931 Croix de Fer Refurb

[Witzend]

I was going to post this as daily updates in the "Fettled" thread, but repeated problems with the decal supplier, and then the actual decals themselves, followed by having to source a more compatible lacquer kept putting the brakes on.

As it was fresh out of the box:

I bought it in 2016 as an all-weather/winter bike. After a couple of years, I noticed bubbling around the bottom bracket areas and realised there was a thick 'protective' coating, probably polyurethane, which eventually started to flake off. I then noticed that most of the decals were applied afterwards with a layer of lacquer on top, meaning that as the coating broke down I would lose the decals as well.

Madison-Genesis lived up to their solid reputation for customer service, so I contacted the dealer I bought it from who said replacement decals should be no problem - then Covid hit, all went quiet, so I put it on the back burner. But after 30k miles I couldn't leave it any longer.

I managed to source some decals, and once they were delivered I took one last muddy ride, took detailed notes of where the decals went, stripped it down and prepared to start removing the coating.

Before I started I got everything together and noticed that they had not sent me one of the decals I'd ordered, and had sent me two more that I hadn't. Judging from the responses to my earlier e-mails (which suggested they just skimmed through them) I wasn't that surprised.

Whilst I was waiting I tackled the chromoly forks. An over-long and straight-cut steerer tube was not only restricting tyre size (in my opinion, tyre clearance was the main problem with the CdF), but also precluded the use of most types of mudguard as well. I filed it into a curve, cleaned and treated the corrosion, including the tin-worm burrowing under the paint, etch-primed, primed then gloss black painted them. The decals were a bit fiddly, and one of the quarters wouldn't come away with the rest, so I had to apply it with tweezers - a warning for later.

TBC

 

[Witzend]

Where the salt and UV had got to the plastic coating, it peeled off like sunburnt skin. Surrounding areas were much more difficult, and I tried metal, plastic and wooden scrapers - all of which marked the frame and were very slow going. Heat only shrunk it on more and burning it off just left a sticky brown mess, so I eventually stumbled upon rubbing a screwdriver shaft over it to flex it until some air got behind it and then squeezed the bubble around (arrow) until I had a large enough piece to peel away, leaving the gleaming frame exposed.

The more protected areas would not budge at all, so I scraped away as much as I dare with a sharp blade and took off the remainder with coarse wire wool.

Where the brushed finish of the frame was rubbed smooth, or marked through over-exuberant scraping, I restored the finish with emery cloth and fine wire wool.

Reynolds 931 is 17-4PH, which is the aerospace grade stainless steel, so no problems with corrosion (as the long-exposed areas underneath the chainstays showed).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17-4_stainless_steel.
However, the decal supplier recommends covering with lacquer after application and I was also concerned about decal adhesion. A rough surface is good for getting glue to stick, but a 2D decal will only touch the high-points of the brushed finish, so I decided to create a smoother surface for maximum decal contact with a lacquer. I trialled several cleaning methods (thinners; white spirit; meths; brake cleaner) but found that a blowtorch not only cleaned off any residue, leaving it even shinier, but the heat gave better adhesion. Unfortunately, even after 2 days curing, it still just rubbed off easily.

Online research on a stainless steel manufacturers website showed the acrylic lacquer I had used was not suitable and suggested polyurethane would be best - preferably with a primer (not that I could source a suitable clear one). Once it had arrived, I heated up the frame and applied a thin coat of PU lacquer, left it to cure a couple of days and it was much better. I then added another couple of thin coats, with a gentle rub-down in between, until the frame was smooth enough for the decals.

Lacquered frame curing.

TBC

 

[Witzend]

The Reynolds decal peeled away perfectly and attached no problem, although the facing paper was a bit too sticky and I feared for the lacquer when I peeled it off the frame. Then I saw this...

To be fair, they only took a week to get me another one printed (although they sent me someone else's decals as well). I tried with the smallest first, but the decals would not separate from the backing paper - the facing paper was not tacky enough to hold the decals on. I even used tweezers so that I could fold it right back whilst keeping the facing paper flat, but no joy. The later replacement decal was slightly better, but not much, and the others wouldn't budge so I contacted the supplier again.

