37X7) width bearing except for GPX, which is 8mm drive side. See e.g. https://wheelsmfg.com/enduro-24-x-37...d-bearing.html I find it hard to believe Trek is using a 7.3mm bearing. Why would they produce an expensive, non-standard size bearing instead of using a thicker bearing shield or shim?

Also inside there are tubular covers that are asymmetrical - one side is of a larger diameter than the other so that they fit together one inside the other. This also means that the facing on one side is of a larger diameter than the other. So maybe they can be reversed though that seems a bit unlikely to me.

Like I said, that is not a structural element and does not affect the bearing seat. I suppose it could be misinstalled somehow and prevent the bearings from seating, but it would be obvious before the bearings went in that the sleeve flanges were not seated.

The crank as I said before is a standard Ultegra FC-R8000.

The three upper class Trek road bikes - the Domaine, Madone and Emonda are all made in Wisconsin.

Nope. The top end is made in Taiwan, and Project One are painted/finished in Wisconsin. I have one -- purchased directly from my friends at Trek. Awesome bike.

snip

As for your later comments - I never said nor implied that it was a "giant undertaking". I said that you have to buy a 24 mm axle bearing removal tool (most of them are for 30 mm axles) and a bearing press. The removal took is cheap and effective but the press comes in all grades from absolute trash (a bolt, two washers and a nut) to large complex fits-all press that runs several hundreds of dollars. I just had a quote on my impending tooth implant for over $5,000. Spending $300 for a set of tools that would be used twice in the rest of my life is pretty silly don't you think? When a shop charges you $20 to replace the bearings?

You were going on about your crank arm hitting the chainstay and the need for odd-ball bearings and the possibility that the bearing "cups" were in backwards, etc., etc. -- all strange complaints for a simple bearing install. Yes, if you don't want to buy the tools, then have a shop do the install. If you own a headset press, all you need a https://www.biketiresdirect.com/prod...SABEgIKI_D_BwE

The usual reason for a left arm hitting the stay is that the crank is not seated. Whack the right side. If, after the crank is seated, there is still lateral play, then you should get some shims from Wheels MFG. And if the Trek shop is doing the bearing install, they can manage all this anyway. I can't comment on the Di2 routing because my Emonda is cable shift.

-- Jay Beattie.

Huh. Just as an added data point, I've replaced the crank bearings
twice [1] in my Domane and never needed a bearing press. My bearings
pressed in by hand just fine.

[1] At least once due to a noise that turned out to come from elsewhere.

Mark J.

That is not good for a Shimao crank/bearing.

Do you mean too loose? I should clarify that it took lots of
back-and-forth, slowly rocking the bearing into place about 1 mm per
finger press, but no tools required.

Mark J.

On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 10:51:00 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 9:50:17 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 12:51:52 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep.. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . .. in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, I'm tired of explain things to you. If you don't know what you're talking about just F off.

Explain what crank you're using? O.K. Fine with me. Continue muddling on.

-- Jay Beattie.

Pardon me for getting ****ed off. I said that Trek uses non-standard BB90 bearing sizes slightly wider than the usual BB90.

No. It's a standard 7mm (24X37X7) width bearing except for GPX, which is 8mm drive side. See e.g. https://wheelsmfg.com/enduro-24-x-37...d-bearing.html I find it hard to believe Trek is using a 7.3mm bearing. Why would they produce an expensive, non-standard size bearing instead of using a thicker bearing shield or shim?

Also inside there are tubular covers that are asymmetrical - one side is of a larger diameter than the other so that they fit together one inside the other. This also means that the facing on one side is of a larger diameter than the other. So maybe they can be reversed though that seems a bit unlikely to me.

Like I said, that is not a structural element and does not affect the bearing seat. I suppose it could be misinstalled somehow and prevent the bearings from seating, but it would be obvious before the bearings went in that the sleeve flanges were not seated.

The crank as I said before is a standard Ultegra FC-R8000.

The three upper class Trek road bikes - the Domaine, Madone and Emonda are all made in Wisconsin.

