New Crankset and Bottom Bracket for my 4500

[Old Proflexer]

I've been looking at some of the options to move over to a 9 speed from my old but still quite functional 8 speed xt setup.
Square taper, Wilderness Trail Bikes BB (hollow bolts so I can inject grease and clean off the excess) is what I have.  
Getting chain rings for the older setups seems to be a bit of hassle so looking to take the leap into the new millenium's standards.

Am drawn towards one of the new XT setups with the exterior bottom brackets, integrated cranks etc. all in one box.
I looked back at some of the old posts and didn't seem to get a clear answer.

I had gone into a "Performance" bike shop to look around, was quickly insulted by some young yo-yo who knew everything and wanted to expain that before even asking me a question, so I left.

Stopped in at a local "Rock 'n Road" and one of the guys that looked pretty scarred and beat up, so I presumed he rides like
most all the other guys in there, mentioned that the Octalink, Isis types seem to be on their way out and the exterior bearing'd
types appear to be taking over.

Any experience here or with friends with these types of units?

Should they slip right in first time around on my 4500?
Would you suggest I have a guy in the shop do the install or are they pretty simple and just do it myself?

Yeah, new chain, new cassette, new shifter for the right side.



Any feedback would be appreciated guys - thanks.

[Thunderchild]

Good to hear from you again OP.

I won't be of much help, but can commiserate.  I became confused when trying to find the correct spindle width for an older bike.  No one really new what I needed to preserve my chainline and fit the bike correctly.  Personally, I think the out bound bearings are not a great idea.  More exposed to water, mud, Moab sand, etc.   To me that equates to more maintenance. 

Here is a, local to me, LBS that sells 5-arm chainrings. 

http://www.utahmountainbiking.com/shopmiva/components_chainrings.html

Yamabiker

[orange]

there was an issue with the outboard bearings wearing a lot quicker too as they are smaller - not sure if that's been resolved.

[fyrstormer]

Oh, sure it's been resolved. They've decided the NEW standard should be a single piece cartridge again -- only this time, it's BMX-sized, so older bikes can't be retrofitted. 

Anyway, 9-speed rings work fine with 8-speed chains.

[Colin]

Anyway, 9-speed rings work fine with 8-speed chains.

They sure do, but maybe it's finding one's in the appropriate BCD that's the problem?

I've got an Octalink set up ready to fit to one of my Oz's but I'm not convinced I've got the right axle length.................I bought a 73x113mm as per the OEM square taper BB............I'll have to suck it and see.

Col.

[shovelon]

Anyway, 9-speed rings work fine with 8-speed chains.

They sure do, but maybe it's finding one's in the appropriate BCD that's the problem?

I've got an Octalink set up ready to fit to one of my Oz's but I'm not convinced I've got the right axle length.................I bought a 73x113mm as per the OEM square taper BB............I'll have to suck it and see.

Col.

I have an XT Octalink in my Oz, 73x113. Originally had XT crankset, now FSA carbon pro. Both have worked flawlessly.

Terry

[DugB]

I still ride square taper on most of my bikes. Who cares what's "on the way out"...the second hand market is flooded with older gear, and you're not likely to stress it to its breaking point. I fitted most of my old bikes with XTR M950/952-series gear for a song (crank is octalink, by the way, with a BB in the 180g range - very light!), and the stuff shifts like crazy (certainly on par with the Sram X0 I recently put on the 956, maybe slightly less crisp than a set of M970 shifters I tried recently...but still reaaaaaly good). 

[Colin]

Anyway, 9-speed rings work fine with 8-speed chains.

They sure do, but maybe it's finding one's in the appropriate BCD that's the problem?

I've got an Octalink set up ready to fit to one of my Oz's but I'm not convinced I've got the right axle length.................I bought a 73x113mm as per the OEM square taper BB............I'll have to suck it and see.

Col.

I have an XT Octalink in my Oz, 73x113. Originally had XT crankset, now FSA carbon pro. Both have worked flawlessly.

Terry

Excellent! That's exactly the BB and Crankset that I've got in a box ready to go!

Col.