According to them it was my fault, there was nothing wrong with the decals and they supplied loads of them - I was doing it wrong. Brakes on again.

I asked around and a week or so later a message came back to run a hot iron over them. I tried it on the one with the error, thinking I had to get it hot to peel it off, but it didn't work. However, once it cooled down it just came away perfectly, and the facing paper was much tackier than before. Not sure if during the delays they had got too hot, cold, damp or dry - or were just a bad batch, but they all separated properly afterwards.

The benefit of the double decals meant that pairing their alignment was easier, I just had to check they had got the spacings between them right for the differently-sized tubes, which they had.

I put a couple of coats of lacquer over the top (as the supplier recommends) with a day's curing in between, then started the rebuild.

TBC

 

[Witzend]

New headset bearings.

A smear of Vaseline on the seat tube, as per Raleightnut's advice.

I swapped the corroded steel stem bolts for black stainless. Time will tell if they turn out to actually be Chineseum.

New hoods, bar tape; inner cables (the outers were not long ago replaced); cable clips and adjusters; jockey wheels; chain and chainrings. Having properly-sized hands, I added the new bar tape over the top of the old for a thicker grip.

After replacing the bearings far too many times, I swapped the original Hollowtech crankset for an Octalink. I managed to find a used 105 crankset online to keep it close to original, and they even threw in the used sealed bearing bottom bracket. To be honest, I had fitted it a while beforehand, and already done more miles with it than some of the previously-fitted Hollowtech ones. I've had square taper sealed bearings last for over 20K miles, but find the Octalink releases the cranks more easily. I think Hollowtech bottom brackets were a brilliant idea - they must have made Shimano a fortune in countless replacements compared to the old cartridge ones.

Being properly proportioned, I get through back wheels. The original AlexRims split after a few thousand miles, so I bought a pair of wheels on offer at Planet X. The back wheel lasted about the same, so I took the original 105 hub and laced on the rim from the Planet X front wheel with stainless spokes. This has lasted the longest, and would still be OK but the hub has had it, so I fitted the rear from a pair I'd got from Wiggle's clearance eBay site a while back, although they both had minimal grease and needed cone adjustment. As well as coming with brand new tyres; tubes and disc rotors, the front wheel also came with a Shimano dynamo hub and the pair cost less than the tyres and tubes would have. However, whilst I prefer to focus more on the functional over aesthetics, the black spokes annoy me, so I may try to refurb the old hub and re-fit that wheel.

The finished article. Apologies for the state of the lawn, but at least the tyre labels are aligned with the valves, which are at the top, the cranks are level and the pedals both verticle (the things that matter...).

Not too dissimilar to the original photo.

I only refitted one of the stainless steel bottle cages for now. I also have stainless steel Tubus front and rear racks. The rear one has been a permanent fixture, but I think I'll leave it as it is until I need to refit the rear mudguard later in the year.

It's been so long, I'd forgotten how well it rides.

All the Best.

 

[Spiderweb]

WOW!
Great job, must have taken hours.
Looks fabulous 👍

 

[Witzend]

WOW!
Great job, must have taken hours.
Looks fabulous 👍

Thanks. The longest job was removing the lacquer without marking the frame - once I'd worked out the best way, things sped up.

The main hold-ups were the various decal issues, waiting for lacquer to cure and 3 weeks watching the Tour de France...

 

[Gunk]

As you know I’m a sucker for a thread like this, right up my street. Superb job, well done!

 

[wafter]

Great work - looks like a super-thorough job

Interesting choice with the Octalink crankset - did you consider facing the BB shell in an effort to sort the Hollowtech problem? Apparently alignment is usually a signifcant factor in their longevity.

What sort of mileage were you getting out of the Hollowtech BBs, out of interest?

 

[si_c]

Very nice.

 

[Witzend]

As you know I’m a sucker for a thread like this, right up my street. Superb job, well done!

Very much appreciated, I'm glad you enjoyed it. The fact that other people seem to have got something out if it sort of compensates for the frustrations and pitfalls.
Thanks again to all.