Nope. The top end is made in Taiwan, and Project One are painted/finished in Wisconsin. I have one -- purchased directly from my friends at Trek. Awesome bike.

snip

As for your later comments - I never said nor implied that it was a "giant undertaking". I said that you have to buy a 24 mm axle bearing removal tool (most of them are for 30 mm axles) and a bearing press. The removal took is cheap and effective but the press comes in all grades from absolute trash (a bolt, two washers and a nut) to large complex fits-all press that runs several hundreds of dollars. I just had a quote on my impending tooth implant for over $5,000. Spending $300 for a set of tools that would be used twice in the rest of my life is pretty silly don't you think? When a shop charges you $20 to replace the bearings?

You were going on about your crank arm hitting the chainstay and the need for odd-ball bearings and the possibility that the bearing "cups" were in backwards, etc., etc. -- all strange complaints for a simple bearing install. Yes, if you don't want to buy the tools, then have a shop do the install.. If you own a headset press, all you need a https://www.biketiresdirect..com/pro...SABEgIKI_D_BwE

The usual reason for a left arm hitting the stay is that the crank is not seated. Whack the right side. If, after the crank is seated, there is still lateral play, then you should get some shims from Wheels MFG. And if the Trek shop is doing the bearing install, they can manage all this anyway. I can't comment on the Di2 routing because my Emonda is cable shift.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, it gets a little tiresome that you repeat garbage without even bothering to look it up:

BB90/BB95
Proprietary? Yes (Trek)
BB shell inner diameter 37mm
Bearing inner diameter 24mm
BB shell width 90mm road, 95mm MTB
Installation Pressed bearings with stepped BB shell
Compatibility Designed specifically for 24mm spindles, no 30mm option
Other names n/a
Other notes The extra width of the BB cups is replaced with more frame real-estate

Where in that standard does it say one word about the bearing widths?

The frame holes for the bearings are 37 mm. And the ID of the bearing is 24 mm. But the width of the bearings themselves can be whatever the manufacturer decides it is. The STANDARD SIZE COMMERCIAL BEARINGS are 7 mm width. Trek for reasons of their own have used a non-standard 7.3 mm width. They might have used the standard 10 mm bearing width as well.

Since they usually have a reason for what they do, including requiring their dealers to buy a certain stock of replacement parts (which is how I managed to snag a replacement frame brake exit cup) I would say that their expertise in this area is probably better than yours.

On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 1:17:06 PM UTC-8, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/27/2020 10:50 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 9:50:17 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 12:51:52 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on..

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out.
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed.

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . . in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, I'm tired of explain things to you. If you don't know what you're talking about just F off.

Explain what crank you're using? O.K. Fine with me. Continue muddling on.

-- Jay Beattie.

Pardon me for getting ****ed off. I said that Trek uses non-standard BB90 bearing sizes slightly wider than the usual BB90.

No. It's a standard 7mm (24X37X7) width bearing except for GPX, which is 8mm drive side. See e.g. https://wheelsmfg.com/enduro-24-x-37...d-bearing.html I find it hard to believe Trek is using a 7.3mm bearing. Why would they produce an expensive, non-standard size bearing instead of using a thicker bearing shield or shim?

Also inside there are tubular covers that are asymmetrical - one side is of a larger diameter than the other so that they fit together one inside the other. This also means that the facing on one side is of a larger diameter than the other. So maybe they can be reversed though that seems a bit unlikely to me.

Like I said, that is not a structural element and does not affect the bearing seat. I suppose it could be misinstalled somehow and prevent the bearings from seating, but it would be obvious before the bearings went in that the sleeve flanges were not seated.

The crank as I said before is a standard Ultegra FC-R8000.

The three upper class Trek road bikes - the Domaine, Madone and Emonda are all made in Wisconsin.

Nope. The top end is made in Taiwan, and Project One are painted/finished in Wisconsin. I have one -- purchased directly from my friends at Trek. Awesome bike.

snip

As for your later comments - I never said nor implied that it was a "giant undertaking". I said that you have to buy a 24 mm axle bearing removal tool (most of them are for 30 mm axles) and a bearing press. The removal took is cheap and effective but the press comes in all grades from absolute trash (a bolt, two washers and a nut) to large complex fits-all press that runs several hundreds of dollars. I just had a quote on my impending tooth implant for over $5,000. Spending $300 for a set of tools that would be used twice in the rest of my life is pretty silly don't you think? When a shop charges you $20 to replace the bearings?

