2008 2-piece Tiagra crankset

[Davosaurus Returns]

Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
cranks? Thoughts?

[M-gineering]

Davosaurus Returns wrote:
> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> cranks? Thoughts?
>
Same as in 2007

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <6249-4766771C-1140@storefull-3351.bay.webtv.net>,
DaveReturns@webtv.net (Davosaurus Returns) wrote:

> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> cranks? Thoughts?

The new design is essentially the "Hollowtech II" external-bearing setup
that all Shimano's better road and MTB groups have been using for a few
years.

The same idea, more or less, is available from virtually every other
major crank-maker, including Campagnolo (Ultra-Torque has an interesting
two-piece spindle, but follows the basic external-bearing principle).

The idea is to allow for bigger crank bearings and stiffer, stronger,
lighter crank spindles.

Given the odd failings of the previous "Hollowtech" pipe-spindle design,
this is probably an improvement.

There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.

I'm not sure if this stuff has been in service long enough to generate
complaints, but mountain bikers are usually pretty spectacular breakers
of parts, and I don't hear a lot about XTR, XT, Saint, or Hone cranks
breaking apart under load.

Note that in all cases, the external-bearing design is arguably a
workaround for the fact that standard BBs are too small to fit both
reliable bearings and big hollow spindles within their diameter.
Numerous makers (Pinarello, Trek, Cannondale) are now building
more-or-less proprietary oversized BBs into their top bikes. In the case
of Trek, they provide slip-fit bearings which will accept a Shimano
crankset.

Cannondale has released their BB30 (formerly Si) BB design to the world;
nobody else appears to be using it right now.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> cranks? Thoughts?

It simply works. Boring & pathetically easy to service (just need an allen
wrench to pull the cranks off on the road, so if you're ever worried about a
chain getting REALLY jammed, it can be a good thing to have). Life could be
much worse for the mechanics who work with them. No complaints at all.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

[Scott Gordo]

On Dec 17, 8:18 am, DaveRetu...@webtv.net (Davosaurus Returns) wrote:
> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> cranks? Thoughts?

They're not tubular like the higher-end Shimano cranks, but hollowed
out at the back like FSA Gossamers. No idea if that makes a
perceptible difference in flex or weight or whatever, just something
noticed that separates it from, I believe, 105 and up.

Anyone know if those chainrings okay on 10sp?

[sndive@gmail.com]

On Dec 17, 8:11 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
> Davosaurus Returns wrote:
> > Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> > cranks? Thoughts?
>
> Same as in 2007
>
for those who are new to this (me!) is that a good thing or a bad
thing?
how do these compare to 2004 set?

[Hank Wirtz]

On Dec 17, 7:22 am, snd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 17, 8:11 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:> Davosaurus Returns wrote:
> > > Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> > > cranks? Thoughts?
>
> > Same as in 2007
>
> for those who are new to this (me!) is that a good thing or a bad
> thing?
> how do these compare to 2004 set?

Integrated spindle & outboard bearings for FC-4503. The old FC-4403
was Octalink.That means larger bearings and a supposed increase in
stiffness from their wider placement.

I haven't ridden either, so I can't illuminate beyond that.

[M-gineering]

sndive@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 17, 8:11 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
>> Davosaurus Returns wrote:
>>> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
>>> cranks? Thoughts?
>> Same as in 2007
>>
> for those who are new to this (me!) is that a good thing or a bad
> thing?
> how do these compare to 2004 set?

Aluminium axle, badly sealed bearings, non-replacable axle prone to
wear. Take care of your 2004!

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Scott Gordo]

On Dec 17, 1:06 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> In article <6249-4766771C-1...@storefull-3351.bay.webtv.net>,
> DaveRetu...@webtv.net (Davosaurus Returns) wrote:
>
> > Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
> > cranks? Thoughts?
>
> The new design is essentially the "Hollowtech II" external-bearing setup
> that all Shimano's better road and MTB groups have been using for a few
> years.
>
> The same idea, more or less, is available from virtually every other
> major crank-maker, including Campagnolo (Ultra-Torque has an interesting
> two-piece spindle, but follows the basic external-bearing principle).
>
> The idea is to allow for bigger crank bearings and stiffer, stronger,
> lighter crank spindles.
>
> Given the odd failings of the previous "Hollowtech" pipe-spindle design,
> this is probably an improvement.
>
> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> I'm not sure if this stuff has been in service long enough to generate
> complaints, but mountain bikers are usually pretty spectacular breakers
> of parts, and I don't hear a lot about XTR, XT, Saint, or Hone cranks
> breaking apart under load.
>
> Note that in all cases, the external-bearing design is arguably a
> workaround for the fact that standard BBs are too small to fit both
> reliable bearings and big hollow spindles within their diameter.
> Numerous makers (Pinarello, Trek, Cannondale) are now building
> more-or-less proprietary oversized BBs into their top bikes. In the case
> of Trek, they provide slip-fit bearings which will accept a Shimano
> crankset.
>
> Cannondale has released their BB30 (formerly Si) BB design to the world;
> nobody else appears to be using it right now.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@sfu.cahttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
> Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

