A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Minnesota Winters



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old December 21st 08, 04:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,751
Default Bearing damage?

Tom Keats wrote:

smack. Brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment of
a 4lb hammer when the car's own function can serve the purpose,
and not damage anything.


How come bottom bracket bearing do NOT have this problem when a
hammer is used to drive cotter pins in [1] and out on cranks?


[1] No, tightening is NOT done with the nut with attaching a
cottered crank.


When cotter pins have to be pounded in, there's something horribly
wrong. It usually happens from the bike shop who doesn't quite
have the exact match of what you require, and gives you what they
consider the next closest thing. It's an all too common
occurrence.


Anyway, bearings get ruined by being used dry of grease/lubricant.


I'd like to hear more about that. Who rides with lubricant free BB
bearings?


A number of Pacific Northwesters who frequently ride through deep
puddles and torrential rainfalls, and don't maintain their bikes as
well as they should for the prevailing conditions.


Besides, no matter how you brace the spindle when pounding in
cotters, the shock reaches the ball or two under the spindle. In


You shouldn't have to pound them in. If you have to pound them in,
they don't fit. Maybe tap them in a little, sure -- but to ~pound~
them in?! Nay.


I see you don't work with these. They must be pressed in with
enormous force to give enough preload and insure no "lift-off" from
the small cotter face under hard torque. Those of us who lived
through the steel crank + cotters can recall how they failed with
excess torque if not installed forcefully enough.

They must be driven in with a hammer or a special press. Not only
that, the also needed to be filed to the right wedge angle to match
the other crank in a one side replacement. The off-the-shelf cotter
not being ready to install. The flat taper was only an indication of
where the flat belonged because the threaded end was offset to pass
under the spindle flat. Again, it is a retention nut, not one that
can be used to install the cotter, it having insufficient strength for
that task.

addition, I saw many cranks secured without more than a 1/2 lb
hammer held under the crank, yet no dents in the spindle resulted.


Of course. The cotters were being smote with a hammer, not the
spindles. I don't think I've ever seen a dented spindle. I've seen
spindles with badly scoured cones, though. Because the bearings
were run dry of lube.


Where do you suppose the reaction force went if not through the
spindle to the bearing cups?

I still have cottered crank spindles lying around that have no sign
of Brinelling although I have a few head sets where both top and
bottom ball bearings as well a roller bearing ones have fretting
dimples.


In these rainy Pacific Northwest climes, the lower headset bearing
gets the brunt of the weather, especially when unprotected by a
front fender. The cup serves to guide splashed-up water into the
bearing, washing the lube out.


And it's a sneaky effect, because as long as the upper headset
bearing is fine, everything can appear to be good.


I don't think you analyzed the head bearings correctly. If they were
being bathed in water, they would rust solid when parked. On
inspection, they are not full of water and did not rust. As I
explained, this is a fretting b=problem and that is why the upper head
bearing also shows home position dimples.

Fortunately this problem has been solved with current bearings.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/i...-steering.html

Jobst Brandt
Ads
  #32  
Old December 21st 08, 05:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.rides
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Minnesota Winters

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 13:21:17 +0000, Clive George wrote:

"jim beam" wrote in message
...

actually pretty easy to do this - simply loosen the lug nuts a
couple of
turns, then go drive around the block. a couple of hard braking
episodes
will break free the stubbornest of rusted wheels.

God Danged Jim. Thats the only intelligent thing you've ever posted
on this forum.

I did that, and it worked with the front wheel but not the rear wheel.
I had to take additional measures for the rear wheel, including
putting some Liquid Wrench between the rim and hub and engaging in the
telephone book rhumba -- you loosen the lug nuts and then drive the
stuck wheel over a phone book, back and forth. Then you kick the
wheel in strategic locations. That finally worked. Or maybe it was
the swearing that did it.

My 4lb club hammer was bought specifically to remove a wheel from my
car. I'd tried the 1lb one, no joy, no matter how hard I went at it.
4lb one, smack, wheel off.


smack. brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment of a 4lb
hammer when the car's own function can serve the purpose, and not
damage anything.


