Repacking front wheel cup and cone hub - too much grease?
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Repacking front wheel cup and cone hub - too much grease?
Hi, everyone.
I'm just getting into bike mechanics, learning and trying to maintain my bikes myself. So please don't laugh hard if I ask something stupid
I've recently bought 1988 Miyata 615. While the bike is quite old it wasn't ridden much and spent whole his life in the previous owner's basement.
Following recommendations from this great forum, I've decided to repack all the bearings on the bike. I've started from the front wheel hub, assuming it's the easiest part of the job.
Before taking the front wheel off the bike, I've checked for the play in the axle with the QR closed and opened (closed just a little to prevent the wheel falling off). Since I've never adjusted the cones before I wanted to have a feel how much play there should be before closing QR. There was no play with QR closed and very little play with QR opened.
Also I've done the following test that Sheldon Brown suggests to test the cone adjustment:
The wheel swung back and forth 6 times.
I've took apart the hub. It was in a good shape: the grease inside was clean but was getting thick and dry.
I've cleaned the hub internals and cones with mineral spirit, replaced the ball bearings, put in a LOT of marine grease, reassembled and adjusted the hub. Then, all proud of myself, did the wheel swing test. The wheel swung back and forth 4 times. Telling me that there's more friction in the hub than it was before. I opened the QR (now I could feel some play on the axle) and did the test again. Same result - 4 swings. This tells me that I didn't overly tightened the cones.
I'm wondering why there's more friction in the hub now? Is there too much grease in the hub? (Sheldon Brown says that there's no such thing as too much grease in a hub). I'm certain that I've used the right size ball bearings (3/16) and put in right number of balls (10 per side). I'm not sure what's the grade of the balls. I got them from LBS and there's no information about the balls grade on the package.
Did I do something wrong? Or the higher friction in a hub is expected after repacking?
I'm just getting into bike mechanics, learning and trying to maintain my bikes myself. So please don't laugh hard if I ask something stupid
I've recently bought 1988 Miyata 615. While the bike is quite old it wasn't ridden much and spent whole his life in the previous owner's basement.
Following recommendations from this great forum, I've decided to repack all the bearings on the bike. I've started from the front wheel hub, assuming it's the easiest part of the job.
Before taking the front wheel off the bike, I've checked for the play in the axle with the QR closed and opened (closed just a little to prevent the wheel falling off). Since I've never adjusted the cones before I wanted to have a feel how much play there should be before closing QR. There was no play with QR closed and very little play with QR opened.
Also I've done the following test that Sheldon Brown suggests to test the cone adjustment:
... hold the tire so that the valve is at the 3:00 or 9:00 position, then let go of it. On most wheels, the valve is the heaviest part; on wheels that have spoke reflectors, the reflector will be the heaviest part. Whatever is the heaviest part of the wheel, it should cause the wheel to turn and swing back and forth like a pendulum, before finally coming to a stop.
I've took apart the hub. It was in a good shape: the grease inside was clean but was getting thick and dry.
I've cleaned the hub internals and cones with mineral spirit, replaced the ball bearings, put in a LOT of marine grease, reassembled and adjusted the hub. Then, all proud of myself, did the wheel swing test. The wheel swung back and forth 4 times. Telling me that there's more friction in the hub than it was before. I opened the QR (now I could feel some play on the axle) and did the test again. Same result - 4 swings. This tells me that I didn't overly tightened the cones.
I'm wondering why there's more friction in the hub now? Is there too much grease in the hub? (Sheldon Brown says that there's no such thing as too much grease in a hub). I'm certain that I've used the right size ball bearings (3/16) and put in right number of balls (10 per side). I'm not sure what's the grade of the balls. I got them from LBS and there's no information about the balls grade on the package.
Did I do something wrong? Or the higher friction in a hub is expected after repacking?
Last edited by t1k; 08-06-19 at 04:21 PM.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: columbus, ohio
Posts: 895
Bikes: Soma Saga, 1980 Schwinn Voyageur 11.8, New Albion Privateer
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
7 Posts
Your issue may be because marine grease is heavier and tackier than regular bearing grease. I use marine grease as well because it is more resistant to water. I don't think you'll notice any difference at all when you ride the bike.
Likes For robert schlatte:
#3
Senior Member
Spinning without resistance doesn't matter. Does the hub feel smooth when spinning?
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,656
Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!