You were going on about your crank arm hitting the chainstay and the need for odd-ball bearings and the possibility that the bearing "cups" were in backwards, etc., etc. -- all strange complaints for a simple bearing install. Yes, if you don't want to buy the tools, then have a shop do the install. If you own a headset press, all you need a https://www.biketiresdirect.com/prod...SABEgIKI_D_BwE

The usual reason for a left arm hitting the stay is that the crank is not seated. Whack the right side. If, after the crank is seated, there is still lateral play, then you should get some shims from Wheels MFG. And if the Trek shop is doing the bearing install, they can manage all this anyway. I can't comment on the Di2 routing because my Emonda is cable shift.

-- Jay Beattie.

Huh. Just as an added data point, I've replaced the crank bearings
twice [1] in my Domane and never needed a bearing press. My bearings
pressed in by hand just fine.

[1] At least once due to a noise that turned out to come from elsewhere.

Mark J.

That is a bit scary. Pressing in by hand means that they can fall out just as the Italian threaded cups would loosen out against the cranks if you didn't tighten them sufficiently. Usually the cranks limit the space they have to self-extract, but it then wears the holes in a taper. This is what causes the infamous "creaking" bottom bracket.

On Friday, February 28, 2020 at 8:12:59 AM UTC-8, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/28/2020 12:40 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 10:17:06 PM UTC+1, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/27/2020 10:50 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 9:50:17 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 12:51:52 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out..
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it.. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed..

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . .. in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, I'm tired of explain things to you. If you don't know what you're talking about just F off.

Explain what crank you're using? O.K. Fine with me. Continue muddling on.

-- Jay Beattie.

Pardon me for getting ****ed off. I said that Trek uses non-standard BB90 bearing sizes slightly wider than the usual BB90.

No. It's a standard 7mm (24X37X7) width bearing except for GPX, which is 8mm drive side. See e.g. https://wheelsmfg.com/enduro-24-x-37...d-bearing.html I find it hard to believe Trek is using a 7.3mm bearing. Why would they produce an expensive, non-standard size bearing instead of using a thicker bearing shield or shim?

Also inside there are tubular covers that are asymmetrical - one side is of a larger diameter than the other so that they fit together one inside the other. This also means that the facing on one side is of a larger diameter than the other. So maybe they can be reversed though that seems a bit unlikely to me.

Like I said, that is not a structural element and does not affect the bearing seat. I suppose it could be misinstalled somehow and prevent the bearings from seating, but it would be obvious before the bearings went in that the sleeve flanges were not seated.

The crank as I said before is a standard Ultegra FC-R8000.

The three upper class Trek road bikes - the Domaine, Madone and Emonda are all made in Wisconsin.

Nope. The top end is made in Taiwan, and Project One are painted/finished in Wisconsin. I have one -- purchased directly from my friends at Trek. Awesome bike.

snip

As for your later comments - I never said nor implied that it was a "giant undertaking". I said that you have to buy a 24 mm axle bearing removal tool (most of them are for 30 mm axles) and a bearing press. The removal took is cheap and effective but the press comes in all grades from absolute trash (a bolt, two washers and a nut) to large complex fits-all press that runs several hundreds of dollars. I just had a quote on my impending tooth implant for over $5,000. Spending $300 for a set of tools that would be used twice in the rest of my life is pretty silly don't you think? When a shop charges you $20 to replace the bearings?

You were going on about your crank arm hitting the chainstay and the need for odd-ball bearings and the possibility that the bearing "cups" were in backwards, etc., etc. -- all strange complaints for a simple bearing install. Yes, if you don't want to buy the tools, then have a shop do the install. If you own a headset press, all you need a https://www.biketiresdirect.com/prod...SABEgIKI_D_BwE

The usual reason for a left arm hitting the stay is that the crank is not seated. Whack the right side. If, after the crank is seated, there is still lateral play, then you should get some shims from Wheels MFG. And if the Trek shop is doing the bearing install, they can manage all this anyway. I can't comment on the Di2 routing because my Emonda is cable shift.

-- Jay Beattie.

Huh. Just as an added data point, I've replaced the crank bearings
twice [1] in my Domane and never needed a bearing press. My bearings
pressed in by hand just fine.

