I just wanted to let those of you who emailed me and posted comments here regarding the Campy UT post know that I haven't backed down or considered walking away from this just yet. It's just too common of an issue. Please understand that this just might take some time. I am aware of the situations that surround what's going on... despite what's being thrown around on the forums and I am currently working on a viable solution or solutions. As soon as I have something definitive, I'll post it here. Thanks for checking in. -John

I have a theory that I want to share about the Campagnolo Ultra Torque crankset and bottom bracket system. I'm going to systematically lay out, in detail, what I believe is a design flaw, or at least, a short coming that has lead to and can cause issues. I've spent a considerable amount of time thinking this out and I have even consulted with a mechanical engineer... WARNING: This is going to be a long post and has the potential to be REALLY boring if you have zero interest in this topic.

But first, a brief overview of the design. Here's a CAD drawing.

Here's my extremely simplified description of the Ultra Torque design:

This system is designed around the Hirth joint, which joins the two semi-axles. These semi-axles are held together by a special fixing bolt. The bearings are pressed onto both of the semi-axles. Installation includes inserting the drive side of the crank into the driveside cup. It is then secured by a retaining spring. The non-drive side is then installed into the non-drive side cup with a wave washer placed on the semi-axle between cup and the bearing. The cups are supposed to be installed free of grease, with Loctite 222, hand tight. Install the fixing bolt, torque to spec, wait 24hrs (for the Loctite to cure), then off you go...
Ok.. Here's the rub.

When Campy first introduced this new system and I had the chance to install one, right off the bat, a red flag went up. What I didn't like or didn't understand is why would they design a system like that has a fixed distance between the bearings that doesn't much allow for the discrepancies in bottom bracket shell width??? I thought that I must OBVIOUSLY be missing something... But like a good little bike mechanic, I followed the installation instructions provided and completed the installation as specified ( I have to admit that I really struggled with myself when it came to the installation of the cups...). More on this later...

Fast forward sixish months and approximately 3k miles later I get a text...

John, I have a creak/knock and I think that the bb might be loose can you take a look?

It didn't take long for me to find the cause of the noise... actually in his driveway. And after a few more questions, I was heading back to my shop. What I found was to say the least, suprising.

Here's what I found. When compressing or squeezing the non-drive side crankarm laterally towards the drive side, I was able to make the whole crankset move laterally to the drive side of the bike. I could see the drive side of the crankset move out or away from the bottom bracket!! I was able to do this by squeezing the non-drive side crankarm towards the down tube or seat tube, like this (the poorly drawn red arrow vaguely shows where I was able to see the lateral movement)...

And here's a video: (Look at the area near the "center" of the crankarm and the bottom bracket cup..)

This generally is not good. This specifically, really is piss poor (not a technical term, but works well with this application).

I then repeated the same procedure on the drive-side, like this...

No movement. Rock solid.

I immediately had a really good theory about what was happening...

Ok, here goes...
My theory is that because of the use of the Hirth joint, which when joined, has a fixed distance between the bearings. This doesn't allow for any discrepancy in the bottom bracket shell width. In fact, I believe that Campagnolo built in some "wiggle room" (another technical term...) to account for a certain range of shell widths. It states in the installation instructions that:

The Campagnolo Ultra Torque crankset is compatible with bottom bracket shells having the following widths:

...that's a 1.6mm range or +/- .8mm each side of standard widths.

After 1-3k miles, the chances for lateral or horizontal movement increases due to the minute increases in the ID of the cups and/or the OD of the cartridge bearings.

This lateral or horizontal movement towards the drive side in related to the compression of the wave or spring washer and the inability of the retaining spring to stop the movement of the system (see video 2).

This occurance is probably more evident in composite frames because of the amplification of the sound or the resonating qualities of these frames. This is not to say that it’s not possible with frames made of other materials. I have just observed this issue with multiple composite frames.

I found that this happens with both English and Italian bottom bracket shell designs.

Two of the frames, one with English and the other Italian bottom brackets, had bottom bracket widths of 68.1 and 70.03 respectively. These measurements are pretty darn close to industry standards. So I believe that this can happen on bikes with shell widths well within normal.

Please allow me to go off on another related tangent...

