Originally Posted by
Camilo
Frankly, this oversized BB thing I think is a bit overkill for me and probably many if not most recreational enthusiasts, even strong amateur racers. I have no need - nor do I think do many riders - for a "more stiff" bottom bracket. I mean, please chime in if you've ever (I mean really, ever) felt the bottom bracket on your modern decent quality bike - aluminum, steel, CF, titanium - is too flexible. Really? Yes maybe for the 1 in a million pro-class sprinters, but for the rest of us 999,999? And the weight? Even when I was afflicted with weight weenism, it was a non-issue.
But I think the creakiness of PF BB's is quite a bit overstated, becoming Urban Legend at this stage of the technology.
I think the benefit, as someone mentioned upthread, of the OS BB shell is not so much stiffness of the BB, but rather that the bigger and wider BB shell provides the builder more room to work with larger tubes and shapes, affording overall frame stiffness and better tire clearance with tighter geometry. Particular to metal, the extra space of the OS shell allows the weld heat affected zones to be more isolated and smaller, maintaining the more uniform and predictable original mechanical properties of the shell metal.