Van Dessel is working with BB30.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2007/newarrivals/12-17

"...next year's version promises to be even better with the addition
of a BB30 integrated bottom bracket system. Cannondale first pioneered
this system ages ago (and continues to use it today), but its recent
decision to open up the standard has been welcomed with open arms by
several frame and component manufacturers. By pressing the oversized
bearings directly into the shell and increasing the spindle diameter,
the system promises to be lighter, stiffer, and more durable than
conventional external-type cranksets. An adapter will allow the use of
standard threaded bottom brackets, too, if users are so inclined."

[M-gineering]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

> The same idea, more or less, is available from virtually every other
> major crank-maker, including Campagnolo (Ultra-Torque has an interesting
> two-piece spindle, but follows the basic external-bearing principle).

No it doesn't, as it has the required pressfit for the inner bearing
rings the marketing types of other brands think they can do without!

>
> The idea is to allow for bigger crank bearings and stiffer, stronger,
> lighter crank spindles.

Some are stiffer and/or lighter, some are not.. Sealdrag can be up 1000%

> Given the odd failings of the previous "Hollowtech" pipe-spindle design,
> this is probably an improvement.

?
If you avoided ISIS and DA it always got you home IME. When the
hollowtech2 races split you're walking

>
> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.

> I'm not sure if this stuff has been in service long enough to generate
> complaints, but mountain bikers are usually pretty spectacular breakers
> of parts, and I don't hear a lot about XTR, XT, Saint, or Hone cranks
> breaking apart under load.

Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)

-
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[David L. Johnson]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.

I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
still, or ride a whole lot more.

--

David L. Johnson

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by
little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson

[M-gineering]

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
>> cranks? Thoughts?
>
> It simply works. Boring & pathetically easy to service

A nice little earner, the way these things go through bearings ;)


(just need an allen
> wrench to pull the cranks off on the road, so if you're ever worried about a
> chain getting REALLY jammed, it can be a good thing to have).

You could have fun getting the plastic adjusting bolt out though, and
once the axle is grooved a hammer and punch is necessary


--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>>> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
>>> cranks? Thoughts?
>>
>> It simply works. Boring & pathetically easy to service
>
> A nice little earner, the way these things go through bearings ;)

??? Outboard bearings have been around for a couple years now, and in that
time we've sold darned few of them. Just seems to be a non-issue for road
bikes, although I have hear that areas with muckier weather do sell a fair
number of mountain bike versions. But not for us.

> (just need an allen
>> wrench to pull the cranks off on the road, so if you're ever worried
>> about a chain getting REALLY jammed, it can be a good thing to have).
>
> You could have fun getting the plastic adjusting bolt out though, and once
> the axle is grooved a hammer and punch is necessary

On greased axles? Again, we just haven't seen that to be the case.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com




"M-gineering" <ikmotgeenspam@m-gineering.nl> wrote in message
news:fk6frs$vie$1@localhost.localdomain...
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> Anyone managed to get ahold of the '08 2 piece Tiagra triple road
>>> cranks? Thoughts?
>>
>> It simply works. Boring & pathetically easy to service
>
> A nice little earner, the way these things go through bearings ;)
>
>
> (just need an allen
>> wrench to pull the cranks off on the road, so if you're ever worried
>> about a chain getting REALLY jammed, it can be a good thing to have).
>
> You could have fun getting the plastic adjusting bolt out though, and once
> the axle is grooved a hammer and punch is necessary
>
>
> --
> /Marten
>
> info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Jay Beattie]

On Dec 17, 10:59 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > The same idea, more or less, is available from virtually every other
> > major crank-maker, including Campagnolo (Ultra-Torque has an interesting
> > two-piece spindle, but follows the basic external-bearing principle).
>
> No it doesn't, as it has the required pressfit for the inner bearing
> rings the marketing types of other brands think they can do without!
>
>
>
> > The idea is to allow for bigger crank bearings and stiffer, stronger,
> > lighter crank spindles.
>
> Some are stiffer and/or lighter, some are not.. Sealdrag can be up 1000%
>
> > Given the odd failings of the previous "Hollowtech" pipe-spindle design,
> > this is probably an improvement.
>
> ?
> If you avoided ISIS and DA it always got you home IME. When the
> hollowtech2 races split you're walking
>
>
>
> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
> > I'm not sure if this stuff has been in service long enough to generate
> > complaints, but mountain bikers are usually pretty spectacular breakers
> > of parts, and I don't hear a lot about XTR, XT, Saint, or Hone cranks
> > breaking apart under load.
>
> Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>
> -
> /Marten
>
> info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Jay Beattie]

