Comments on: Origin 8 2X9 Crank Set: On Test

By: Jimmythefly

Jimmythefly — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:10:34 +0000

Count me as another who likes Octalink over external. I picked up a Coda crankset a few weeks ago that’s a dedicated 5×94BCD double, on an Octalink V1(road) 109.5mm bottom bracket. It came with 44/29 rings, which suit my commuter bike just fine.

For mountain rides, I’ll stick with a good ‘ol 22/34/bashguard. I need the hillclimbing ability and I rarely need to go faster than the 34/11 allows, at least when I’m actually in the mountains.

There are a couple of other options for compact doubles(that aren’t a square-taper BB), but I’m trying to find stuff on eBay and don’t need you lot bidding against me!

By: Guitar Ted

Guitar Ted — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:46:45 +0000

dan: I am very curious whether the 29T will become available as well as a triple with the 20T granny. I have been putting my two cents in to Origin 8 on this for several months now.

Alex: The external BB set ups have certainly simplified things for manufacturers and consumers. However, it has caused issues with seal drag, and bearings that spin poorly, (thus the very lucrative and hot ceramic after market bearing sales by several companies.) I think the concept is fine, but the execution of the concept is poor. There is no accounting for adjustment in regards to side loading the bearings and frame tolerances being slightly off on outboard bearings with a few notable, very expensive exceptions.

My inclination would be to utilize a few of the past bottom bracket features in a new package. The simplicity of a cartridge, which eliminates frame facing issues, a larger diameter shell, ala BB-30, and the ISIS interface, which makes for fool proof crank arm installation and removals. If all of this could be accomplished in one simplified, easy to install cartridge in a bigger bottom bracket shell which would allow for bigger internal bearings, then I think we’d have a BB that would last years and years under severe duty.

I just think that current manufacturer philosophies and culture doesn’t support this sort of product longevity and ease of use.

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:07:51 +0000

Interesting about the external BB’s. I’ve had zero issues with mine but there’s very little mud out here in Utah – mostly dust. You do have to give the manufacturers credit though for simplifying matters related to BB options – 68/73 width is dealt with easily. Also, aren’t there too many damn standards for bottom brackets anyways? I dunno, I see this as a move in the right direction.

By: dan

dan — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 14:29:30 +0000

great crank set when 10 speed or 36tooth rear sprockets come later this year .also wonder if you can buy the 29 tooth sprocket ?

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:22:48 +0000

Agreed 100%. The only thing EBB’s are good for filling up with dirt. Who ever thought that having your bearing sitting on the outside under a flimsy disc of plastic would be a revolution in bike component design was a fool.

By: Steve-o

Steve-o — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:20:19 +0000

External BB’s are crap. Decent for road and nothing but trouble for XC/CX. I just spent the cash to get a set of Middleburn’s in ISIS. The external BB was marketed real well by all involved as a more durable (not) and stiffer (very marginally according to FSA’s website). Going to the external BB did help to save some grams, but it was mostly so manufacturers only had to make 1 BB. Think about it, they used to have to make a whole bunch of different width shells anf spindle lengths. That costs money. Now they make one, that is mostly plastic (cheap) and make different length plastic pieces for it. All way more cost effective for them. ISIS and Octalink were very expensive to produce because the bearings were small. That is why BB 30 is the standard od the future. By your next bike in BB30 and show all the manufacturers that this is the way to go. Lighter, Stiffer all around.

Rant over.

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 19:32:28 +0000

I love ISIS….I’ve had nothing but problems with external BB’s on both my XC and CX bikes.
I think for mountain communities a combo with a big ring of a 38t would be the. I rarely use the 44t except for a commute back to town occasionally. 38 would be sick!

Nice looking gear, make a lighter option for another $60 as well and your in the market for HP product.

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:57:19 +0000

Aren’t ISIS/Octalink obsolete standards? Or at least on their way to it? Every bike that I’ve upgraded over the last couple years I’ve gone with external BB style cranks as the price of a new crank set was barely higher than finding replacement octolink or isis parts.

By: Guitar Ted

Guitar Ted — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:33:48 +0000

3 agu: This crank ain’t light. It’s cheap and durable. Origin 8 may lighten it up if there is interest, but for less than $100.00 street for this crank with rings, you are not going to get light weight too.

By: agu

agu — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 02:57:04 +0000

Interesting how they decided to use ISIS.

Did you guys measure it up? Q-factor, weight, etc? Hope it comes out lighter than a triple crank sans granny.