And what sort of loads + impacts do the bearings get in normal use?


why don't you work it out? mass. acceleration. point contact area.


What
impacts do they get when you're driving around with loose nuts? You're
raising bogus worries.


no, i'm speaking from experience of failure analysis. bearings that get
hammered get brinelled and subsequently fail. this is not knowledge
exclusive to scientists - technicians with shop experience long enough to
see the consequences will tell you that.

  #33  
Old December 21st 08, 06:00 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.rides
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Minnesota Winters

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:10:48 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote:

In article ,
"Clive George" wrote:

"jim beam" wrote in message
...

actually pretty easy to do this - simply loosen the lug nuts a
couple of turns, then go drive around the block. a couple of
hard braking episodes will break free the stubbornest of rusted
wheels.

God Danged Jim. Thats the only intelligent thing you've ever
posted on this forum.

I did that, and it worked with the front wheel but not the rear
wheel. I had to take additional measures for the rear wheel,
including putting some Liquid Wrench between the rim and hub and
engaging in the telephone book rhumba -- you loosen the lug nuts and
then drive the stuck wheel over a phone book, back and forth. Then
you kick the wheel in strategic locations. That finally worked. Or
maybe it was the swearing that did it.

My 4lb club hammer was bought specifically to remove a wheel from my
car. I'd tried the 1lb one, no joy, no matter how hard I went at it.
4lb one, smack, wheel off.

smack. brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment of a
4lb hammer when the car's own function can serve the purpose, and not
damage anything.


And what sort of loads + impacts do the bearings get in normal use?
What impacts do they get when you're driving around with loose nuts?
You're raising bogus worries.


Not our jim!


timmy, why don't you tell us how you managed to calculate how 1800
5000? the mathematical world is on the edge of its seat.

or not. because you're a retard.

  #34  
Old December 21st 08, 06:01 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Bearing damage?

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 00:24:03 -0600, Tom Sherman wrote:

"jim beam" wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:52:56 +0000, Clive George wrote:

"Jay Beattie" wrote in message
news:52f52205-62dd-4d66-ac78-

...
On Dec 17, 6:08 am, "
wrote:
On Dec 17, 7:41 am, jim beam wrote:

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:25:07 -0800, Jay Beattie wrote: snip for
clarity
On a somewhat tech note, I went to put on my (car) snow wheels on
Saturday, and my aluminum rims had welded to the iron hubs. Should
have
used my anti-seize! Getting those mo-fos off was a monumental PIA,
but
finally got it done.
actually pretty easy to do this - simply loosen the lug nuts a
couple of
turns, then go drive around the block. a couple of hard braking
episodes
will break free the stubbornest of rusted wheels.
God Danged Jim. Thats the only intelligent thing you've ever posted
on this forum.
I did that, and it worked with the front wheel but not the rear
wheel. I had to take additional measures for the rear wheel,
including putting some Liquid Wrench between the rim and hub and
engaging in the telephone book rhumba -- you loosen the lug nuts and
then drive the stuck wheel over a phone book, back and forth. Then
you kick the wheel in strategic locations. That finally worked. Or
maybe it was the swearing that did it.
My 4lb club hammer was bought specifically to remove a wheel from my
car. I'd tried the 1lb one, no joy, no matter how hard I went at it.
4lb one, smack, wheel off.


smack. brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment of a 4lb
hammer when the car's own function can serve the purpose, and not
damage anything.


How come bottom bracket bearing do NOT have this problem when a hammer
is used to drive cotter pins in [1] and out on cranks?


ah, nothing like a little jobstian myth to troll the day along! how's it
working for you tom? have you ever done bearing failure analysis?





[1] No, tightening is NOT done with the nut with attaching a cottered
crank.


  #35  
Old December 21st 08, 06:06 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Bearing damage?

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 07:01:09 +0000, jobst.brandt wrote:

Tom Keats wrote:

smack. Brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment of a
4lb hammer when the car's own function can serve the purpose, and not
damage anything.