Before I dove head-first into this little puzzle, I called and spoke with a kind gentleman at a large US distributor of Campagnolo the ask if he has heard of this issue. To make a long story short, he verified if I installed everything as per the instructions including the wave washer. I said that I did. He then recommended that I might add another wave washer because it is “wafer thin”…I asked if “wafer thin” is a technical term… I knew that I wasn't going to get very far info-wise, so I ordered a few to have on hand and when on my way…

While you're here, check out video 2:

After taking accurate measurements of everything related to the bottom bracket and crankset, the only solution to this problem was to add spacers to the equation to take up the space that was allowing the movement. This had to be done to the point that there wouldn’t be any binding or side-loading of the bearings. started systematically adding spacers, starting with a .36mm spacer between the non-drive side cup and shell…

I assembled, checked for play…. Still there.

Added a .30mm spacer inside the cup between the wave washer and inside face of the non-drive side cup, reassembled, checked for play… better, but still there. Now, I thought that I was getting somewhere…

I added yet another .30mm spacer in the same location as the prior one. I then assembled again, checked for play, this time no play, or pretty darn close to no play. I was satisfied, so at this point, I disassembled it again, but this time I applied the Loctite 222 to the NDS cup threads and lubricated all of the spacers that I added.

Bottom bracket shell width: 68.1mm

Spacer placed between NDS cup and frame: .36mm

First spacer added: .30mm

Second spacer added: .30mm

Total amount of spacers added: .96mm

This essentially adds up to the effect shell + cups width of 69.06mm. So theoretically, if you have a bike with a bottom bracket shell width of 69.6mm and you install an English Ultra Torque crankset/bottom bracket system, you won’t have the problem of lateral crankset movement.

So, the day after I deliver the bike back, I receive this text…

Perfect… 40 miles so far and no noise.

I thought, great! Problem solved… Not that I was happy about the need for the fix, but was still relieved. But wait! Not so fast… About two weeks later… another text…

My bottom bracket click has returned…

Damn… I thought, but I wasn't totally surprised. After a brief phone call, I am told that it’s not the knocking now, but a click. Back to the drawing board, but I knew that I was getting somewhere…

After the first fix, the knocking noise went away, but a clicking/ticking developed after < 1k miles. This mainly occured at the 6 o’clock non-drive side crankarm position when riding the bike. I was also able to produce the sound while bike was on stand. I think that this happened at the 6 o’clock position while on the bike because that is the lowest point of the power curve and most of the input force was removed from the system allowing the slight movement of the crankset to produce the click….
After closely looking at everything closely for anything that might cause a click, the only thing that was somewhat concerning was that some of the silver coating on the wave washer was rubbed off (See photo below).

I added a third .30mm spacer…Too tight. To cut to the chase, I removed a .30mm spacer and added a .34mm spacer in its place. This added .04mm to the total amount of spacers. And if my math is good, that’s a sum of 1mm. I assembled…again, and took it for a test ride…. No click. Tried to replicate the noise in the stand. Nadda. Good news.

1. I can’t accept this as being normal if this is the only crankset/bottom bracket design on the market that has this lateral movement...
2. I believe that the constraints of the Hirth joint and the inability to account for the normal discrepancies of bottom bracket shell widths lead to the use of both the wave washer and the retaining spring.
3. If all frames with English bottom bracket shells had exactly 68mm shell widths and if all frames with Italian bottom bracket shell widths had exactly 70mm widths and Campagnolo produced the Ultra Torque systems for those respective widths WITHOUT needing to use the wave washer and the retaining spring, there wouldn’t be this issue.
4. I think, albeit kinda far fetched, that one of the reasons why the instruction say to only tighten the cups hand tight and to use Loctite 222 is to not decrease the overall width of the shell and cups any more than it already is… We’re not talking much but as you will see, we’re not talking much anyway.

I believe that Campagnolo pigeonholed itself into this problem by incorporating the Hirth joint into the design of their Ultra Torque system. The inability of the Hirth joint to adjust for variances in shell width dimensions forced the use of the wave washer and the retention spring. Because of this limitation, they somehow agreed upon a spindle length (actually the distance between the bearings…) that was greater than the standard widths and added the washer and retention spring to make up for the range of shell widths. This is obvious because I observed this situation on a bike with a 68.1mm English bottom bracket shell as well as a bike with an Italian shell measuring 70.3mm. All of this being said, is this just me or am I missing something? I welcome any and all comments and questions. And please, correct me if I'm way off base. Thanks for checking in. -John

So, I'm going to pick up where I left off...