On Dec 17, 10:59 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > The same idea, more or less, is available from virtually every other
> > major crank-maker, including Campagnolo (Ultra-Torque has an interesting
> > two-piece spindle, but follows the basic external-bearing principle).
>
> No it doesn't, as it has the required pressfit for the inner bearing
> rings the marketing types of other brands think they can do without!
>
>
>
> > The idea is to allow for bigger crank bearings and stiffer, stronger,
> > lighter crank spindles.
>
> Some are stiffer and/or lighter, some are not.. Sealdrag can be up 1000%
>
> > Given the odd failings of the previous "Hollowtech" pipe-spindle design,
> > this is probably an improvement.
>
> ?
> If you avoided ISIS and DA it always got you home IME. When the
> hollowtech2 races split you're walking
>
>
>
> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
> > I'm not sure if this stuff has been in service long enough to generate
> > complaints, but mountain bikers are usually pretty spectacular breakers
> > of parts, and I don't hear a lot about XTR, XT, Saint, or Hone cranks
> > breaking apart under load.
>
> Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)

Mostly trouble free. I am waiting for the BlueRay BB, or is it the HD
BB . . . whatever it may be, it will be the best forever. -- Jay
Beattie.

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 17, 12:59 pm, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > The same idea, more or less, is available from virtually every other
> > major crank-maker, including Campagnolo (Ultra-Torque has an interesting
> > two-piece spindle, but follows the basic external-bearing principle).
>
> No it doesn't, as it has the required pressfit for the inner bearing
> rings the marketing types of other brands think they can do without!
>
>
>
> > The idea is to allow for bigger crank bearings and stiffer, stronger,
> > lighter crank spindles.
>
> Some are stiffer and/or lighter, some are not.. Sealdrag can be up 1000%
>
> > Given the odd failings of the previous "Hollowtech" pipe-spindle design,
> > this is probably an improvement.
>
> ?
> If you avoided ISIS and DA it always got you home IME. When the
> hollowtech2 races split you're walking
>
>
>
> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
> > I'm not sure if this stuff has been in service long enough to generate
> > complaints, but mountain bikers are usually pretty spectacular breakers
> > of parts, and I don't hear a lot about XTR, XT, Saint, or Hone cranks
> > breaking apart under load.
>
> Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>

And how long before Shimano "walks away" from this current design and
introduces something !!NEW!! ?

Marketing never sleeps.......

[Chalo]

M-gineering wrote:
>
> Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)

Let's see... how shall I put this? You are wrong.

Less than a week ago, I had some expensive, painful, inconvenient
surgery on my gums. The periodontist sliced away the front of my gums
from my upper jaw bone and folded the flap back out of the way. The
dental assistant reported that I awoke a couple of times during the
procedure and asked, "what are y'all doing?"

The doctor then chopped out most of a front tooth that my body was
attacking to as if it were a foreign object. After cleaning out the
debris from the surrounding infection, he inserted a piece of
sterilized cadaver bone to fill the gap, and then went into the back
of my mouth to slice out a chunk of healthy gum tissue to help cover
the patch he had made. Afterwards, he stitched the whole leaky mess
more or less together.

How, you might be wondering, did my own tooth somehow become a foreign
object? By getting knocked out of my head, stuffed back in, drilled
out, bleached and scoured, filled with gutta-percha, and embedded into
a gold alloy prosthesis along with the stumps of a few other teeth,
that's how.

Why did that happen, you say?

Because square taper spindles are not trouble-free.

Thirteen years after I broke the last square taper spindle I will ever
buy for myself, I was again mopping crusts of dried blood off my face
in the mornings because way back then, I was fool enough to trust that
the best Shimano had to offer was good enough for me.

I won't get fooled again (about square tapers, anyway).

Your mileage, as the saying goes, may vary.

Chalo

[Scott G.]

>
> Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>
> -
> /Marten

Amen, Long live the Shimano UN-72, cheap and long lasting.
At some point I guess TA and Phil will be the last square tapers
available.

Scott G.

[Werehatrack]

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:09:33 -0800 (PST), Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> may have said:

>On Dec 17, 12:59 pm, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>>
>
>And how long before Shimano "walks away" from this current design and
>introduces something !!NEW!! ?
>
>Marketing never sleeps.......

Well, let's see. All of the principal competitors have their own
hollowtech-alike product, and some of the frame makers are going over
to proprietary or unprotected-spec oversize BB designs. At the
moment, there are more potentially incompatible flavors of BB vs crank
vs frame than has been the case for a while. The need for a wider BB
shell on the frames is probably going to spawn yet another round of
revisions, but I've seen no sign from Shimano of a move in that
direction, and SRAM doesn't appear to have convinced anyone to grab
the ISIS-II spec and run with it, either. So right now we're trapped
in a twisty little maze of standards, all different.

