Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - road cranks vs track cranks

any differences between using those 2 on a fixie?

i do see alot of ppl craving for the suginos but does it make a difference in any way: weight or etc?

cheers

length is the most important part. most track cranks are 165mm, which gives better ground clearance. track cranks are also a different BCD (bolt circle diameter). Sugino 75's are popular because they're stiff and beautiful.

length is the most important part. most track cranks are 165mm, which gives better ground clearance.

While length is important, most road and track cranks are available in a variety of lengths, usually in 2.5 or 5 mm increments, from 165mm to 175mm. So in that regard track and road cranks are not different.
For all practical purposes, you will notice little difference between track and road cranks. If you use a track hub and track crank, paired with the correct BB you'll have an easier time achieving a straight chainline. Thats about the only benefit of track cranks used on the road.

Most track cranksets use 144mm BCD, while most road doubles use 130mm BCD. There are many exceptions to this, though, like the very popular Sugino RD Messenger with 130mm BCD. (if I mention that the TokyoLoco is 130mm BCD as well, will I start a flamefest? Let's see....)

the only real difference is five little 1/8 inch tabs. you can get a equal quality hype free road double crank on ebay for a 1/4 of the price of a track crank.

the only real difference is five little 1/8 inch tabs. you can get a equal quality hype free road double crank on ebay for a 1/4 of the price of a track crank.

To be honest, I don't know any cranksets that are marketed for road usage, that would come in 144mm BCD. Campa used to have one model, long time ago. You would be hard pressed to find road chainrings in 144mm BCD.

since we are here i might as well ask....

what's the difference between a track specific BB to a road BB?

cheers

since we are here i might as well ask....

what's the difference between a track specific BB to a road BB?

cheers

Apart from the width that, in the case of track chainlines, is narrower, there's no difference between the two.

since we are here i might as well ask....

what's the difference between a track specific BB to a road BB?

cheers

There is not necessarily any mechanical difference. Many, but not all track bottom brackets are unsealed to meet NJS (Japanese Keirin) requirements. However, many cranks and BB are meant to be pairs. For instance, the sugino 75 BB and crank will give you the standard 42mm chainline which will match a track hub. Using the same crank with another BB will not guarantee this because the spindle may be a different length and/or the taper of the spindle may differ. One the other hand, road cranks and bottom brackets are not necessarily designed to yield a 42mm chainline. There is a good chance you can achieve the right chainline with any crank, but if you choose a road crank you might have to do some experimenting with different bottom brackets, or just accept that you chainline will be a few mms off.

thanks....apreciate allt he replies. still a noob in the fixie scene.

so anyone here using an unsealed njs certified bb?

how long is the service interval and also how is it compared to a sealed one; rolling smoothness and weight?

cheers

there are a lot of guys on the board using road doubles in place of track cranks and they work wonderfully

To be honest, I don't know any cranksets that are marketed for road usage, that would come in 144mm BCD. Campa used to have one model, long time ago. You would be hard pressed to find road chainrings in 144mm BCD.

Hey i have those cranks, 170 strada i think they are called. Do you know how old these would be?

Hey i have those cranks, 170 strada i think they are called. Do you know how old these would be?

Yeah, I think you're right, they should be the Campagnolo Strada! I have no clue, never seen them in real life. But I do feel they're quite unique. Do you have the original chainring(s), too? If you do, I'd be very graterul if you could post/send a pic of that chainring. Or at least describe the construction of it.

There's plenty of old road cranksets with 144bcd, altough many of them seem to be originally Campy copies. Stuff like Sugino Mighty, older Dura-Ace and Shimano 600 too, Ofmega, SR etc. Too many to mention, actually. Check out Ebay and you'll see.