How come bottom bracket bearing do NOT have this problem when a hammer
is used to drive cotter pins in [1] and out on cranks?


[1] No, tightening is NOT done with the nut with attaching a cottered
crank.


When cotter pins have to be pounded in, there's something horribly
wrong. It usually happens from the bike shop who doesn't quite have
the exact match of what you require, and gives you what they consider
the next closest thing. It's an all too common occurrence.


Anyway, bearings get ruined by being used dry of grease/lubricant.


I'd like to hear more about that. Who rides with lubricant free BB
bearings? Besides, no matter how you brace the spindle when pounding in
cotters, the shock reaches the ball or two under the spindle. In
addition, I saw many cranks secured without more than a 1/2 lb hammer
held under the crank, yet no dents in the spindle resulted.


says the great and mighty jobst brandt. not because it doesn't happen,
but because his ego doesn't allow mistake admission and his lack of
learning doesn't allow correction.





I still have cottered crank spindles lying around that have no sign of
Brinelling


of course! jobst brandt looking for evidence of something that would
evidence his gross ignorance is like the fda looking for evidence of mad
cow disease after they've fired all their inspectors!



although I have a few head sets where both top and bottom
ball bearings as well a roller bearing ones have fretting dimples.


no jobst, you have brinelling dimples. don't protect your ignorance like
it's a virtue.



  #36  
Old December 21st 08, 06:09 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Bearing damage?

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 15:14:30 +0000, jobst.brandt wrote:

snip usual presumptive, mistaken and underinformed crap

jobst, i know it's late in the day for you, but is there /any/ chance
you'll open a book on materials and deformation before you die? it might
stop you looking like a complete ass.

  #37  
Old December 22nd 08, 11:51 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
Chalo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,093
Default Bearing damage?

jim beam wrote:

Jobst Brandt wrote:

although I have a few head sets where both top and bottom
ball bearings as well a roller bearing ones have fretting dimples.


no jobst, you have brinelling dimples. *don't protect your ignorance like
it's a virtue.


How the hell would you brinell a _top_ race, or a roller bearing
headset? Your determination to somehow declare Jobst wrong when he's
not is strange and perverse, not to mention futile.

Chalo


  #38  
Old December 23rd 08, 04:12 AM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Bearing damage?

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:51:54 -0800, Chalo wrote:

jim beam wrote:

Jobst Brandt wrote:

although I have a few head sets where both top and bottom ball
bearings as well a roller bearing ones have fretting dimples.


no jobst, you have brinelling dimples. Â*don't protect your ignorance
like it's a virtue.


How the hell would you brinell a _top_ race, or a roller bearing
headset?


er, by lateral loading perhaps? by repeated impact perhaps?


Your determination to somehow declare Jobst wrong when he's
not is strange and perverse, not to mention futile.


but he is wrong so it's not. or at least, not as futile as a guy that
hasn't done his homework trying to argue with someone that has.

bottom line, i don't understand your problem chalo. i understand jobst's
- he doesn't do his homework, but has opinions anyway, and declares those
underinformed opinions as fact. on topics where i just so happen to know
more than he does. but you? you don't seem to understand the distinction
between argument to establish fact in the face of utter bull****, and just
argument with the argument. the latter is ****ing pointless. but you
react like it's your whole raison d'etre. and as if it's personally
insulting to you. from where i'm standing, i think you're wasting your
electrons.



  #39  
Old December 24th 08, 08:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Sherman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,890
Default Bearing damage?

aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
Tom Keats wrote:

smack. Brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment of
a 4lb hammer when the car's own function can serve the purpose,
and not damage anything.


How come bottom bracket bearing do NOT have this problem when a
hammer is used to drive cotter pins in [1] and out on cranks?


[1] No, tightening is NOT done with the nut with attaching a
cottered crank.


When cotter pins have to be pounded in, there's something horribly
wrong. It usually happens from the bike shop who doesn't quite
have the exact match of what you require, and gives you what they
consider the next closest thing. It's an all too common
occurrence.