Thus the question devolves to one of "what can be done to convince the
buying public that what's available isn't good enough?" The answer to
this, in my opinion, lies in Shimano and the rest getting
bargain-basement versions of the inherently fragile current tech into
the fray. When *those* arrive, with the problems they will inherit
from corners cut too closely in choice of materials and employment of
manufacturing techniques, we should start to see enough failures in
low-time components. My bet is that the outboard-mounted bearings
will loosen and/or fail more often when they're made more cheaply and
are mounted in less carefully-constructed BB shells, and this will
provide the stepping stone to redefinition of the standard BB shell
size. If a new genuine industry standard can be agreed upon (fat
chance), we're probably looking at a long period of sharp dichotomy
between old and new BB design support; I'm expecting any new BB shell
spec to be enough wider than 73mm to preclude using old BBs via a pair
of adapter rings. I would not be surprised if the new spec was 85mm
wide or more.



--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Jay Beattie]

On Dec 17, 5:03 pm, "David L. Johnson" <david.john...@lehigh.edu>
wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> still, or ride a whole lot more.
>

I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now, I
have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.

[Steve Gravrock]

On 2007-12-18, David L. Johnson <david.johnson@lehigh.edu> wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
>> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
>> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
>> pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> still, or ride a whole lot more.

I'm a 200 lbs goofy-footed mountain biker -- pretty much the worst case
scenario that Jobst Brandt identified for square taper spindles. I've
never broken one. That said, I don't put on many miles at all off-road.

My road bike is ISIS, although those 2-piece Tiagra cranks are going to
start looking awfully good if I burn out another bottom bracket.

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
>> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
>> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>>
>> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
>> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
>> still, or ride a whole lot more.
>>
>
> I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
> associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
> on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
> failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
> half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
> proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
> spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now, I
> have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
> above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.

Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
although I did go through 3 Ti Time pedal spindles (fortunately bent them,
not broke) before I realized they weren't a good idea for someone my size.
Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
everybody?). And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
killed an Octalink and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to the
oversized spindle).

And all I do is climb or sprint. But not very well, apparently! :>)

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 17, 8:53 pm, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
> On 2007-12-18, David L. Johnson <david.john...@lehigh.edu> wrote:
>
> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> >> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> >> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> >> pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> > I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> > using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> > still, or ride a whole lot more.
>
> I'm a 200 lbs goofy-footed mountain biker -- pretty much the worst case
> scenario that Jobst Brandt identified for square taper spindles.

IIRC, that "goofy footed" scenario involved Octalink, not square taper
spindles. And, there's little evidence to support it, in any case.


> I've never broken one. That said, I don't put on many miles at all off-road.
>
> My road bike is ISIS, although those 2-piece Tiagra cranks are going to
> start looking awfully good if I burn out another bottom bracket.

[jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org]

Steve Gravrock writes:

>>> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
>>> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere
>>> around 200 pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.

>> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a
>> problem using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are
>> either bigger still, or ride a whole lot more.

> I'm a 200 lbs goofy-footed mountain biker -- pretty much the worst
> case scenario that Jobst Brandt identified for square taper
> spindles. I've never broken one. That said, I don't put on many
> miles at all off-road.

Not so. Goofy-footed affects Octalink spindles because the spline is
not a press fit and has backlash that comes to bear when reverse
torque is transmitted from the left crank. That micro-motion
gradually unscrews the retaining bolt and the spline shears off when
its engagement approaches zero.

> My road bike is ISIS, although those 2-piece Tiagra cranks are going
> to start looking awfully good if I burn out another bottom bracket.

BB wear is not related to the type of spindle but rather whether the
bearings are properly adjusted.

Jobst Brandt

[M-gineering]

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

>
> Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,

I know the feeling, I've never had a broken bb -axle in the shop either ;)

> Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> everybody?).

correct, got em ;')

And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
> frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> killed an Octalink

they pass away gracefully, unless you run silly DA

and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
> bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to the
> oversized spindle).

Here is what happens when you combine Dutch weather, road cyclists and
octalink2:

bearing (ok, this is a good one, most will just rust solid, taking it
out on the axle instead)
www.m-gineering.nl/h2lager.jpg

Axles suffer from pitting and wear (as the inner ring walks around the
axle) this is a fairly typical Ultegra:
http://home.planet.nl/~borsj029/as.jpg

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Scott Gordo]

On Dec 18, 2:28 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> >> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> >> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> >> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> >> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> >> still, or ride a whole lot more.
>
> > I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
> > associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
> > on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
> > failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
> > half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
> > proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
> > spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now, I
> > have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
> > above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
> although I did go through 3 Ti Time pedal spindles (fortunately bent them,
> not broke) before I realized they weren't a good idea for someone my size.
> Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> everybody?). And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
> frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> killed an Octalink and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
> bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to the
> oversized spindle).
>
> And all I do is climb or sprint. But not very well, apparently! :>)
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Nothstein was around 220lbs and put some serious wattage through the
bb. I have yet to see a track crankset that's not square taper.

