primoz-resman profile

This is what I was talking about, I didn't know it exists already. Makes sense though. And yeah, expensive as hell, as expected.

I'd try to make it single sided only though for that true blind bearing removal capability (think about RM Slayer chainstay pivot bearings for example).

One point here is that RWC tools are designed to pull bearings out of mounts where you can get behind a bearing. If you have two bearings with a spacer pressed into your frame, into a hub or somewhere similar, heck, if you have two bearings in your chainstay pivot, the RWC kit wont help you.

It's designed to push the bearing out using a block on the back side, that is pulled out into a cup, covering the bearing hole. If you have a blind hole, a spacer with another bearing on the other side, etc., you can't install said block. The easiest way is to use a bearing puller (an expanding collet grabbing the bearing with a slide hammer to knock it out), but a screw type puller on the same principle could also be used. I'm not sure anyone sells those though, it also sounds quite expensive to make.

I really need a lathe in my life...

EDIT: slide hammer puller work great, but ideally you're pulling the bearing out from a heavy part. Like an engine block, electric motor housing, transmission casing, etc. With bike frames, we're talking about light parts. You can't really clamp them into anything (you'll bend the frame easily by just clamping it into a vice or at least when hammering away), so someone has to hold the frame or swingarm. Usually it's hard to do it by someone on their own. Using a screw-type blind bearing puller would mean there would still be a cup sitting on the frame right around the bearing, pressing nicely where you have the most material. This means a quick, easy, quiet bearing removal.

I saw that, yeah, it was a rhetorical question.

Next time at least use old bearings as an interface to press new ones in and put a spacer between outer races so the old inner race can move inwards and not put pressure on the new inner races.

And like mentioned, regardless, it won't matter much for pivot bearings, but pressing them in by the inner races is just something I can't get myself to doing. Even if they go in easy (unless they go in by hand) and even if I know it doesn't matter. It's just a sort of a PSA from a smartass on the internet. Turns out loads of people ignore said guys and function in the world just fine.

BTW, in some cases (DT 370/350/240 series of hubs) you need to press in BOTH races at the same time since you're pressing the bearing into the body and over the axle at the same time.

Please don't tell me you actually pulled the two bearings into the Switch Infinity sled by pulling on the inner races?

Bearings should ALWAYS be pressed in by pressing on the ring being installed. If you are pressing a bearing into a bore, press on the outer raceway. Pressing onto a shaft, press the inner raceway.

Doing it the opposite way will load up both the raceways and the balls and can cause premature wear out of the bearings (through ball indentation in the raceways), vibrations, etc. While not critical with a suspension pivot, where a bearing invariably dies from dirt getting into it, it's just common practice to install them the right way.

My 2015 Giant had horrible bearing layout. The lower shock mount was done through the lower link bearings and bearings in the frame with the bolt rotating with the shock. Barely. So the frame bearings barely turned. At the same time the lower shock mount had a tub around it where water would not flow out of. And be kept there by the frame bearings. Plus that you had to take the whole bike apart to remove all the links (the lower link was completely covered by the crank and chainguide).

As for bearings, the original ones were semi-max-fill, cageless but had more balls in them than caged bearings. So no, not wheel bearings. As for the seals, you have the metal cover (no touch sealing), a rubber seal (RS, with 2RS denoting the seal being present on both sides) and then what Enduro bearing has - LLU and the like. If you're buying off the shelf bearings, chances are it will be the standard 2RS sealing design which is not perfect, but works. Having another layer of protection surely helps.

And the Santa Cruz grease gun method squirts the grease THROUGH the bearings and out. In my opinion, done regularly, this is the best method for bearing upkeep. With this you don't even need additional sealing on them, just push the dirt out from the bearing with fresh grease.

Simple. The extraction cups the bearings are pulled into must be made from plastic. And to cover non-flat surfaces for the cups you cut away part of it. I did this (3D printed) for my Reign and it worked somewhat. Making it from a tougher, solid plastic would probably work better.

My average ride, starting at home, involves the whole cassette. I rarely do an uphill where i don't put it into the 50T and i have relatively long tarmac/gravel transfers with a slight downhill, where i put it into the 10T gear. I have a 30T in the front on a 29er.

I put GX Eagle on my previous bike as an upgrade and it was a revelation how limiting the 420 % of the 11spd was - i was seriously straining myself on steep climbs with a cadence that was too low when i actually much prefer a higher cadence of an easier gear.

On another note, it's rare that i want an easier gear than the 50T and while there are cases, i think it's even rarer it would actually be a benefit.

And then roadies argue MTB drivetrains have jumps that are too big between gears...

With a short inseam you can always cut them off. Not with a long inseam.

I actually have problems finding shorts long enough to not have a thigh gap and i'm not even 36 inches in the inseam department.

I have good experience with the Agent shorts, but the fit could be better. They bunched up a bit around the pocket zippers and exposed my knee a bit too much. But the shorts might be different to the pants.