Anything wrong with using a road double on the track?

edit: I know it'll be harder to find quality chainrings in the proper BCD

144 BCD:
Campy Record (NR, Record, CR, ect)
Most Campy copies including most Italian cranks from the 80's and 90's
Most Sugino single and double chainring cranks from the 80's and 90's
Mavic starfish cranks, IIRC
****mano Dura Ace track

Finding 144 BDC cranks is beyond easy. Finding inexpensive 144 BDC chainrings, notsomuch.

yeah, i rock a campy record road double, chainline's perfect with ring on the outside, coupled with centaur bb (108 i think?), 144 BCD

http://www.firstflightbikes.com/LCrank61.JPG

i think they look better than pretty much any crank out there.

hijacking sorry,
BCD is being thrown around a lot. What is that an acronym for?

it's posted above (bolt circle diameter)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_sizing#Bolt_circle

144 BCD:
Campy Record (NR, Record, CR, ect)
Most Campy copies including most Italian cranks from the 80's and 90's
Most Sugino single and double chainring cranks from the 80's and 90's
Mavic starfish cranks, IIRC
****mano Dura Ace track

Finding 144 BDC cranks is beyond easy.

Not all of those you listed is/was marketed as road crankset.

http://www.yayhooray.com/imgs/pinkies/05.gif

hijacking sorry,
BCD is being thrown around a lot. What is that an acronym for?

Take a look at posting #2 (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=6068935&postcount=2).

thanks....apreciate allt he replies. still a noob in the fixie scene.

so anyone here using an unsealed njs certified bb?

how long is the service interval and also how is it compared to a sealed one; rolling smoothness and weight?

cheers

Not long ago all bottom brackets were unsealed..people rode them on the road, on the dirt, in the rain, etc. so its not really a major issue. Service interval depends on the conditions you ride it in, but I would say 1-2 times a year. Weight wise, it depends on the materials, but assuming both are made of steel, on average an unsealed BB is probably a little lighter than a basic square taper sealed BB, but barely so. A good quality unsealed BB will be smoother than a sealed BB.

Anything wrong with using a road double on the track?

You might attract an occasional insulting remark from some track snob, but other than that, a road crank should work fine on the track.

You might attract an occasional insulting remark from some track snob, but other than that, a road crank should work fine on the track.

Really? I thought that street fg h------s were the only ones who cared about that.

Really? I thought that street fg h------s were the only ones who cared about that.

True, but some of them occasionally show up at the track.

so when it comes to mm, will using a sugino BB with 109 spindle length skew the performance/chain line of my 110mm spindle with my IRO crank?

cheers

so when it comes to mm, will using a sugino BB with 109 spindle length skew the performance/chain line of my 110mm spindle with my IRO crank?

cheers

Assuming the spindles are both symmetrical and have the same taper (so that the crank fits onto them the same distance), that would alter your chainline by 0.5mm...thats not a significant difference.

Not all of those you listed is/was marketed as road crankset.

pretty sure he was right.

fyi, campy cranks (and some sugino and such campy copies) were 151bcd prior to around 1967 for strada cranks and maybe 1972 for pista cranks.
the late 80's or so to the previous mentioned date the strada cranks were 144bcd, then after i think they were 135bcd.
the pista cranks are still 144bcd.

and legalize it, just so you remember, strada=road, pista=track...lol.

pretty sure he was right.

Not saying he wasn't right, but so was I when I said that not all of those are road cranksets:


144 BCD:
Campy Record (NR, Record, CR, ect)
Most Campy copies including most Italian cranks from the 80's and 90's
Most Sugino single and double chainring cranks from the 80's and 90's
Mavic starfish cranks, IIRC
****mano Dura Ace track

On my IRO I am running some NOS Shimano 600 road doubles, 170mm.
They is sexy...
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1306/700451090_b7c8adac7a_o.jpg

Very nice sean, I luv NOS Shimano 600.

They don't use the same chainrings. Use a 144 BCD track crank if you want to run a really large chainring. Use a 130 BCD road crank if you want to use a medium size chainring. Use a 110 BCD compact double if you want to run a small chainring.

Sure there is overlap, but if you think in general terms about what you are going to do with the bike, one of these will make more sense than the others.

Another factor is cost. Track cranks and 144 BCD chainrings are usually expensive compared to the other two choices.

To be honest, I don't know any cranksets that are marketed for road usage, that would come in 144mm BCD. Campa used to have one model, long time ago. You would be hard pressed to find road chainrings in 144mm BCD.