With all that said, good BMX cranks, which I think take the most
abuse, have been cromo pipe-spindle since the 80s.

/s

[M-gineering]

Chalo wrote:
> M-gineering wrote:

> Why did that happen, you say?
>
> Because square taper spindles are not trouble-free.

Any design will give trouble if you overload it way beyond the
designlimits. Trouble with bikeparts is that the designlimits are not
clear and that the loading spectrum depends very much on pedalling style.
--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Jay Beattie]

On Dec 18, 12:09 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>
> > Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
>
> I know the feeling, I've never had a broken bb -axle in the shop either ;)
>
> > Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> > everybody?).
>
> correct, got em ;')
>
> And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
>
> > frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> > killed an Octalink
>
> they pass away gracefully, unless you run silly DA
>
> and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
>
> > bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to the
> > oversized spindle).
>
> Here is what happens when you combine Dutch weather, road cyclists and
> octalink2:
>
> bearing (ok, this is a good one, most will just rust solid, taking it
> out on the axle instead)
> www.m-gineering.nl/h2lager.jpg
>
> Axles suffer from pitting and wear (as the inner ring walks around the
> axle) this is a fairly typical Ultegra:
> http://home.planet.nl/~borsj029/as.jpg

Which again makes me wonder why we dumped square taper. Unlike Mike,
I killed the bearings on an FSA Ti ISIS BB (and crank, which broke at
the splined insert in the arm), and a Truvativ steel ISIS BB. I only
have one Octalink crank which gets light use, and that is still going
(although I broke the crank and put on new arms). The FSA crank was
replaced with an Octalink2/Ultegra -- and if Marten is right, that
thing may be short lived. At least it does not get much riding in the
rain (unlike my commuter), and never gets ridden in Holland, which I
guess is the real killer. -- Jay Beattie.

[jim beam]

M-gineering wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>
>>
>> Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
>
> I know the feeling, I've never had a broken bb -axle in the shop either ;)
>
>> Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
>> everybody?).
>
> correct, got em ;')
>
> And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
>> frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
>> killed an Octalink
>
> they pass away gracefully, unless you run silly DA
>
> and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
>> bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due
>> to the oversized spindle).
>
> Here is what happens when you combine Dutch weather, road cyclists and
> octalink2:
>
> bearing (ok, this is a good one, most will just rust solid, taking it
> out on the axle instead)
> www.m-gineering.nl/h2lager.jpg
>
> Axles suffer from pitting and wear (as the inner ring walks around the
> axle) this is a fairly typical Ultegra:
> http://home.planet.nl/~borsj029/as.jpg
>

great contribution.

[Chalo]

M-gineering wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > Why did that happen, you say?
> >
> > Because square taper spindles are not trouble-free.
>
> Any design will give trouble if you overload it way beyond the
> designlimits. Trouble with bikeparts is that the designlimits are not
> clear and that the loading spectrum depends very much on pedalling style.

At the time I broke the spindle in question, I weighed 260 lbs.
(118kg)-- though you'd be hard pressed to find a fitter, faster 260-
pounder anywhere. That was as heavy as I had ever been during the
time I owned the bottom bracket in question. I used a 180mm crank
and a single 49t ring.

While it may be true that I overloaded the spindle beyond its design
limits, in context I think that is why I'm not the only person who
should be concerned about the insufficiency of the square taper
design. A lot of Dutch men should also be concerned.

Chalo

[M-gineering]

Chalo wrote:
> M-gineering wrote:
>> Chalo wrote:
>>> Why did that happen, you say?
>>>
>>> Because square taper spindles are not trouble-free.
>> Any design will give trouble if you overload it way beyond the
>> designlimits. Trouble with bikeparts is that the designlimits are not
>> clear and that the loading spectrum depends very much on pedalling style.
>
> At the time I broke the spindle in question, I weighed 260 lbs.
> (118kg)-- though you'd be hard pressed to find a fitter, faster 260-
> pounder anywhere. That was as heavy as I had ever been during the
> time I owned the bottom bracket in question. I used a 180mm crank
> and a single 49t ring.
>
> While it may be true that I overloaded the spindle beyond its design
> limits, in context I think that is why I'm not the only person who
> should be concerned about the insufficiency of the square taper
> design. A lot of Dutch men should also be concerned.

Don't think there are too many Dutchman of that weight AND in shape. If
they ride a lot the rain will force periodic replacement of the axle ;)


--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 18, 9:29 am, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 12:09 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>
> > > Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
>
> > I know the feeling, I've never had a broken bb -axle in the shop either ;)
>
> > > Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> > > everybody?).
>
> > correct, got em ;')
>
> > And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
>
> > > frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> > > killed an Octalink
>
> > they pass away gracefully, unless you run silly DA
>
> > and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
>
> > > bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to the
> > > oversized spindle).
>
> > Here is what happens when you combine Dutch weather, road cyclists and
> > octalink2:
>
> > bearing (ok, this is a good one, most will just rust solid, taking it
> > out on the axle instead)
> > www.m-gineering.nl/h2lager.jpg
>
> > Axles suffer from pitting and wear (as the inner ring walks around the
> > axle) this is a fairly typical Ultegra:
> > http://home.planet.nl/~borsj029/as.jpg
>
> Which again makes me wonder why we dumped square taper.


