Shimano Deore Hollowtech II Crankset

MountJordan

hi guys
i am building a marin nail frame up from scratch, it had a truvitiv bottom bracket in it which was a 113mm spindle and 68mm. i am wanting to place a deore hollowtech crankset on the bike and i have seen the set i want. i was just wondering if it would fit the bike. spec of the new set is
Specifications:

Material : Aluminium, small sprocket steel
Colour : black arms silver ring
Bolt Circle :104 / 64mm
Comes complete with bottom bracket for 68 and 73 mm frames
Chainring sizes : 44/32/22t
Crank Arm Length E 175mm
Designed for 9 Speed
Will fit both B/B Sizes 68mm/73mm via spacers supplied
Tools are not included to fit this unit. (But are available within our shop)
Product Code: FCM590E422XL
NEW 2010 Version
cheers for your help in advance ;p


cheer

ilovedirt

Truvativ axles are a different width to shimano, as such, truvativ hollow BB's are only compatible with truvativ cranks, however if you are buying the deore crankset new, it will come with a BB anyway. Truvativ BB's are shite anyway.

nicklouse

MountJordan

no probs but as you are going from an internal BB to an external one the BB shell will need faceing. An LBS job.

submityournentries

that deore one is on chain reaction, ive got it and it comes with the external bb cups such good value (and i was very naughty and didnt get it faced cause im abit lazy like that) and it runs soooooo smooth,

vengeance111

i didnt face it either, still works after 3 months :twisted:

rockmonkeysc

When I changed from internal to external BB on my Hardrock I measured the BB shell & found that it was only 0.02m out of tru after I removed the paint.
I asked the mechanic at a local bike shop about it & he said that it is very rare that it actually needs doing on a modern, good quality frame.
The shell would align to the thread when tight, not the face of the BB shell & the plastic spacers would deform to make up any difference, that would be one of the reasons for using plastic spacers.

jayson

Ive got the exact same crankset and it does indeed come with its own BB cups (as do all HT II cranks), if you have a 68mm BB shell then simply fit 2 plastic spacers to the drive side cup and screw in then the remaining spacer on the non side and its job done.

nicklouse

vengeance111 wrote:

i didnt face it either, still works after 3 months :twisted:

and the ones that have been will last longer.

nicklouse

RockmonkeySC wrote:

When I changed from internal to external BB on my Hardrock I measured the BB shell & found that it was only 0.02m out of tru after I removed the paint.
I asked the mechanic at a local bike shop about it & he said that it is very rare that it actually needs doing on a modern, good quality frame.
The shell would align to the thread when tight, not the face of the BB shell & the plastic spacers would deform to make up any difference, that would be one of the reasons for using plastic spacers.

sorry, but how did you measure this? it is not a distance measurement it is an angular one. I would say that you have total missed the point of facing.

i wonder if your mechanic has the facing tools.

I am constantly amazed how far out most modern frames are.

and when bike come back with worn bearings after a short time the BB shell has normally not been faced.

rockmonkeysc

I was going to face it using a milling machine so I set it on the machine bed using a dti guage to get the bore of the BB shell true within less than 0.01mm. I then run the guage over the face of the shell found it was nice and true, flipped it over & repeated it on the over side. True to within 0.02mm (paralell & square).
This is a method I would use for precision machine parts which need to be far more accurate than a BB shell.
The mechanic who told me that few frames need facing does have the tool, he would need it to be able to check if a BB shell is true.