[jazclrint]

Ahh, ok, I'm going to chime in.  Square taper isn't on it's way out, it's dead.  And the only people buying Oct/ISIS are ones who can't afford the new external BB cranksets.  Here's the thing, the new designs are MUCH stiffer and efficient.  I will disclaimer this by saying I am still running ISIS on my proflex.  But I've run Campy's external crankset on my road bike and the improvement in stiffness was paramount to when I switched from a 1989(?) Raleigh Technium Alu/steel lugged frame set to a 2004 Raleigh Prestige Alu frameset with carbon fork and stays.  Now the Proflex has a much beefier BB area in the frame, so I have been curious how much difference I would notice on my 5500.  On the raod the best degign as far as bearing life is Shimano's because you can preload the bearings, but to me Campy's design is MUCH simpler and easier to work on.  It was such a good design that Specialized copied it, but they only make thier cranksets for BB30 bottom brackets.  I've seen and heard of FSA's gossimer crank arms falling off, but the rest of their line seems to be fine.  And I installed a set of Truatives on my ex's mtb when I built it up for her, and they were easy enough to install.  If you do go with Shimano's cranks though (ick) I would have a mechanic install it to make sure the bearing tension gets set right.  Personally, I'm waiting for grip shifts to be offered on the XX groupset, and going external BB with a double.  Not that I have the money for it.

[fyrstormer]

Ahh, ok, I'm going to chime in.  Square taper isn't on it's way out, it's dead.  And the only people buying Oct/ISIS are ones who can't afford the new external BB cranksets.  Here's the thing, the new designs are MUCH stiffer and efficient.

Single-piece bottom brackets are much easier to set up, because they don't require the BB shell to be faced, and the bearings don't drag on the spindle if they're a tiny bit out of alignment, because they're NEVER out of alignment. That's why the newest tech is BMX-sized single-piece bottom brackets, because I guess the larger bearings are an improvement but the external-cup design was too much of a pain in the ass to work with.

As for who's buying ISIS parts -- I buy them because they're a standard interface across all manufacturers, meaning I can pick the best bottom bracket and pair it with the best cranks, according to my preferences. As far as I know, the external BBs and cranks come as branded pairs, and if you replace one you have to replace the other. I'm not cool with that.

The only reason bikes are as good as they are nowadays is because the parts companies used standard fittings so their parts were all interchangeable, and therefore all competitive with each other. Proprietary interfaces reduce our choice as consumers and degrade the quality of the marketplace.

[Thunderchild]

Ahh, ok, I'm going to chime in.  Square taper isn't on it's way out, it's dead. 

Just don't tell Phil Wood & Co. that square taper is dead.
http://www.philwood.com/products/bottom-brackets/

By the way, he passed from this world on March 17th.  http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_14742546 


I have a square taper on my Miyata Terra Runner that is 21 years old and still cranking.  This is the old school with accessible bearings 

Thunderchild

[Old Proflexer]

Thanks guys, not sure if I heard that someone is running a set on a 4500 carbon or not but will give it a try when the time is right.
Just had a couple outings this weekend and all the components of the bike were running well - just trying to get into a 34 on the back end.
It's not like I'm lacking for a perfect gear to be in -
If I can't find one in my selection of 24, it's me with the problem and not the bike.  I'll just have to spend more time working on the motor.

Jaczlrint - Personal opinion but I think it's ok to buy something that works well for a less money if one can't afford the more expensive setup.

[jazclrint]

Jaczlrint - Personal opinion but I think it's ok to buy something that works well for a less money if one can't afford the more expensive setup.

And I'd appreciate not being misinterpreted.  I didn't say there was anything wrong with buying ISIS.  It's what I have now.  I simply said that those who can't afford the external cranks sets get ISIS.  I wasn't implying anything other than the performance on external systems in terms of raw stiffness is without competition.  You asked about our experiences with those products I was speaking just to what was most common in the market and of my own experiences.  For the exact reason of affordability I have a Campy square taper crankset mated to a Miche BB on my Trek 820 SS.  I got both for a song.

On the performance side, from personal experience I went from a mid-late 90's Campagnolo square taper cranks to their new Ultra-Torque cranks (which come apart in not time).  The difference in rigidity was ridiculous.  And that was on an '04 Raleigh Prestige road frame.  I can't speak to the BMX BB referenced above, because I haven't seen them on the market yet, but I haven't looked that hard.  I do know Shimano, SRAM, Race Face, and Campanolo are all external BB systems still.  Heck, even Shimano's BMX crankset is Hollowtech.

Oh, and ISIS is only the standard as long as it's not Octalink compatible.  The problem with the way things were was that Shimano was the standard, and when people try to define a different standard (ISIS), Shimano refuses to play ball.  But you really can't spring $30 for an external BB when you change brands?  How often to you change cranks?  And for what it's worth I just rode my Campy external BB cranks every work day through a Maine winter, and they're just fine.  They are arguably, the most exposed bearings in the market.  SRAM's new 2X10 line is all external BB cranksets.  If there were issues that were bad enough to overcome the performance benefits then I would think they would change.  But maybe they are just replying to market pressures.