Bicycle Mechanics - Is Square Taper Crank Dead?

All three of my bikes have square taper crank sets -- 2 Shimano and 1 Campy. I recently damaged the crank on my Trek mountain bike. The entire drive train on that bike is tired anyway, so I was looking around at new bits. It seems that all the new crank sets are of the external bearing variety. I'm a bit of a retro-grouch, but I'll go with new tech if it really offers an advantage. I noticed that decent quality NOS square taper cranks are still available at giveaway(nearly) prices. In addition to being a bit of a retro-grouch, I'm also a cheap mofo. What to do? What do you folks think?

I'm not moving away from square taper 'til I have to. I'd probably just get a new square taper crank arm.

I'm not moving away from square taper 'til I have to. I'd probably just get a new square taper crank arm.


Elaborate please.

Ummm, what's there to elaborate on?

'til I have to means, when absolutely no square taper replacement BBs or crank arms are available.

just get a new square taper crank arm means crusing ebay, or http://loosescrews.com/index.cgi?c=Crank/Chainring&sc=Crank%20Arms&id=39286023629

I think if you are not a professional biker, then the newer technology may not be an advantage at all. Perhaps you might be able to get longer lasting ISIS stuff and cut some weight, but hey cant get much cheaper than old square taper.

Ummm, what's there to elaborate on?

'til I have to means, when absolutely no square taper replacement BBs or crank arms are available.

just get a new square taper crank arm means crusing ebay, or http://loosescrews.com/index.cgi?c=Crank/Chainring&sc=Crank%20Arms&id=39286023629

So the advantages to external bearing cranks, over square taper, are not worth the extra money?

There are many non-square taper cranks that fit on internal bearing BBs.

I couldn't elaborate on external bearing BBs, as I've never tried them. What's the deal? Stiffer. At 145 pounds, I find most BBs to be sufficiently stiff. Not worth the extra money to me. I am thinking about getting a NEW bike this year, so I might wind up with an external bearing BB, but that won't be a selling point.

Square taper cranks are fine, and they are my first choice. Thankfully TA shares this idea and I can still get 185mm cranks from them with the Carmina and Vortex:)

I see no reason Sugino won't keep making the XD arms as they are good sellers for them. White Industries has also stuck to tapers. Campy makes them still, as does FSA. There's other lesser known brands too... Andel, Sinz, High Sierra/Zinn come to mind. Shimano does make one, with riveted rings.... it's for Kmart bikes.

My view is they're making solutions for problems that didn't exist by changing crank designs. Shimano did no one a favor by switching to Octalink, then switching again to OB cranks. What's next? How long will OB cranks last before they change once again? .....Makes no sense to me.

Bikes are not standardized, and that is what OB cranks try to do with a non adjustable chainline. They have no flexibility for components other than those made specifically for it. Good for Shimano's pocketbook, poor for the person who mixes components.

My bet is square tapers will outlast all of them .. . . octalink ,isis and outboard bearing. It's a proven, durable design. I had considered getting some Surly Mr. Whirly cranks as they make them in 185mm, but I could not think of one advantage of the design over tapers.

Square taper cranks are fine, and they are my first choice. Thankfully TA shares this idea and I can still get 185mm cranks from them with the Carmina and Vortex:)

I see no reason Sugino won't keep making the XD arms as they are good sellers for them. White Industries has also stuck to tapers. Campy makes them still, as does FSA. There's other lesser known brands too... Andel, Sinz, High Sierra/Zinn come to mind. Shimano does make one, with riveted rings.... it's for Kmart bikes.

My view is they're making solutions for problems that didn't exist by changing crank designs. Shimano did no one a favor by switching to Octalink, then switching again to OB cranks. What's next? How long will OB cranks last before they change once again? .....Makes no sense to me.

Bikes are not standardized, and that is what OB cranks try to do with a non adjustable chainline. They have no flexibility for components other than those made specifically for it. Good for Shimano's pocketbook, poor for the person who mixes components.

My bet is square tapers will outlast all of them .. . . octalink ,isis and outboard bearing. It's a proven, durable design. I had considered getting some Surly Mr. Whirly cranks as they make them in 185mm, but I could not think of one advantage of the design over tapers.

I remember when the splined (octalink, isis) came out and they were all the rage, then I heard all the horror stories. Like you said, seemed like an answer to a question nobody asked. It didn't occur to me that the chainlines on OB cranks are non-adjustable. Yes, I like the option of mix and match. I think I'll go Sugino this time around.

Thanks.

So the advantages to external bearing cranks, over square taper, are not worth the extra money?

I say it depends. I bought a Campagnolo Centaur Ultra Torque crank with external bearings as a replacement for a 2005 Campagnolo Centaur square taper crank. I only bought it because I got it very cheap and needed a crank for a new bike project, so I really didn't have any expectations about it being an upgrade. Nevertheless the UT crank immediately felt much better than the square taper crank. I assume it feels better because it flexes less.
The UT crank feels better than my square taper crank, so everything else being equal I would prefer the UT crank with its external bearing. There are some trade offs however, since most external bearing cranks are sensitive to whether the crank box sides are completely parallel or else the bearings gets destroyed too fast. So many frames can benefit from "facing" the crank box before installing eg. a Campagnolo UT crank.