Likes: 0
Liked 1,102 Times
in
747 Posts
Freshly overhauled and greased hubs are usually a bit "stickier" than one that has been in service for a while since the grease excess has yet to be distributed or extruded out of the hub. That will improve as the miles build up. Also, as noted, marine grease is thicker than most of the grease sold for bike use and will drag slightly more. The difference is insignificant.
#5
Junior Member
Thread Starter
#6
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Thank you for the answers.
It does make sense that the thicker grease creates more drag. I was confused because I have never seen "normal" bike bearing grease.
Thank you again. I very appreciate your help.
It does make sense that the thicker grease creates more drag. I was confused because I have never seen "normal" bike bearing grease.
Thank you again. I very appreciate your help.
Last edited by t1k; 08-06-19 at 04:26 PM.
#8
Senior Member
I personally like to get as much grease as possible around the bearings.
However, you don't need any grease in the middle of the hub in the hole between the axle and the hub shell.
Nonetheless, I'd leave your wheel as-is, and move on.
However, you don't need any grease in the middle of the hub in the hole between the axle and the hub shell.
Nonetheless, I'd leave your wheel as-is, and move on.
#9
Really Old Senior Member
#11
Junior Member
Thread Starter
#12
Junior Member
Thread Starter
You're absolutely right. In addition to learning how much play should be left on a hub (before closing QR skewer) I had to decide for myself how tight I want my QR to be. I tighten the skewer bolt until the resistance starts when the skewers closing part (not sure how it's called) is parallel to the axle.
#13
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Im going to derail this thread slightly
Does anyone have some good tips on how to adjust cones on a hub with QR without having to put on and off the wheel on a bike 10 times?
I've read about a tool that Sheldon Brown came up with, to properly adjust QR hubs without installing the wheel on a bike:
The spacer bushing consists of an old, worn-out cone, with a short length of axle screwed into it, so it fits reasonably snugly onto the skewer. The quick-release body presses on this old cone; the stub of axle (which you can't see, because it is entirely inside the old cone) presses on the end of the axle. This tool is also useful for truing wheels if you use a truing stand, such as the Park, that doesn't compress the axle. This tool can remove the play from the bearings, and still allow you to install the wheel into the truing stand.
Did anyone tried to make the tool. Is it possible to replace old worn-out cone with some washers?
Does anyone have some good tips on how to adjust cones on a hub with QR without having to put on and off the wheel on a bike 10 times?
I've read about a tool that Sheldon Brown came up with, to properly adjust QR hubs without installing the wheel on a bike:
Special tool for rapid cone adjustment under load
I have made a special tool for cone adjustment on QR hubs, consisting of a skewer and a spacer bushing to allow the handle end of the skewer to press against the end of the axle, leaving the locknuts unobstructed. This is very handy, and saves a good deal of time in the shop. Since it presses directly on the ends of the axle, you can make the actual adjustments while the axle is under compressive load from the quick release. This has not previously been possible.The spacer bushing consists of an old, worn-out cone, with a short length of axle screwed into it, so it fits reasonably snugly onto the skewer. The quick-release body presses on this old cone; the stub of axle (which you can't see, because it is entirely inside the old cone) presses on the end of the axle. This tool is also useful for truing wheels if you use a truing stand, such as the Park, that doesn't compress the axle. This tool can remove the play from the bearings, and still allow you to install the wheel into the truing stand.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 13,336
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Liked 4,338 Times
in
2,792 Posts
Leave the grease. Cheap insurance against water and dirt getting in. It will cost you a couple of seconds in a 25 mile time trial if that is important to you.
I overfill cup and cone bearings with marine grease all the time. Improves reliability and saves labor.
Ben
I overfill cup and cone bearings with marine grease all the time. Improves reliability and saves labor.
Ben
#15
FWIIW, I've tried multiple ways to make cone adjustments using various tools so as to avoid having to do trial/error adjustments (fitting hub to bike, closing QR, checking play) - none have worked well enough for me to get the adjustment consistently where I want it without tweaking. So I just continue doing trial and error and usually get it right within 2-3 times. You get better with experience - you develop the ability to feel how much play you should have with the QR open to have it snug up without any play with it closed. I have an old junk fork sitting around which I put in a vise to use as a stand, so this makes things a little faster/easier at least for the front wheel. And I try and repack rear hubs during drivertrain overhauls so typically the chain, RD, etc. is out of the way.
A newly-packed-with-grease hub will always have a little more drag than one that has some miles on it. If the play is right and it turns smoothly, then it's good to go in my book, even if it has a bit more drag.
- Mark
A newly-packed-with-grease hub will always have a little more drag than one that has some miles on it. If the play is right and it turns smoothly, then it's good to go in my book, even if it has a bit more drag.