[1] At least once due to a noise that turned out to come from elsewhere.

Mark J.

That is not good for a Shimao crank/bearing.

Do you mean too loose? I should clarify that it took lots of
back-and-forth, slowly rocking the bearing into place about 1 mm per
finger press, but no tools required.

Mark J.

https://www.bbinfinite.com/products/...t=921366265870

How do I know if my bike needs a Repair Kit or a Standard Kit?
If a bearing or both bearings are loose in the frame bottom bracket shell while you are riding and/or can be installed or removed by hand with little effort when the crank has been removed from the bike, you need our REPAIR KIT.
If the bearings are snug in your frame’s bottom bracket shell, and you need to knock the bearings out mechanically, and need to use a press to install the bearings, order our STANDARD KIT.

On Friday, February 28, 2020 at 5:12:59 PM UTC+1, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/28/2020 12:40 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 10:17:06 PM UTC+1, Mark J. wrote:
On 2/27/2020 10:50 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 9:50:17 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 12:51:52 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 9:18:30 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 7:26:35 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 3:39:12 PM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2020 at 10:21:41 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:41:06 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I an a bit afraid of the term "anti-seize", in this case, as so many
anti-seizes contain some sort of metallic particles to aid in high
temperature uses. Not very useful in preventing galvanic corrosion.
One of the most useful "stuff" I used on the boat was basically
lanolin with some sort of thickener.

The purpose of an anti-seize compound is to:
1. Electrically insulate dissimilar metallic components from each
other.
2. Squeeze itself into the tiny surface cracks and crevasses to act
as a reservoir in case the fastener looses anti-seize (or thread lock)
compound.
3. Reflow slightly when hot or under pressure.
4. In the absence of oxygen, polymerize with metals to form a
"sticky" bond. For anti-seize, this bond is rather weak. For thread
lock, rather strong.
"Basics on Anaerobic Adhesives and Threadlockers"
https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/24136/anaerobic-adhesives-threadlockers
You can use greases to insulate and block electrolysis, but will be
missing the benefits of #4. Some greases are also not so good with
#3, where heating and solvent attack will soon cause the anti-seize to
wash away and disappear.

Incidentally, the need for cracks and crevasses for lubricants and
sealants to function is why bearing and glued surfaces are not
polished to excessive smoothness.

The last ditch solution is to (carefully) drill the stuck fitting out
and re tap the hole but I hesitate to recommend that as it does
require a certain amount of skill, the proper tools, and so on.

Nope. Try that with a threaded insert (rivet nut), and the insert
will spin out of the CF frame before the screw is drilled out..
Everything will be fine, until the drill starts to break through the
bottom end of the insert. The drill will then jam, and the power of
the drill and inertia of the chuck and armature will rip the insert
from the CF frame. If the drill has a torque limiter, it might work,
but wouldn't want to take the chance. The nice thing about doing such
things by hand is one gets some feedback just before things go
horribly wrong. Experience is all about recognizing this feedback.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

It turns out that the screw was stainless and that it has a stainless "nut" cast into the frame. I removed the other end and looked at it.. So there isn't any area for electrolytic dissimilar materials to interact in any way to seize the threads.

I guess the idiot who owned the frame before simply tightened a 2 mm screws way too much. I was wondering why I got the frame and all of the additional frame pieces for so cheap - 2018 for $500 and another $50 shipping. Two small paint knicks, one that is plain down by the off-side chain stay where I believe the off-side crank arm struck. I also have to discover why the new cranks hit the chain stay. One thing I know - a standard bearing for those BB-90's is supposed to be 37 x 24 x 7 mm. Trek (who is opening a local factory store!) uses a non-standard 37 x 24 x 7.3 mm bearing and chances are that is the problem.

The bike is a breeze to build. I hope this doesn't turn into one of your months long, agonizing wrong parts buying frenzies. BB 90 is a standard 7mm bearing width. They use a bearing shield, which you're probably missing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mix25T4PdnY. If you still have play after installing the shields, then use a shim. If the crank arm is hitting, and there is no play in the system, then you have the wrong crank -- which would be impossible if you're using a Shimano Hollowtech road crank, but I fully expect that we'll go down some rabbit hole until you disclose that the crank is in backwards.

-- Jay Beattie.