My old Peugeot had 144 BCD ROAD cranks and it was a Huret! It was the only road crank that worked well when converted to fixie. I had tried a 132 Campy double and Shimano and you can never get the chainline right without getting a shorter BB. So I think unless you have a Huret and I heard an old Sugino double, you really need a track specific crank and BB that's my experience anyway and that was 4 double cranks! MAybe it works for some but if it's noisy, I know that something is not alingned. A track BB, crank and 120 mm rear seems to be the ticket for a quiet drive. My pet peeve I guess!

I've seen fixie/track cranks from 110 to 151 but 144 is the most common although I think 46T or 45T are the smallest 144 chainrings out there. Businesscycles.com had a sale on 135 BCD Miche Pista cranks and those are beautiful but I think Miche joined the 144 crowd late.

144 is the most common although I think 46T or 45T are the smallest 144 chainrings out there.

42 tooth ring is the smallest a 144bcd crank will accept.

42 tooth ring is the smallest a 144bcd crank will accept.

yup. which is why 130mm is now the standard for road cranks. (the 39T inner ring)

I'm actually about to buy a Sakae EX crankset because it's cheaper than buying a track chainring, and I want a lower gear for winter. There are tons of older road cranksets out there (Sakae, Sugino, etc) that I think would work fine for most conversions.

My Bianchi Pista came with a Sugino RD crank; a road double crank with a 130mm Bolt Circle Diameter (BCD) and 170mm cranks.

I started playing around with different size cogs and chainrings, and I noticed that one tooth difference on the cog corresponded to 4-5 teeth on the chainring.

A one tooth difference on the cog represented a big jump, whereas a one tooth difference on the chainring represented "fine tuning."

I learned a lot about fixed gear riding and "gear inches" from playing around with cogs and chainrings.

Inner road double chainrings typically cost less than a quality EAI cog, which means one has a lot of options for his dollars if he has two EAI cogs, say, a 17 tooth and a 19 tooth cog, and a 42 tooth, 47 tooth, and 52 tooth chainring.

When I decided to upgrade my Pista's comoponents, which, to me, meant lighter and more reliable components, I noticed how many 3/32 chains I had (for the various cog and chainring combos), how many 3/32 cogs, and how many 130 BCD 3/32 chainrings I had, and I decided to stay with that format.

For a new crank, I chose a Stronglight 130 BCD track crank, because, by virtue of its smaller size, it weighed less than the lightest (and very expensive) track crank.
I think I paid John Dace of Businesscycles less than $120 for it (the price has gone up since then).
Elite bicyclists who have ridden my bike, comment on the stiffness of the Stronglight crank.

So now I have the lightest (and very stiff) crank available, and all of my cogs, chains and cheap chainrings still work.

For a bottom bracket, I splurged with the Phil titanium bottom bracket with alloy cups.

I have not ridden a loose ball bottom bracket, like the Sugino bottom bracket, but my reading suggests they weigh less for the money, and have considerably less rolling resistance than sealed cartridge bearings.
I don't know this for a fact, though.

My lbs says, in a clean environment, cleaning and repacking a loose ball bottom bracket every 1.5 to two years will do.
I don't know what "clean environment" means.
Acquaintances who ride in wet environments tell me that a good waterproof grease works just fine, and their bottom brackets do well with minimal maintenance.
Here in Bend, they cinder the roads during snow and ice, and, in this case, "cinder" means ground up volcanic glass, or ash.
With traffic, the cinder turns into a fine red powder that gets inside everything and causes considerable erosion of parts.

As for crank length, with a typically higher track frame bottom bracket shell, 170mm seems like a safe length in regard to pedal strikes in turns.

On a conversion of a road frame to a street fixed gear bike, I'd feel safer with 165mm cranks.

I had planned another drive train upgrade in the near future, and did considerable research in that regard; and I think I could write a nice magazine article on the comparitive merits of the Sugino 75, the Dura Ace, and the Sugino Grand Mighty cranksets.
A person could not go wrong with any of the three.

However, when I looked at how much it would cost to go to 144 BCD, and when I considered the virtues of my present Stronglight/Phil 130 BCD system, I couldn't see any gain that would justify the expense of a 144 BCD system.