Can you say "marketing"? I knew you could! ;-)


> Unlike Mike,
> I killed the bearings on an FSA Ti ISIS BB (and crank, which broke at
> the splined insert in the arm), and a Truvativ steel ISIS BB. I only
> have one Octalink crank which gets light use, and that is still going
> (although I broke the crank and put on new arms). The FSA crank was
> replaced with an Octalink2/Ultegra -- and if Marten is right, that
> thing may be short lived. At least it does not get much riding in the
> rain (unlike my commuter), and never gets ridden in Holland, which I
> guess is the real killer. -- Jay Beattie.

[jim beam]

Jay Beattie wrote:
> On Dec 18, 12:09 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
>> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>
>>> Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
>> I know the feeling, I've never had a broken bb -axle in the shop either ;)
>>
>>> Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
>>> everybody?).
>> correct, got em ;')
>>
>> And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
>>
>>> frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
>>> killed an Octalink
>> they pass away gracefully, unless you run silly DA
>>
>> and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
>>
>>> bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to the
>>> oversized spindle).
>> Here is what happens when you combine Dutch weather, road cyclists and
>> octalink2:
>>
>> bearing (ok, this is a good one, most will just rust solid, taking it
>> out on the axle instead)
>> www.m-gineering.nl/h2lager.jpg
>>
>> Axles suffer from pitting and wear (as the inner ring walks around the
>> axle) this is a fairly typical Ultegra:
>> http://home.planet.nl/~borsj029/as.jpg
>
> Which again makes me wonder why we dumped square taper.

you can still buy and ride if you want. but it weighs more and is more
subject to fatigue as a function of its physical dimensions.


> Unlike Mike,
> I killed the bearings on an FSA Ti ISIS BB (and crank, which broke at
> the splined insert in the arm), and a Truvativ steel ISIS BB. I only
> have one Octalink crank which gets light use, and that is still going
> (although I broke the crank and put on new arms). The FSA crank was
> replaced with an Octalink2/Ultegra -- and if Marten is right, that
> thing may be short lived. At least it does not get much riding in the
> rain (unlike my commuter), and never gets ridden in Holland, which I
> guess is the real killer. -- Jay Beattie.

[Wayne]

On Dec 18, 9:44 am, "Scott G." <sco...@primax.com> wrote:
> > Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>
> > -
> > /Marten
>
> Amen, Long live the Shimano UN-72, cheap and long lasting.
> At some point I guess TA and Phil will be the last square tapers
> available.
>
> Scott G.

I am still using a Phil with a triple crank and have a couple
questions about the new outboard designs.

Can the chain line, Q-factor, and ring clearance be changed at all
with the new BB designs or are you stuck with what the builder decides
is best? I noticed that the Campy and Shimano have different ideas of
what is best.

A related question: What is the chain line like on a Shimano triple
crank. Is it the same as the double with a little ring added to the
inside?

Thanks
Wayne

[Hank Wirtz]

On Dec 18, 7:44 am, "Scott G." <sco...@primax.com> wrote:
> > Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>
> > -
> > /Marten
>
> Amen, Long live the Shimano UN-72, cheap and long lasting.
> At some point I guess TA and Phil will be the last square tapers
> available.
>
> Scott G.

UN-72's been gone for ages. Only ones on ebay are used. UN-73 is out
of production now, IIRC, and UN-54 is their top Square Taper BB now.

I think the last UN-72s got grabbed up by folks with French bikes, to
use with Phil Wood rings. That's what I did when I had a Sugino XD on
my PX-10 (since replaced with an actual Phil Wood in ISO taper and a
Campy crank).

[David L. Johnson]

Wayne wrote:

> Can the chain line, Q-factor, and ring clearance be changed at all
> with the new BB designs or are you stuck with what the builder decides
> is best? I noticed that the Campy and Shimano have different ideas of
> what is best.

My FSA seems not to be adjustable. OTOH, the Q factor is certainly less
than my previous cranks, but they were mountain-bike triple. AFAIK most
cartridge bbs, and most cup-and-cone bbs for that matter, did not have
adjustable chainlines. Some Campy cartridge bottom brackets did have
adjustable chainlines, but they seem rather rare. What I had done in
the past was to use a nonstandard bottom bracket width to use my triple
crank as a double.

You can add a shim to these outboard bearings, which would give you a
little adjustment.
>
> A related question: What is the chain line like on a Shimano triple
> crank. Is it the same as the double with a little ring added to the
> inside?

