• Maybe there's less friction on a traditional cup and cone bb ? I'm sure there's a reason, and trackies aren't just being luddites. Look at all the money BC puts into the secret squirrel stuff

    Any crank/BB effects are tiny next to aerodynamic improvements, which is where most of the secret squirrel money goes. Lets say you waste 0.1W in crank/BB flex; if you make the assembly twice as stiff, you're only gaining 0.05W. In other words, if you're not actually breaking cranks, the generally satisfactory old school kit is a low priority for development until you're absolutely sure you've wrung every drop out of other areas. I'm sure the SS club have checked this and decided it's a low priority. There is also an issue with the joint between axle and crank - the square taper and Octalink have been proven over hundreds of training sessions to be up to the abuse meted out by big guys doing Kilo starts, but the other connection methods (various kinds of press fit, bonding and splines) have so far only been tested by skinny legged roadies. On top of all that, external bearings are just an interim solution while we are trying to fit 24-30mm axles into frames designed for 15-16mm ones, so there isn't much point spending a lot of time and money proving that they are an improvement when the next generation of frames will have BB30 or similar arrangements. Most of the current high end track frames already have grossly enlarged BB areas, so big holes through the middle of them seems an obvious path forward.

About

Avatar for gbj_tester @gbj_tester started