If I started out building a bike from scratch, and did not care about every last little gram of weight, I think the 144 BCD and 1/8 format would give the roundest, smoothest, and most quiet performance; but, it would cost some bucks, and I might not even notice the difference except for the increased weight.

So, I've decided to stay with 130 BCD and 3/32.

The only way to roll.

http://oldtenspeedgallery.com/bikes/Motobecane.jpg

^^^I disagree. The only way to roll is this:
http://tinypic.com/30a9dms

On my IRO I am running some NOS Shimano 600 road doubles, 170mm.
They is sexy...
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1306/700451090_b7c8adac7a_o.jpg What spindle length are you using?

uhh, can't remember, but I will look when I get home.
I have Paul hubs which take a 46mm chainline, so you might have to do some math to get it perfect for 42mm.
I think the spindle is a 110 or 113mm, but don't quote me yet.

Ah Pauls, that explains it. I was trying to figure out how you were running the chainring on the outside, I have the same 600's and have to run mine on the inside even with a 107mm spindle, i tried a 103mm but the cranks bottomed out against the cup

yeah, old shimano road doubles are awesome, and they look super classy. 130 bcd chainrings are plentiful as well. i run all 3/32 on 2 of my bikes. one is 42/17 (28mm tires) and the other is 42/15 (23mm tires). the chainrings i have cost 5$ each, and i've gotten a couple of them nos. never bent or deformend a ring and i'm 6'4" and 195. road double is definitely a good way to go.

Ah Pauls, that explains it. I was trying to figure out how you were running the chainring on the outside, I have the same 600's and have to run mine on the inside even with a 107mm spindle, i tried a 103mm but the cranks bottomed out against the cup

I run Shimano 600s (FC-6207) on my kilo TT and if my calculations are correct with a 107 BB (UN54?) I get a 42mm chainline.

(seat tube is 28.6mm, measurement from outside of seat tube to middle of chainring is 57mm so 57-14.3=42.7) it is nice and quiet and I love the way they feel/look.

Spider to crank arm offset is usually different between track and road cranks. That is one reason why in most cases you see chain rings mounted on the inside of road cranks to achieve good chain line.
Trying to mount the chain ring on the outside of road cranks and using even shorter BB spindles usually result in almost no clearance between crank arm and chain stay. But that all depends on crank/frame combo.

Spider to crank arm offset is usually different between track and road cranks. That is one reason why in most cases you see chain rings mounted on the inside of road cranks to achieve good chain line.
Trying to mount the chain ring on the outside of road cranks and using even shorter BB spindles usually result in almost no clearance between crank arm and chain stay. But that all depends on crank/frame combo.

+1 billion

Q-factor is lower with a real track crank and frame.

Spider to crank arm offset is usually different between track and road cranks. That is one reason why in most cases you see chain rings mounted on the inside of road cranks to achieve good chain line.
Trying to mount the chain ring on the outside of road cranks and using even shorter BB spindles usually result in almost no clearance between crank arm and chain stay.

Good analysis. But for me the problem has never been crank arm clearance, always chainring clearance. Has to do with the kind of frames I use, I guess.

I'd like to mention that, if you are a singlespeeder, and use one of the freehub conversion kits, you could space out the cog/sprocket all the way to the right, in which case you get to keep your cake and eat it, too - that is, use wide BBs so you have no clearance problems and yet have perfect chainline.

EDIT: operator's comment prompts me to note that such setup will, however, have a higher Q-factor than a true track setup.

Good analysis. But for me the problem has never been crank arm clearance, always chainring clearance. Has to do with the kind of frames I use, I guess.


For me a lot of the problem is not the crank arms themselves but the crank spider and the extra lip for double rings hitting the chainstay. I have had to switch out parts repeatedly on a few conversions to get around this. One involved having to shim the BB and cog to get the spider away and still have a straight chain line.

a couple comments...

centaur BB spindle length is almost certainly 111mm.

double standard:

all campy road cranks use a 135mm BCD, unless very old (80s?)...those 135 miche rings are perfect for 1/8" conversion here. i'm running a centaur carbon crank/miche ring (on the outside)/111 BB and the chainline is perfect.

pretty much all japanese road cranks these days use 130mm, as does the stronglight track crank (as ken mentioned).

$0.02