FSA ceramic wheel bearings?

[wwtsui]

Out of curiosity more than anything else, has anyone here tried these? Any impressions? After reading the cyclingnews review of the ceramic BB, it seemed to me that the wheel bearings would make more of a difference. Also, is replacing the bearings in a pair of Ksyriums reasonably straightforward (i.e., something the LBS could handle)?

[Too Tall]

It is nice of you to support the mass market cycling industry. Thank you :rolleyes:

(Ahem) Spend the cash on a great dinner and a movie. This is not going to make you go faster.

What would Jelly Roll Morton do?

[csm]

most of what we buy for our bikes won't make us faster.

[ergott]

The theoretical is that ceramic bearings will have a longer service life. Too soon to tell, but that reason will be easier to stomach than the 0.3W (just a guess) you might save.

[1centaur]

The world is full of naysayers who calculate zero effect from cycling gimmicks. To repeat a story I've given before:

I already owned two sets of Topolino AC19s. I always felt their bearings were their weakness, and my LBS wanted to experiment with ceramic wheel bearings, so they offered to put in a set at cost. I decided to do as scientific an experiement as possible. I put new GP 4000s and new tubes on both sets of Topos. I had the LBS put the new bearings in one and not the other. I told the LBS to give me a blind test - sequential identical 16 mile familiar loop, one with each set of wheels, same bike, same cassette cluster (i.e., wheel change between loops), same tire pressure, but don't tell me which is which. I noted my qualitative impressions, did various intermediate roll-down tests, and noted total ride time for each loop. When I got back after the second loop, I said, "Second wheel felt faster, is faster." I was right. That said, the total time difference between the loops was 30 seconds (though I was more tired on round two).

I had ceramics put in the other set as well.

Now when I ride those wheels I rarely go "whee" but ocasionally note greater freedom than I would expect. I get greater speed increase from 303 clincher rims. I don't feel sluggish on other high quality bearings. So my take is, ceramics are better, but not enough better to merit much cost.

[Grant McLean]

... I decided to do as scientific an experiement as possible.

Riding the same loop twice is scientific?

g

[Bill Bove]

We've installed the FSA's on a couple of bikes and their riders seem to like them. That's all that matters.

Boca Bearing www.bocabearing.com has ceramic bearings for most cycling applications. It ain't hard to swap them.

[obtuse]

The world is full of naysayers who calculate zero effect from cycling gimmicks. To repeat a story I've given before:

I already owned two sets of Topolino AC19s. I always felt their bearings were their weakness, and my LBS wanted to experiment with ceramic wheel bearings, so they offered to put in a set at cost. I decided to do as scientific an experiement as possible. I put new GP 4000s and new tubes on both sets of Topos. I had the LBS put the new bearings in one and not the other. I told the LBS to give me a blind test - sequential identical 16 mile familiar loop, one with each set of wheels, same bike, same cassette cluster (i.e., wheel change between loops), same tire pressure, but don't tell me which is which. I noted my qualitative impressions, did various intermediate roll-down tests, and noted total ride time for each loop. When I got back after the second loop, I said, "Second wheel felt faster, is faster." I was right. That said, the total time difference between the loops was 30 seconds (though I was more tired on round two).

I had ceramics put in the other set as well.

Now when I ride those wheels I rarely go "whee" but ocasionally note greater freedom than I would expect. I get greater speed increase from 303 clincher rims. I don't feel sluggish on other high quality bearings. So my take is, ceramics are better, but not enough better to merit much cost.

any even small decrease in friction can certainly be felt. 1centaur is right. long before it became an "in" thing to do i rebuilt an loose ball/roller bearing d/a ocatlink bb with ceramics took out all the seals and lubed the thing with special oils....it spun when you blew on the spindle. by the time i'd done the same thing to the d/a hubs and played with the pulleys some there was a difference...not nearly enough to warrant the cost but a difference nonetheless.

obtuse

[obtuse]

Riding the same loop twice is scientific?

g

as scientific as me telling you tied and soldered wheels exhibit greater torsional stiffness than wheels not prepared as such. sometimes the pudding is in the proof or something.

obtuse

[Grant McLean]

as scientific as me telling you tied and soldered wheels exhibit greater torsional stiffness than wheels not prepared as such. sometimes the pudding is in the proof or something.

obtuse

I love pudding.