IMO it should not be. A double should have the midpoint between rings
aligned with the middle of the cassette, a triple should have the middle
ring so aligned. But with a derailleur system, chainline is not
absolute. It'll still work even if it is considerably off the ideal.

--

David L. Johnson

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by
little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 18, 10:45 am, Wayne <waynesu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 9:44 am, "Scott G." <sco...@primax.com> wrote:
>
> > > Before the advent of marketing square taper axles were troublefree too ;)
>
> > > -
> > > /Marten
>
> > Amen, Long live the Shimano UN-72, cheap and long lasting.
> > At some point I guess TA and Phil will be the last square tapers
> > available.
>
> > Scott G.
>
> I am still using a Phil with a triple crank and have a couple
> questions about the new outboard designs.
>
> Can the chain line, Q-factor, and ring clearance be changed at all
> with the new BB designs or are you stuck with what the builder decides
> is best?

What you get is what you got.

> I noticed that the Campy and Shimano have different ideas of
> what is best.
>
> A related question: What is the chain line like on a Shimano triple
> crank. Is it the same as the double with a little ring added to the
> inside?

According to Shimano spec, the former inner (now middle) ring sits
slightly farther out in a triple than on a double (some of this also
depends on ST diameter, FD, etc.). However, it is possible to set a
triple up with a chainline nearly identical to a double, *if* you only
intend to use the inner ring on the 3-4 innermost spockets, *and* the
ST diameter, FD design, etc., allow. All this, of course, depends on a
crankset/BB setup which allows the end user some latitude with spindle
length, etc.

[M-gineering]

Wayne wrote:

> Can the chain line, Q-factor, and ring clearance be changed at all
> with the new BB designs or are you stuck with what the builder decides
> is best? I noticed that the Campy and Shimano have different ideas of
> what is best.
>
crank to crank distance is fixed, but MTB cranksets come with a bunch of
spacers between shell and bearing to play around with. With road
cranksets you have to mill the frame


> A related question: What is the chain line like on a Shimano triple
> crank. Is it the same as the double with a little ring added to the
> inside?

Sheldon Brown explains all

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[jim beam]

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Steve Gravrock writes:
>
>>>> There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
>>>> square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere
>>>> around 200 pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
>>> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a
>>> problem using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are
>>> either bigger still, or ride a whole lot more.
>
>> I'm a 200 lbs goofy-footed mountain biker -- pretty much the worst
>> case scenario that Jobst Brandt identified for square taper
>> spindles. I've never broken one. That said, I don't put on many
>> miles at all off-road.
>
> Not so. Goofy-footed affects Octalink spindles because the spline is
> not a press fit and has backlash that comes to bear when reverse
> torque is transmitted from the left crank.

if the teeth were absolutely square, that would be true, but they're
not, they're radiused, and that wedges the teeth solid - when torqued to
spec.


> That micro-motion
> gradually unscrews the retaining bolt and the spline shears off when
> its engagement approaches zero.

that's mere supposition based on your poor observation of the facts.
show us one single sheared shimano octalink spline. just one. even one
not torqued to spec.


>
>> My road bike is ISIS, although those 2-piece Tiagra cranks are going
>> to start looking awfully good if I burn out another bottom bracket.
>
> BB wear is not related to the type of spindle but rather whether the
> bearings are properly adjusted.
>
> Jobst Brandt

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<46d67ca1-7385-4cb8-a622-06c6c5866eb1@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Scott Gordo <blubberpuss@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 18, 2:28 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > >> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > >> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > >> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
> >
> > >> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> > >> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> > >> still, or ride a whole lot more.
> >
> > > I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
> > > associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
> > > on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
> > > failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
> > > half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
> > > proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
> > > spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now, I
> > > have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
> > > above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.
> >
> > Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
> > although I did go through 3 Ti Time pedal spindles (fortunately bent them,
> > not broke) before I realized they weren't a good idea for someone my size.
> > Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> > everybody?). And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
> > frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> > killed an Octalink and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
> > bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to
> > the
> > oversized spindle).
> >
> > And all I do is climb or sprint. But not very well, apparently! :>)
> >
> > --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com- Hide
> > quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Nothstein was around 220lbs and put some serious wattage through the
> bb. I have yet to see a track crankset that's not square taper.

Tracks don't have potholes.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

[M-gineering]

Scott Gordo wrote:

>
> Nothstein was around 220lbs and put some serious wattage through the
> bb. I have yet to see a track crankset that's not square taper.