The bearing was installed when I got it and the shield in on. Hambini made a point about the Trek using the none-standard bearing width so I am assuming that someone replaced the bearing with a standard BB90 bearing. Either that or the frame was made with one of the bearing cups too deep. Easily fixed by purchasing a Hambini BB90 Bearing. But these can only be installed after all of the wiring is installed since they are one piece and the Trek is three (actually four There are two shield cups that fit together.) pieces.

Which gives me the idea - Perhaps the cups were install reversed..

Groan. A standard BB90 bearing is 24X37X7 -- that's what your Trek uses. Rabbit hole here we come. The cups (bearing seats) are moulded into the frame. There is nothing to install backwards. The internal plastic shell is not structural and just a moisture guard, and the lip fits into a recess. Please tell me you are not using a GPX crank. In fact, WHAT CRANK ARE YOU USING?

Bearing replacement is a ten minute operation. I've done it . . .. in ten minutes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay, I'm tired of explain things to you. If you don't know what you're talking about just F off.

Explain what crank you're using? O.K. Fine with me. Continue muddling on.

-- Jay Beattie.

Pardon me for getting ****ed off. I said that Trek uses non-standard BB90 bearing sizes slightly wider than the usual BB90.

No. It's a standard 7mm (24X37X7) width bearing except for GPX, which is 8mm drive side. See e.g. https://wheelsmfg.com/enduro-24-x-37...d-bearing.html I find it hard to believe Trek is using a 7.3mm bearing. Why would they produce an expensive, non-standard size bearing instead of using a thicker bearing shield or shim?

Also inside there are tubular covers that are asymmetrical - one side is of a larger diameter than the other so that they fit together one inside the other. This also means that the facing on one side is of a larger diameter than the other. So maybe they can be reversed though that seems a bit unlikely to me.

Like I said, that is not a structural element and does not affect the bearing seat. I suppose it could be misinstalled somehow and prevent the bearings from seating, but it would be obvious before the bearings went in that the sleeve flanges were not seated.

The crank as I said before is a standard Ultegra FC-R8000.

The three upper class Trek road bikes - the Domaine, Madone and Emonda are all made in Wisconsin.

Nope. The top end is made in Taiwan, and Project One are painted/finished in Wisconsin. I have one -- purchased directly from my friends at Trek. Awesome bike.

snip

As for your later comments - I never said nor implied that it was a "giant undertaking". I said that you have to buy a 24 mm axle bearing removal tool (most of them are for 30 mm axles) and a bearing press. The removal took is cheap and effective but the press comes in all grades from absolute trash (a bolt, two washers and a nut) to large complex fits-all press that runs several hundreds of dollars. I just had a quote on my impending tooth implant for over $5,000. Spending $300 for a set of tools that would be used twice in the rest of my life is pretty silly don't you think? When a shop charges you $20 to replace the bearings?

You were going on about your crank arm hitting the chainstay and the need for odd-ball bearings and the possibility that the bearing "cups" were in backwards, etc., etc. -- all strange complaints for a simple bearing install. Yes, if you don't want to buy the tools, then have a shop do the install. If you own a headset press, all you need a https://www.biketiresdirect.com/prod...SABEgIKI_D_BwE

The usual reason for a left arm hitting the stay is that the crank is not seated. Whack the right side. If, after the crank is seated, there is still lateral play, then you should get some shims from Wheels MFG. And if the Trek shop is doing the bearing install, they can manage all this anyway. I can't comment on the Di2 routing because my Emonda is cable shift.

-- Jay Beattie.

Huh. Just as an added data point, I've replaced the crank bearings
twice [1] in my Domane and never needed a bearing press. My bearings
pressed in by hand just fine.

[1] At least once due to a noise that turned out to come from elsewhere.

Mark J.

That is not good for a Shimao crank/bearing.

Do you mean too loose? I should clarify that it took lots of
back-and-forth, slowly rocking the bearing into place about 1 mm per
finger press, but no tools required.

Mark J.

Yes that is too loose. Even with an 37h7/H7 fit it is almost impossible to press the bearing in by hand and that has a play between 0- 50 mu. You got a loose fitting on the crank axle and a loose fitting in the frame bore. I would not feel comfortable with that.

Lou