I ride the same loop 3 or 4 times a week, and the times vary each ride.
Does that mean my hubs are performing differently each time? :)

Some days I have a 'no chain' ride, others I feel like crap, are you saying
maybe it's my bike? :)

If you want to tell me something about the performance of a component,
strap on some watt measuring device, and ride in a wind tunnel, in
controlled environment, otherwise give me a freakin' break.
Everything else is outside the margin of error.

g

[1centaur]

I have ridden that loop 50 times, but the nature of time prevents me from riding the comparison for the first time more than once. I could do it week after week on a blind basis, but would anyone expect that? We could have 1,000 people do it once, but hey, life's too short. My question was whether a low dollar upgrade was worth it. I answered it for myself fairly and reasonably, and I haven't seen anyone else report their actual physical test. I'm sure many of us would be interested if someone came up with a better test.

[Grant McLean]

I have ridden that loop 50 times, but the nature of time prevents me from riding the comparison for the first time more than once. I could do it week after week on a blind basis, but would anyone expect that? We could have 1,000 people do it once, but hey, life's too short. My question was whether a low dollar upgrade was worth it. I answered it for myself fairly and reasonably, and I haven't seen anyone else report their actual physical test. I'm sure many of us would be interested if someone came up with a better test.

Hey Centaur,

It's all good, man.
I'm not saying anything about the bearings, or if they're worth it.
They're just nothing "scientific" about your test, that's all.

g

[obtuse]

Hey Centaur,

It's all good, man.
I'm not saying anything about the bearings, or if they're worth it.
They're just nothing "scientific" about your test, that's all.

g


there's nothing scientific about alot of things that are nonetheless true and can be experienced first hand. 1centaur rode the bike with and without the ceramic bearings and could tell the difference. correct scientific method would demand him to conduct the experiment a few more times and the variables are certainly real and the margin of error is potentially huge.....now whether the amount of energy lost through friction had anything to do with his increase in times i have no idea and i doubt it, that being said replacing bearings that suck with bearings that spin smoothly can certainly be felt when riding a bicycle.

obtuse

[Grant McLean]

there's nothing scientific about alot of things that are nonetheless true and can be experienced first hand. 1centaur rode the bike with and without the ceramic bearings and could tell the difference. correct scientific method would demand him to conduct the experiment a few more times and the variables are certainly real and the margin of error is potentially huge.....now whether the amount of energy lost through friction had anything to do with his increase in times i have no idea and i doubt it, that being said replacing bearings that suck with bearings that spin smoothly can certainly be felt when riding a bicycle.

obtuse

Exactly. Don't tell me, tell Centaur1.
He's the one who wrote a post about how he "scientifically" performed a test.

g

[obtuse]

Exactly. Don't tell me, tell Centaur1.
He's the one who wrote a post about how he "scientifically" performed a test.

g


i'm telling the whole world! how about this one; what if anything is "scientific" about "scientific socialism"? discuss.

obtuse

[Grant McLean]

i'm telling the whole world! how about this one; what if anything is "scientific" about "scientific socialism"? discuss.

obtuse

I could tell you some nice anecdotes, but clearly,
who would see the irony in that?

:)

g

[1centaur]

I guess we solve the problem by replacing "scientific" with "as rationally as reasonably possible."

Note that I am not saying the 30 seconds was the proof, since I mentioned roll-down times. At two specific spots I accelerated to hit a certain speed at a specfic point then rolled in approximately the same position to a further check point and noted the terminal speed. In both cases, the ceramic bearings were associated with faster terminal speeds. I view the 30 seconds as a data point but a bad one for all the reasons you imply. It's just that riding 50 minutes with wheelset one, getting a wheeel change and rolling 50 minutes (or was it 49:30 :) ) with wheelset two is the best I can do to avoid environmental and physiological variability throwing off the test.