Square taper cranks however doesn't suddenly becomes bad, just because other crank systems got better. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a square taper crank for a new bike project if the price and quality was right for my needs and my budget. I wouldn't however, buy or prefer a square taper crank if it cost the same as a new Shimano H2 or a Campagnolo UT crank.

--
Regards

As you have pointed out, there are some very good bargans available in square taper cranksets.

Square taper > ISIS/Octalink.
ISIS was trying to "solve" a problem that square taper cranks just didn't have. And, to top it off, ISIS developed a whole host of problems that made it effectively disappear. You are an idiot if you go buy one of the "great deals" that outfits like Nashbar have on ISIS equipment.

Square taper = external bearing.
From a mechanical perspective, external bearing is incredibly elegant, and efficient. It's one of those things where you wonder why they didn't think of it sooner.
HOWEVER...as has been mentioned, there is absolutely zero adjustability of your chainline. It's the adjustability and the capability to make square taper cranks work with any frame that makes them equal, in my opinion, to external bearing systems.

Square taper > ISIS/Octalink.
ISIS was trying to "solve" a problem that square taper cranks just didn't have. And, to top it off, ISIS developed a whole host of problems that made it effectively disappear. You are an idiot if you go buy one of the "great deals" that outfits like Nashbar have on ISIS equipment.
Square taper>ISIS? Fully agree. Square taper>Octalink? Maybe but by very little. Octalink bottom brackets were slightly lighter and slightly stiffer than square taper and decently durable.

ISIS was designed to get around Shimano's Octalink patents and was a "public domain" design, that is anyone could use it. Many makers did but didn't do it well and ISIS developed a reputation for poor reliability. Some were good but many weren't.

The inherent weakness in both Octalink and ISIS is their larger diameter spindle goes into the same shell as a square taper bottom bracket so the individual bearings have to be smaller. Octalink bbs generally had high quality bearings which lasted well. Many ISIS bbs did not.

Alive and well at Phil Woods. bk

Square taper>Octalink? Maybe but by very little.

Only slightly better and considerably cheaper? I'll take it. I have a cheapo Shimano BB that has outlasted darn near every other part (frame included) on the bike it came with, so I'm not too inclined to "upgrade".

Maybe the decreased flex of an external bearing crank is sensible with a crazy stiff carbon race frame, but I can't see a cromoly, square taper axle flexing before the BB shell does on a steel or aliminum MTB frame, and BB shell flex wouldn't change with crank choice, right?

Only slightly better and considerably cheaper? I'll take it. I have a cheapo Shimano BB that has outlasted darn near every other part (frame included) on the bike it came with, so I'm not too inclined to "upgrade".
So will (an do) I. I have square taper bb's on four of my 6 bikes and Octalinks on the other two. I'm in no rush to "upgrade" to external bb's on any of them either.

My point was that Octalink was not a poorer design than square taper. It is a bit lighter, stiffer and plenty durable (I have 22,000 miles on an Ultegra Octalink bb and it's still going strong) and the cost wasn't much, if any, higher.

ISIS varied all over the map on quality and I avoided them like the plague.

I think a lot of issues with the change to "other then square taper" started when Shimano went to an indexed front shifting system. With very little adjustability of the shifter/derailer (as compared to friction front or Campy's design), the position of the crank to the derailer had to be exact, else the shift wouldn't happen as clean as Shimano specifies. Thus they attempted to gain control over the b-bracket design so as to position the crank in an exact location. That, coupled with a desire to save a little bit of weight, led to experimenting with different designs that resulted in the current crop of external bearing systems, whose spindle is a set length and is integral to the right crank arm.

That said, if you use any system in the 9 or 10 speed groups, it's difficult to find square taper cranks that has rings and spacing for anything that will work correctly. Most of the square taper designs are for 7/8 speed systems. Stronglight has square taper in 9/10 speed, but I am not aware of many others.

Steve B.

I like my 9sp Shimano D/A cranks (octalinx V1), as well as my 9sp (external BB) cranks simply because I put my bike in cars a lot and enjoy being able to remove and install the crank with an allen wrench and a little plastic thing I can fit in my hand. On the other hand, that is due to the serf extracting crank bolts in the 9sp case, not actually due to the bb spindle. I find that the bearings in ISIS don't last as long, and if you go octalink you are forever stuck with Shimano (maybe not a bad thing). While the external setups are stiffer, I'm not convinced that matters much, and they do require very parallel bb shell faces. As a parting note, several of my bikes have square taper BBs, and I'm deing nothing to change them. They don't cost a lot, and they work just fine if I'm not removing and reinstalling the cranks regularly.

So the advantages to external bearing cranks, over square taper, are not worth the extra money?