Now, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that by taking this position, I will more than likely upset a few folks. I guess that goes with the territory. Perhaps it would be best to break this down into two major groups. Parts and people. In reality, the two overlap somewhat… Like a Venn Diagram (Here’s a quick 5th grade math review…)

In this example, A=People and B=Parts. The overlapping middle area could be peoples' influence on parts, such as approving a design for production and sales before it has been thoroughly tested, or some yoyo improperly installing a component, etc... I think you get the idea.

I guess that I can just write about all the components and bikes that I like, and I just might do more of that. But I think that there's plenty of sunshine being blown up you-know-where on just about every site out there. Most of them are carefully written as to not upset the manufacturer who may or may not be an advertiser or sponsor.

I like to, every once and a while, share with you some of the good stuff that impresses me, and more often, I find something that frustrates me to no end. These situations sometimes boil over and end up as a post on this site. Again, let me make my intentions clear. I write this stuff with you in mind. I get hacked off just like every other person (ok... probably more...) when I have to deal with some inferior product that's dressed up as something high-quality or when someone doesn't do their job. But when I do get to writing about something, I think that a greater part of you like to "see it like it is" instead of words regurgitated from some company's marketing department.

In conclusion, my aim is to share with you my real-life experiences with products and services, in a professional manner. Wow... that sounded good. What's more than likely going to happen is an insight into my intolerance it idiocy, incompetence, apathy, mediocracy, and piss-poor design... delivered , of course, in a professional manner... You know...keeping it real. Just like you like it.       To Be Continued....

Recently, I’ve been trying to look at my posts more objectively. What I find somewhat disheartening is that it could be easily perceived that some of my posts have a negative slant. While this is not my intention, I can see that they can be taken that way. I want everyone to realize that this is really not where I’m coming from. My objective is more in line with being an advocate for you, the end-user… the one who drops his/her hard-earned $$$ on some product or service and rightfully assumes that it will work as advertised..... To Be Continued...

Just in case you were wondering... This is what a $7800 bike looks like... Oh, and if you want it with Campy 11 instead of SRAM Red, then it's more like $8300.... holy cow...

I forgot how much I LOVE replacing the rear deraileur cable on a Kestrel Airfoil without damaging it in the process...
Again, this "required" a modification to improve shifting or decrease cable friction...

After... (Putting the RogueMechanic Fix to it)

Btw... "Before" was how it came from a local IBD...

Well, this mess now only reeked havoc on the lower bearing, it also is evidence of the corrosion/ degrading of the aluminum steertube. Check this...

I needed a plan to stop any further degrading of the aluminum, so I got on the blower to my buddy Dr. J who is like a chemistry god and asked him for advise. He gave me a simplified lesson about what was going on and the nature of aluminum and corrosion and then he told me what to do and I did it. Here's a pic of the steertube and bearing before I installed it back into the headtube... (this is what a $45 bearing looks like...)

Btw... I recommended that the fork not be ridden and should be replaced because there is no way to confirm that the steertube is still structurally sound...
That's it for now. Thanks for checking in. -John

Anyway, before I get off on a tangent... It can with a Bontrager compact crankset, Dura Ace front and rear derailleur, SRAM 10spd chain...PC 1090 and SRAM OG 1070 cassette. I was installing a Dura Ace 7800 12-27t cassette for a lower gear range and Shimano R700 compact chainrings to improve front shifting. I was going to keep the 1090 chain because in the past when dealing with 9 speed chains, I found that there was only a slight difference between the Shimano and SRAM equivalent chains. Well, I was not at all happy with how the 1090 chain meshed or interfaced with the Dura Ace cassette. In fact it sounded more like a chainsaw than it did a top-end drivetrain. Not good. Don't get me wrong, it worked, but it didn't work nearly as well as the Shimano chain that I replaced it with. So, if your stuck in some small town, this side of East Podunk, and the local shop just happens to only have SRAM 10spd chains, it will work.... but it will sound like you're being chased by my Stihl...

Here's what the upgraded Bontrager crankset looks like...

Thanks for checking in! -John

Download RogueMechanicPodcast11.m4a (15434.8K)

This is kinda funny... ROGUE

Click here to purchase!