My goal was to see if I could perceive a difference. I could. I made some measurements along the way that reassured me I was not just projecting my emotional desire to see a difference (and used the blind nature of the test for the same reason). Using same model wheels, equal tires, tubes and pressures was also a way to avoid the typical objections of variability. If this had been a science experiment in high school it probably would have been accepted. But for the more exacting purposes of this forum, let's just call it "a comparison of sensations and numbers."

[wwtsui]

1centaur,
As the one who asked the question, thanks for sharing your experience -- that's exactly the kind of perspective I was hoping somebody on this board would have.

While I agree that neutrally sponsored, double-blind, peer-reviewable, etc., etc. scientific proof (or dis-proof) and measurements would be very interesting, I didn't figure anyone here was that obsessed (possessed?) to have managed to do so...

Thanks everyone!

[stevep]

I have ridden that loop 50 times, but the nature of time prevents me from riding the comparison for the first time more than once. I could do it week after week on a blind basis, but would anyone expect that? We could have 1,000 people do it once, but hey, life's too short. My question was whether a low dollar upgrade was worth it. I answered it for myself fairly and reasonably, and I haven't seen anyone else report their actual physical test. I'm sure many of us would be interested if someone came up with a better test.

i'd buy something like a roll down or something like that.. but a loop? not sure it makes any claim to an advantage of one over the other. way too many variables. atmo
worth it to centaur, thats all that matters really.

[ada@prorider.or]

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22710&highlight=bearings

[classic1]

any even small decrease in friction can certainly be felt. 1centaur is right. long before it became an "in" thing to do i rebuilt an loose ball/roller bearing d/a ocatlink bb with ceramics took out all the seals and lubed the thing with special oils....it spun when you blew on the spindle. by the time i'd done the same thing to the d/a hubs and played with the pulleys some there was a difference...not nearly enough to warrant the cost but a difference nonetheless.

obtuse

Trackies have been doing this stuff for years. Record hubs with dust caps and seals removed and run in oil always spin better than with all the extra paraphenalia still in place and with grease on the bearings.

Hinault won the GP des Nations in 1984 running his BB and hubs with oil instead of grease.

[theprep]

1Centaur

Thanks for putting in the effort and then writing about the bearing results.

Have you experimented with any Ceramic BB's yet.

cheers,
Joe

[catulle]

i'm telling the whole world! how about this one; what if anything is "scientific" about "scientific socialism"? discuss.

obtuse


Totally. Ask Bernadine, atmo. Moreover, even in the age of the silicon neuron the man who owns the means of production pulls the strings in DC. And the DOD strings are pulled from just the other side of the river. The thesis Challenge The Authority Of The Man And Have The Wrath Of The F16 Unleashed Upon You is a historical paradigm amply demonstrated in the lab of the Earth's hide, iirc. Now, is the cure any better than the illness? The answer my friend is blowing in the wind, the answer is blowing in the wind, because first you must state what answer are you referring to. OMMMMMM...

[stevep]

catulle,
you gotta get out of the house more
s

[1centaur]

Have you experimented with any Ceramic BB's yet.

My LBS didn't like the drag he was getting in the FSA ceramic BBs. And so I went with the Chris King bearing replacement on a couple of DA BBs.

I have the Token ISIS ceramic BB in my new Crumpton SL, which seems fine but not "smooth like butter." The trouble of course is that I can't A/B a BB on the same bike. Still, if it was a mind blower I think I would have noticed it.

My next crankset will use the 2007 Campy set-up. I certainly think the world's engineers have a way to go to develop a BB that's super smooth AND sealed from the elements, but if my legs are good on any given day somehow that does not seem to matter.

[catulle]

catulle,
you gotta get out of the house more
s


:) Don't forget my wheels...!