Current DA uses octalink, even with NJS approval ;)

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Jay Beattie]

On Dec 18, 7:14 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> In article
> <46d67ca1-7385-4cb8-a622-06c6c5866...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 18, 2:28 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > >> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > > >> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > > >> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> > > >> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> > > >> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> > > >> still, or ride a whole lot more.
>
> > > > I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
> > > > associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
> > > > on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
> > > > failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
> > > > half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
> > > > proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
> > > > spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now, I
> > > > have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
> > > > above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> > > Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
> > > although I did go through 3 Ti Time pedal spindles (fortunately bent them,
> > > not broke) before I realized they weren't a good idea for someone my size.
> > > Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> > > everybody?). And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
> > > frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> > > killed an Octalink and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
> > > bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to
> > > the
> > > oversized spindle).
>
> > > And all I do is climb or sprint. But not very well, apparently! :>)
>
> > > --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com-Hide
> > > quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Nothstein was around 220lbs and put some serious wattage through the
> > bb. I have yet to see a track crankset that's not square taper.
>
> Tracks don't have potholes.

Except Alpenrose in the '80s. No kidding. It also had transitions
that were like ski jumps. It's much better now. See http://tinyurl.com/2bdcsb
.. -- Jay Beattie.

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

> Tracks don't have potholes.

Hellyer Park used to, back in the 70s. And not just choppy pavement, but
wavey too. Very tough holding your line in the Kilo or Pursuit when your
front wheel was moving up & down all over the place. It is *so* much nicer
now. My son has no idea how good he's got it.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:rcousine-3BCF02.19145818122007@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]...
> In article
> <46d67ca1-7385-4cb8-a622-06c6c5866eb1@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> Scott Gordo <blubberpuss@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 18, 2:28 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> > >> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
>> > >> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around
>> > >> > 200
>> > >> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>> >
>> > >> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a
>> > >> problem
>> > >> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either
>> > >> bigger
>> > >> still, or ride a whole lot more.
>> >
>> > > I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
>> > > associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
>> > > on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
>> > > failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
>> > > half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
>> > > proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
>> > > spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now,
>> > > I
>> > > have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
>> > > above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.
>> >
>> > Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any
>> > type,
>> > although I did go through 3 Ti Time pedal spindles (fortunately bent
>> > them,
>> > not broke) before I realized they weren't a good idea for someone my
>> > size.
>> > Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
>> > everybody?). And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket
>> > bearings
>> > frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
>> > killed an Octalink and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti
>> > ISIS
>> > bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due
>> > to
>> > the
>> > oversized spindle).
>> >
>> > And all I do is climb or sprint. But not very well, apparently! :>)
>> >
>> > --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com- Hide
>> > quoted text -
>> >
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Nothstein was around 220lbs and put some serious wattage through the
>> bb. I have yet to see a track crankset that's not square taper.
>
> Tracks don't have potholes.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
> "My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
> Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

[damyth]

On Dec 18, 8:09 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 7:14 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <46d67ca1-7385-4cb8-a622-06c6c5866...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> > Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 18, 2:28 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > > >> > There are some people here who are heavy enough to routinely break
> > > > >> > square-taper spindles. The fuzzy line seems to be somewhere around 200
> > > > >> > pounds before there's a problem. I'm not that heavy.
>
> > > > >> I can provide a data point at slightly above 200lbs, with nary a problem
> > > > >> using square-taper cranks. Most people with problems are either bigger
> > > > >> still, or ride a whole lot more.
>
> > > > > I broke one Phil BB spindle center-span (not the failure mode
> > > > > associated with the "design flaws" of square taper which was cracking
> > > > > on left side face, IIRC). No Campy, Sugino, Shimano, TA, SunTour
> > > > > failures -- all of which I used far less than the Phil. I broke a
> > > > > half-dozen crank arms at various personal weights up to 225lbs (I'm
> > > > > proudly below 200lbs now), so I have to assume that square taper
> > > > > spindles are not that frail -- and less frail than crank arms. Now, I
> > > > > have eaten up the bearings on a number of ISIS BBs, but as said
> > > > > above, you can still ride home on shot bearings. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> > > > Sometimes I feel so inadequate. I've never broken a bb axle of any type,
> > > > although I did go through 3 Ti Time pedal spindles (fortunately bent them,
> > > > not broke) before I realized they weren't a good idea for someone my size.
> > > > Did the usual thing of causing Campy NR cranks to crack (but didn't
> > > > everybody?). And I've gone through old-style Campy bottom bracket bearings
> > > > frequently, and rusted out an old Phil unit back in the day, but never
> > > > killed an Octalink and am presently between 15-20k miles on an FSA Ti ISIS
> > > > bb that, by rights, should have died long ago (very tiny bearings due to
> > > > the
> > > > oversized spindle).
>
> > > > And all I do is climb or sprint. But not very well, apparently! :>)
>
> > > > --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com-Hide
> > > > quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Nothstein was around 220lbs and put some serious wattage through the
> > > bb. I have yet to see a track crankset that's not square taper.
>
> > Tracks don't have potholes.
>
> Except Alpenrose in the '80s. No kidding. It also had transitions
> that were like ski jumps. It's much better now. Seehttp://tinyurl.com/2bdcsb
> . -- Jay Beattie.

Alpenrose was glass smooth compared to Kissena. If you never rode
Kissena back in the day you didn't understand what an "adventure" that
was.