Enjoy! ~John

Here's your opportunity to get a barely used 2005 Zipp 900 tubular disc wheel that's in great condition before it lands on eBay... I'd say less than 200 miles on it. Zipp lists the product weight at 940 grams!!! It's aero, fast, and light!!! It's 700c and currently has a Shimano freehub body. The Tufo Elite Jet <160g tubular tire is included. Contact me with any questions. Shipping should run $25.00 anywhere in the US except Alaska and Hawaii... Those of you who know, will realize that this is a great deal. O.k...I'm going to take off my salesman's cap now...

Download RogueMechanicPodcast10.m4a

Do you know where your bike mechanic is?



This one is just trying to get things done... It's a constant game of catch-up. I'm not complaining.

Here's a closer look..

This should fall under Mavic's warranty policy. The wheel has been sent and I'm just waiting to hear back from the Mavic warranty department. If by some odd reason they say it's not covered....oh.... there's going to be some issues... I'll keep you posted.

Most people don't think too much about their headsets. It's one of those components that's absolutely critical but often ignored. When it goes south, it's due to corrosion and/or bearing/race failure. One of the bad things that could happen if you let it go too far is actually damage to the steer tube of the fork. Watch for really tight, loose, or "indexed" steering. Be aware that even cartridge bearings go bad, and most are easy to replace. And for all of those with Chris King headsets, stay on top of the maintenance of those bearings so that it will turn smooth for years. The ten year warranty does not mean ten years maintenance free...

Download RogueMechanicPodcast09.m4a (4067.7K)

Download RogueMechanicPodcast08.m4a (14724.2K)

Download RogueMechanicPodcast07.m4a (13540.6K)


Thanks for checking in and for taking the time to suscribe to the RogueMechanic Podast on iTunes.

Download RogueMechanicPodcast 06 CPS Pt2.m4a (17640.5K)

This episode is the second part of my interview with Eric from Cyfac. This system of fitting is different from the others out there and I think that you will find what Eric has to say interesting.

Download RogueMechanicPodcast Episode 05 CPS Pt1.m4a (11997.9K)

This episode is the first of a series of interview with Eric Sakalowsky, Director of VeloEuropa and importer of Cyfac and the Cyfac Postural System.

Here's the link to the Cyfac Postural System.

Thanks for checking in and for taking the time to suscribe to the RogueMechanic Podast on iTunes.

My Podcast Alley feed! {pca-de5d9665a0d9dcd4dfb247bc2e89c063}

RogueMechanic Podcast Episode 04

Listen on iTunes.

Download RogueMechanicPodcast Episode 04

Here's the link to Barnett Bicycle Institute.

Go here to see the Litespeed "Anonymity Kit"

Campy's Ultra Torque Crankset page.

and here's a link to the .pdf file... Scroll down to page 12 to see what I'm talking about...

Here's the 2007 Entrants list for the Leadville Trail 100.

SRAM Force Brake Recall Notice

The way I see it...
If you're going to provide the same level of service that can be found at at big box store, your days are numbered....

Here's a link to the RogueMechanic Podcast on iTunes or just click here to listen right now!
Download RogueMechanicPodcast3.m4a (12542.8K)
Quite frankly, I haven't had enough time to completely figure out this whole podcasting thing just yet, but I'm pretty excited to get it up and running. So, hang tight while I get things situated...
and if you would be so kind, please suscribe to the podcast on iTunes. Thanks in advance! Ok, on with the shownotes...

I don't know why I'm providing this, but here's a link to Bianchi.

Shimano chains.

Campagnolo chains.

SRAM chains.

Here's my email... Hit me up with questions, comments, suggestions...

That's it for now.... Back to the bikes.

RogueMechanic email address: roguemechanic@gmail.com

Skype

Gotta get back to the bikes...

Thanks!
John

Great designs still have drawbacks. Honestly, there's not much that you can do to prevent this from happening. It's a rare occurance but can still happen. This design that Mavic uses on their higher quality wheels (Ksyriums, CrossMax. etc) actually has the nipple threading into the rim as opposed to the nipple threading onto the spoke. Great idea but not infallible...This was no longer a 15 minute job....

Here's a closer look at the Mavic FORE design...

This was tedious and took much longer than expected. Here's what remains of the extracted nipple and spoke end...

Corrosion was the major cause of this issue as is with most frozen nipple issues. It's just much less of an process replacing the traditional spoke nipple design. And please refrain from the "could be prevented with a nice dinner and a bottle of wine" comments... Thanks for reading!