- Mark
Last edited by markjenn; 08-07-19 at 10:40 PM.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 13,336
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Liked 4,338 Times
in
2,792 Posts
Im going to derail this thread slightly
Does anyone have some good tips on how to adjust cones on a hub with QR without having to put on and off the wheel on a bike 10 times?
I've read about a tool that Sheldon Brown came up with, to properly adjust QR hubs without installing the wheel on a bike:
Did anyone tried to make the tool. Is it possible to replace old worn-out cone with some washers?
Does anyone have some good tips on how to adjust cones on a hub with QR without having to put on and off the wheel on a bike 10 times?
I've read about a tool that Sheldon Brown came up with, to properly adjust QR hubs without installing the wheel on a bike:
Did anyone tried to make the tool. Is it possible to replace old worn-out cone with some washers?
Quick releases are impressive devices. They stretch and compress steel with just that lever.
Ben
#17
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Thank you for your advice, 79pmooney
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 13,336
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Liked 4,338 Times
in
2,792 Posts
There is an easy cheat but it does cost money. Modern Campagnolo hubs. (Not all so check.) On those hubs, the cones can be adjusted by turning a "nut" that has a set screw with a wrench while the wheel is in the bike with the QR closed. When you get all the play exactly out, you remove the wrench and tighten the set screw. Play comes back a season or two later, just repeat the process.
Yes, there are other ramifications. Your Shimano cogs won't work. There may an aftermarket spacer kit to convert Campy cogs to Shimano spacing. A poster here claims he has mixed and matched the two. So unless you want to go Campy throughout, you may not want to open this can of worms. I presume Campy has a patent. If we live long enough, maybe others will copy it.
Ben
Yes, there are other ramifications. Your Shimano cogs won't work. There may an aftermarket spacer kit to convert Campy cogs to Shimano spacing. A poster here claims he has mixed and matched the two. So unless you want to go Campy throughout, you may not want to open this can of worms. I presume Campy has a patent. If we live long enough, maybe others will copy it.
Ben
#19
Senior Member
In the past I generally adjusted the cones off the bike, and didn't worry about compression.
It shouldn't make any difference for bolt-on, and just an issue for QR and related technologies.
If I was looking for washers, I'd choose a pair of 5mm, or perhaps 10mm axle spacers.
They should loosely slip over the axle, and transmit the clamping force directly to the lock nuts.
However, the advantage of using an old cone as above, at least on one side is that it would leave the actual cone and locknut free to be worked on without needing to repeatedly open and release the QR. I might have to think about that idea.
It shouldn't make any difference for bolt-on, and just an issue for QR and related technologies.
Washers will distort as you apply the very high clamping force from the quick release because the axle is skinny and close to the center of the washer and the QR applies its camping force to the fork outside the axle. Also very few washers are the very strong steel of a bearing cone. Using several improves things but the washers being separate units, they do not share the load of the differing diameters. So 5 washers are 5X the bending resistance of one washer but a cone the thickness of 5 washers has many times the bending resistance of those five washers.
Quick releases are impressive devices. They stretch and compress steel with just that lever.
Ben
Quick releases are impressive devices. They stretch and compress steel with just that lever.
Ben
They should loosely slip over the axle, and transmit the clamping force directly to the lock nuts.
However, the advantage of using an old cone as above, at least on one side is that it would leave the actual cone and locknut free to be worked on without needing to repeatedly open and release the QR. I might have to think about that idea.
#20
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Washers will distort as you apply the very high clamping force from the quick release because the axle is skinny and close to the center of the washer and the QR applies its camping force to the fork outside the axle. Also very few washers are the very strong steel of a bearing cone. Using several improves things but the washers being separate units, they do not share the load of the differing diameters. So 5 washers are 5X the bending resistance of one washer but a cone the thickness of 5 washers has many times the bending resistance of those five washers.
Quick releases are impressive devices. They stretch and compress steel with just that lever.
Ben
Quick releases are impressive devices. They stretch and compress steel with just that lever.
Ben
Last edited by t1k; 08-07-19 at 11:59 PM.
#21
Junior Member
Thread Starter
In the past I generally adjusted the cones off the bike, and didn't worry about compression.
It shouldn't make any difference for bolt-on, and just an issue for QR and related technologies.
If I was looking for washers, I'd choose a pair of 5mm, or perhaps 10mm axle spacers.
They should loosely slip over the axle, and transmit the clamping force directly to the lock nuts.