Anyway, bearings get ruined by being used dry of grease/lubricant.


I'd like to hear more about that. Who rides with lubricant free BB
bearings?


A number of Pacific Northwesters who frequently ride through deep
puddles and torrential rainfalls, and don't maintain their bikes as
well as they should for the prevailing conditions.


Besides, no matter how you brace the spindle when pounding in
cotters, the shock reaches the ball or two under the spindle. In


You shouldn't have to pound them in. If you have to pound them in,
they don't fit. Maybe tap them in a little, sure -- but to ~pound~
them in?! Nay.


I see you don't work with these. They must be pressed in with
enormous force to give enough preload and insure no "lift-off" from
the small cotter face under hard torque. Those of us who lived
through the steel crank + cotters can recall how they failed with
excess torque if not installed forcefully enough.

They must be driven in with a hammer or a special press. Not only
that, the also needed to be filed to the right wedge angle to match
the other crank in a one side replacement. The off-the-shelf cotter
not being ready to install. The flat taper was only an indication of
where the flat belonged because the threaded end was offset to pass
under the spindle flat. Again, it is a retention nut, not one that
can be used to install the cotter, it having insufficient strength for
that task.[...]


See http://www.sheldonbrown.com/var/images/var0012.jpg.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll
  #40  
Old December 24th 08, 09:12 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,751
Default Bearing damage?

Tom Sherman wrote:

smack. Brinelled bearings. specifically unjoyous deployment
of a 4lb hammer when the car's own function can serve the
purpose, and not damage anything.


How come bottom bracket bearing do NOT have this problem when a
hammer is used to drive cotter pins in [1] and out on cranks?


[1] No, tightening is NOT done with the nut with attaching a
cottered crank.


When cotter pins have to be pounded in, there's something
horribly wrong. It usually happens from the bike shop who
doesn't quite have the exact match of what you require, and
gives you what they consider the next closest thing. It's an
all too common occurrence.


Anyway, bearings get ruined by being used dry of lubricant.


I'd like to hear more about that. Who rides with lubricant free
BB bearings?


A number of Pacific Northwesters who frequently ride through deep
puddles and torrential rainfalls, and don't maintain their bikes
as well as they should for the prevailing conditions.


Besides, no matter how you brace the spindle when pounding in
cotters, the shock reaches the ball or two under the spindle. In
addition, I saw many cranks secured without more than a 1/2 lb
hammer held under the crank, yet no dents in the spindle
resulted.


I still have cottered crank spindles lying around that have no
sign of Brinelling although I have a few head sets where both top
and bottom ball bearings as well a roller bearing ones have
fretting dimples.


You shouldn't have to pound them in. If you have to pound them
in, they don't fit. Maybe tap them in a little, sure -- but to
~pound~ them in?! Nay.


I see you don't work with these. They must be pressed in with
enormous force to give enough preload and insure no "lift-off" from
the small cotter face under hard torque. Those of us who lived
through the steel crank + cotters can recall how they failed with
excess torque if not installed forcefully enough.


They must be driven in with a hammer or a special press. Not only
that, the also needed to be filed to the right wedge angle to match
the other crank in a one side replacement. The off-the-shelf
cotter not being ready to install. The flat taper was only an
indication of where the flat belonged because the threaded end was
offset to pass under the spindle flat. Again, it is a retention
nut, not one that can be used to install the cotter, it having
insufficient strength for that task.[...]


See http://www.sheldonbrown.com/var/images/var0012.jpg.


Nice item. As you can see, those were the "good old days" of bicycle
mechanics. Fortunately Sheldon saved evidence of that.

Jobst Brandt
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Minnesota Winters Paul Weaver General 3 December 16th 08 11:40 PM
Minnesota Winters Tom Keats General 2 December 13th 08 01:21 AM
Minnesota Winters Tom Keats Mountain Biking 2 December 13th 08 01:21 AM
Minnesota Winters Tom Keats Australia 2 December 13th 08 01:21 AM
Minnesota Winters Hank General 0 December 12th 08 11:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.