Now take away the disadvantages of the system: the minuscule tolerances that need to be just right in order to get a creak-free interface, a perfectly straight installation to avoid damaging the BB shell, and all the tools needed to get the bearings in and out, again without damaging the frame.

What exactly does this mean for you, the rider? Think of the benefits of PF30: bigger bearings for longer life, larger bottom bracket shells for improved lateral stiffness, and a larger area that accommodates an array of tube shapes to tailor ride quality. As in, it screws into the frame just like English bottom brackets we knew and loved. It’s called T47, and it’s a thread-in solution to PF30. Let’s call it a re-imagining, because this new iteration is something we’ve seen before, something we know works. There hasn’t been much of that in the last several years since a slew of press-in bottom brackets hit the market, each iteration as flawed as the next.

So let’s start with that skepticism: First off, it’s not a standard, because that word implies some sort of consistency across brands and platforms. Another bottom bracket? Unless it threads into the BB shell, I didn’t want to hear about it. Yeah, my eyes were rolling when I heard the news too. So he, along with Chris King components, set about creating an alternative to PF30. Problem is, with imperfect technology standards like PF30, that pursuit is impossible. GUERNEVILLE, California (VN) - Ben Farver, founder of Argonaut Cycles, wants to make the perfect road bike. Heading out the door? Read this article on the new Outside+ app available now on iOS devices for members!

Download urban slay