However, the advantage of using an old cone as above, at least on one side is that it would leave the actual cone and locknut free to be worked on without needing to repeatedly open and release the QR. I might have to think about that idea.
It shouldn't make any difference for bolt-on, and just an issue for QR and related technologies.
If I was looking for washers, I'd choose a pair of 5mm, or perhaps 10mm axle spacers.
They should loosely slip over the axle, and transmit the clamping force directly to the lock nuts.
However, the advantage of using an old cone as above, at least on one side is that it would leave the actual cone and locknut free to be worked on without needing to repeatedly open and release the QR. I might have to think about that idea.
However, if the worn-out cone is replaced with a wrench socket then this modified tool should better mimic the clamped fork.
Will try this idea tomorrow.
#22
Junior Member
Thread Starter
As I think more about the Sheldon's tool, it seems that the tool is not going to compress the cones the same was as a fork (with QR closed). This is because the old cone will apply pressure to the axle instead of the lock nuts directly. This might result in a different amount of pressure applied to the cones.
However, if the worn-out cone is replaced with a wrench socket then this modified tool should better mimic the clamped fork.
Will try this idea tomorrow.
However, if the worn-out cone is replaced with a wrench socket then this modified tool should better mimic the clamped fork.
Will try this idea tomorrow.
The wrench sockets I have are way too long. Will buy some spacers and try with spacers.
#23
Senior Member
As I think more about the Sheldon's tool, it seems that the tool is not going to compress the cones the same was as a fork (with QR closed). This is because the old cone will apply pressure to the axle instead of the lock nuts directly. This might result in a different amount of pressure applied to the cones.
However, if the worn-out cone is replaced with a wrench socket then this modified tool should better mimic the clamped fork.
Will try this idea tomorrow.
However, if the worn-out cone is replaced with a wrench socket then this modified tool should better mimic the clamped fork.
Will try this idea tomorrow.
When you lock your skewer down, it likely spring-stretches the skewer slightly, and spring-compresses the 100/130mm cylinder that is the axle.
When you lock your cone/lock nut down, it would slam the cone against the threads medially, and the locknut against the threads laterally.
Locking the QR likely doesn't move the cones significantly as they're already locked against the threads.
So, you'll likely end at pretty much the same compression when locking the QR in the dropouts, locking it against spare axle spacers, or locking it against a cone/stub axle.
I suppose the proof would be in the empirical study.
I'm pretty good at feeling friction/play with vintage hubs, but I've had issues with the new labyrinth hubs (6700/6800), and a final check for play in the dropouts has been handy.
But, locked in the dropouts, it is harder to feel the fine details.
#24
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Thinking of the forces at play here.
When you lock your skewer down, it likely spring-stretches the skewer slightly, and spring-compresses the 100/130mm cylinder that is the axle.
When you lock your cone/lock nut down, it would slam the cone against the threads medially, and the locknut against the threads laterally.
Locking the QR likely doesn't move the cones significantly as they're already locked against the threads.
So, you'll likely end at pretty much the same compression when locking the QR in the dropouts, locking it against spare axle spacers, or locking it against a cone/stub axle.
I suppose the proof would be in the empirical study.
I'm pretty good at feeling friction/play with vintage hubs, but I've had issues with the new labyrinth hubs (6700/6800), and a final check for play in the dropouts has been handy.
But, locked in the dropouts, it is harder to feel the fine details.
When you lock your skewer down, it likely spring-stretches the skewer slightly, and spring-compresses the 100/130mm cylinder that is the axle.
When you lock your cone/lock nut down, it would slam the cone against the threads medially, and the locknut against the threads laterally.
Locking the QR likely doesn't move the cones significantly as they're already locked against the threads.
So, you'll likely end at pretty much the same compression when locking the QR in the dropouts, locking it against spare axle spacers, or locking it against a cone/stub axle.
I suppose the proof would be in the empirical study.
I'm pretty good at feeling friction/play with vintage hubs, but I've had issues with the new labyrinth hubs (6700/6800), and a final check for play in the dropouts has been handy.
But, locked in the dropouts, it is harder to feel the fine details.
I think you're right, the compression difference between two approaches is going to be negligent.
I'm curious enough to try both tools and see whether they help at all.
Last edited by t1k; 08-08-19 at 10:13 AM.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 2,664
Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"
Liked 633 Times
in
436 Posts
Any way you can think of to apply the compressive force of the QR on the end of the axle without contacting the lock nuts will work... like washers! You can also put the wheel into the dropout on one side of the bike with the wheel *outside* the frame.