 

[Witzend]

Great work - looks like a super-thorough job

Interesting choice with the Octalink crankset - did you consider facing the BB shell in an effort to sort the Hollowtech problem? Apparently alignment is usually a signifcant factor in their longevity.

What sort of mileage were you getting out of the Hollowtech BBs, out of interest?

Thanks, I suppose it was thorough, but I'm afraid I know no other way.

Alignment wasn't the issue. I have access to a facing tool, but it didn't need doing. 17-4PH is strong steel and the frame itself is as new, especially around the thicker bottom bracket tubing.

The issue is the design and my riding. Having taken a number apart, it's almost like they are designed to fail, especially the road ones - the MTB ones have tended to have an extra seal and lasted much longer. It's as if they said: how can we take these bearings from the protection of the frame; make them smaller and weaker, put them closer to the elements and give them minimal protection whilst discouraging maintenance. I appreciate the weight factor, but that really doesn't compensate for me.

They'd have probably been tolerable if I did a couple of thousand miles a year in dry weather, but I rode it year round, on- and off-road. Couple that with the fact that I can put down a lot of power and, whilst I try very hard to be smooth, I'm an inherent pedal-masher.

As for distances, the least I got was about 2,000miles, which my LBS didn't think was too bad (!?!). The most I got was about 6,000miles when I knocked out the worn bearings and fitted these into the carcasses:

The rest were around 3 to 4,000miles each - but they were well past it by the time I changed them, even with a bit of maintenance. The MTB ones get similar treatment, but average much more - nearly 10,000miles in one case.
Hope this helps.

 

[Jameshow]

Could you take that thin chopping board / placemat plastic and make a disc the size of the BB shell and axle dia and put outside the bearings for added protection. Appreciate there will be a slight increase in drag but added protection might outweigh the drag?
Would work on bb30 not sure about Shimano press fits.

 

[T4tomo]

great job on the refurb of the stainless. it deserves some matching rims though!

 

[wafter]

Thanks, I suppose it was thorough, but I'm afraid I know no other way.

Alignment wasn't the issue. I have access to a facing tool, but it didn't need doing. 17-4PH is strong steel and the frame itself is as new, especially around the thicker bottom bracket tubing.

The issue is the design and my riding. Having taken a number apart, it's almost like they are designed to fail, especially the road ones - the MTB ones have tended to have an extra seal and lasted much longer. It's as if they said: how can we take these bearings from the protection of the frame; make them smaller and weaker, put them closer to the elements and give them minimal protection whilst discouraging maintenance. I appreciate the weight factor, but that really doesn't compensate for me.

They'd have probably been tolerable if I did a couple of thousand miles a year in dry weather, but I rode it year round, on- and off-road. Couple that with the fact that I can put down a lot of power and, whilst I try very hard to be smooth, I'm an inherent pedal-masher.

As for distances, the least I got was about 2,000miles, which my LBS didn't think was too bad (!?!). The most I got was about 6,000miles when I knocked out the worn bearings and fitted these into the carcasses:
View attachment 742199
The rest were around 3 to 4,000miles each - but they were well past it by the time I changed them, even with a bit of maintenance. The MTB ones get similar treatment, but average much more - nearly 10,000miles in one case.
Hope this helps.

Thanks and yes; really appreciate your comprehensive and insightful response!

I concur with all your points raised and feel generally similar about a lot of modern bike tech; although rightly or wrongly think the Hollowtech axles are at the more mild end; certainly compared to stuff like press-fit BBs and needless electronics.

I have a couple of bikes with Hollowtech cranks and they've been good so far; however they don't seem to have seen the use (either intensity or conditions) that yours have. One is a fair-weather bike with road BB on 4.5k miles from new, the other has indeterminate mileage (bought used) and about 2.5k sometimes wet miles in my ownership on the entry-level MTB BB. Both BBs appear fine, but I'm no a particularly strong rider and the distances covered appear to be within your stated mileages to failure.

While content with the performance of the two I have, if I build another bike it'll likely have an ST BB; of only because it's hard to get the facets I want in a crankset from a modern, fashionable HT offering.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Crikey! What a great read and a superb job too.

Very impressive!