External bearing cranks do for working on your bike what PVC did for plumbing. Any idiot with a hacksaw can do it:thumb: External bearings and 2 piece cranks make installation and removal of the crank a breeze. Removal of the bearings is simple also...much easier then an internal bearing set.

As for not being able to adjust the chain line, people are blowing smoke on that one. The RaceFace cranks I have, or I've worked on, have spacers to adjust the chainline which is pretty much what you have to do with an internal bottom bracket. In many respects, the external bearing cranks are simpler because to change chainline on an internal bb often you have to buy a new bb with a different length shaft.

Square taper, Octalink or ISIS internal bb cranks are all good systems. I've never had a problem with any of them and I've had several of each. They aren't 'difficult' to work on but, like threaded headset, the new system is just simpler, easier and require fewer tools.

Most of the square taper designs are for 7/8 speed systems.

I'll just keep using square taper and 7/8 speed systems. The bottom bracket won't self-loosen, the parts are all cheap and easy to find, and generally durable too. Yay, tried and true old technology!

Thanks for the info about Octalink vs ISIS, HillRider. It sort of sums up my feelings about Shimano generally. Their tendency toward monopoly and limited compatibility bugs me, but on the other hand, they usually make really good stuff.

I'm running square-taper on all my bikes, including an early-90's Shimano 600 (Ultegra) crank updated with 10-speed chainrings. I have nothing against moving "up" to a more recently-developed system, but I also have no reason to be frustrated with square-taper performance, let alone price.

That said, if you use any system in the 9 or 10 speed groups, it's difficult to find square taper cranks that has rings and spacing for anything that will work correctly. Most of the square taper designs are for 7/8 speed systems. Stronglight has square taper in 9/10 speed, but I am not aware of many others.
Steve B.

My Campy bike is a 9 speed with a square taper crank(double).

Sheesh.

When are you people going to decide what standard to use? Bike parts are a nightmare of compatibility issues. If you'd just decide between 0 (direct drive), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 24, 27, 30 or 33 speeds, and figure out whether you want direct, treadle, shaft, chain, friction or belt drives...maybe the bike industry could standardize a few things. :rolleyes:

I have 10 sp Ultegra with 82 vintage, 5 or 6 sp DA square taper double, plays fine
Bud

I have a Campagnolo Record bottom-bracket on my vintage Puch. I bought it and installed it in 1982 - 3. Along with a Super-Record 52 - 42T crankset. I overhaul it at least yearly. And it is the smoothest rolling BB I've ever seen - and I've seen a great many BB's in my days. If you ever find a really nice old square-taper - get it! They require new ball-bearings (I always replace these during an overhaul). And they require finesse to adjust them into that narrowest of windows that is perfection. I think they are a vanishing breed due to the ever-increasing laziness of Americans in general.

Ask any 300+ pound sofa-surfer. It's sad.

There's nothing particularly wrong with square-taper, but as noted above, it takes finesse to properly install and adjust them. My preference for external bearing BBs like Hollowtech II style is simply efficiency of time when servicing.

If I notice a bad bearing on a ride, I can get back, and in less than five minutes replace that side of the BB with a spare, properly installed with a torque wrench. No fuss, no muss. Bam, back out on the road.

A traditional square-taper, with loose bearings, would take significantly more time to properly service. I imagine the Protour mechanics feel the same way; they can swap a BB quickly and move on to other work. It's not laziness; time is money.

My Campy bike is a 9 speed with a square taper crank(double).
I can do better than that. MY Campy bike is a Chorus 10-speed triple and it also has a square taper bb. ;)

I can do better than that. MY Campy bike is a Chorus 10-speed triple and it also has a square taper bb. ;)

I have a 12 inch Johnson. :thumb:

I have a Campagnolo Record bottom-bracket on my vintage Puch. I bought it and installed it in 1982 - 3. Along with a Super-Record 52 - 42T crankset. I overhaul it at least yearly. And it is the smoothest rolling BB I've ever seen - and I've seen a great many BB's in my days. If you ever find a really nice old square-taper - get it! They require new ball-bearings (I always replace these during an overhaul). And they require finesse to adjust them into that narrowest of windows that is perfection. I think they are a vanishing breed due to the ever-increasing laziness of Americans in general.

Ask any 300+ pound sofa-surfer. It's sad.


I've just replaced the FSA triple with outboard bearings on my new Airnimal, for a Campag Record BB square taper with a Chorus triple . From experience I know it will last more than twenty, thirty years or more with the minimum of maintenance, will be very smooth with little resistance, and any part will be easily replaced. I trust it absolutely when on tour and that's really a priority for me.

I just ordered this for $40 -- M442 triple square taper. Yes, I know the rings are steel. So what? I don't race. Yes, the outboard bearing cranks are probably better, but the cheapest ones sell for about $150. They may be better, but I doubt they are 3X as good. I'll go OB type crank when the price comes down a bit. What I certainly don't want is OctaStink® or I-P1ss®. Flame away.

http://www.universalcycles.com/images//products/large/19141.jpg

I have a 12 inch Johnson. :thumb:
Are you bragging or complaining? :rolleyes: