-
DUB does nothing that 386Evo wasn't already doing perfectly well
This is what I don't get, particularly when SRAM was already making 386EVO compatible cranks. Do you know what marketing bullshit SRAM came up with to justify not simply adopting 386EVO?
Still, another reason for the No More SRAM rule a.k.a. The Bauke Mollema principle. Not that another was really necessary.
Brommers-
DUB had to work on older and less progressive* threaded frames too, and squishing a 30mm axle in those is a bit of a ballache. So they dropped 1.1mm to make it easier :)
* Santa Cruz love a BSA threaded BB.
-
Do you know what marketing bullshit SRAM came up with to justify not simply adopting 386EVO?
Having enjoyed the 6 minute game of bullshit bingo which is the launch presentation, it seems that they think they can get more bearing durability out of 29mm than 30mm. This is only an actual potential gain when you're trying to fit the bearings inside a 41mm OD for BB86/92 which nobody in their right mind would even attempt (yes, I know it has been done with 30mm and now DUB, but it's as moronic to try to fit into that shell as it is for a frame manufacturer to impose it on their customers)
In the general case of external cups or BB30/PF30/386Evo shells, they're just going to use the usual 6806 size outer races, balls and retainers with a special underbore inner race anyway.
Howard
gbj_tester
No you can't, it still won't go in stupid BB86/92 frames. DUB does nothing that 386Evo wasn't already doing perfectly well, it just ties you to bike-specific bearings rather than generic 30mm ID cartridges, so they can charge three times the proper price every time you replace them