vtchuck

I'm looking at these as a potential crankset for my 76 PX-10. Presently its set up w/ mostly Campy NR components w/
Mafac Comp brakes, so authenticity is nor really an issue:



The positives, IMO, are: 110 BCD, with smaller rings.... I just struggle with a 42T inner ring
Standard extractor & pedal threads
175mm arm length
Love the Drillium

Some reviews from 5 or 6 years back of VO cranks were pretty negative

TIA for your feedback

lostarchitect 

I have one--a different model--that I recently replaced with a Sugino. It was on my VO Pass Hunter for a couple years. I have no complaints from a functional standpoint. It was totally fine. I only changed it out because I think the Sugino looks better.

Roger M

There's a Holdsworth branded crankset that looks similar for about half the money.

Holdsworth Retro Crankset | Planet X



If I ever want to go with a compact crankset for a vintage Campagnolo build, this would be high on the list.

vtchuck

Thanks for the lead! Perfect..... ordered it and it was $116 US shipped.

ThermionicScott 

Too late now, but it looks like VO is selling the non-drillium 165mm cranks for $95: Grand Cru 110 Fluted Double Crankset, 34x48t - Cranks - Cranksets - Components

vtchuck

Thanks.... I saw those, but I need 175mm or longer. The black version was also on sale yesterday.

eschlwc

they don't look right.

vintage cranksets look appropriate on vintage bikes.

they're easily polished and nos chainrings are readily available.

lostarchitect 

It's true, I have tried a few times to use stuff like this on vintage bikes and it just doesn't look right. I do sometimes use various new parts, but try to be minimal. The only larger item I generally like to have new is rims, just because I'm not keen on riding 40 year old rims...

Darth Lefty 

The finish is too new!

The Golden Boy 

So I'll throw this in here-

How much of a difference is noticeable between 170, 172, and 175 crank lengths?

noglider 

That's super tempting. Is this likely to work well with a Campagnolo Veloce 2x10 drivetrain?

@The Golden Boy, I was skeptical that people could feel such differences, but I find that I can. I've ridden bikes and said they feel funny, and sure enough, the cranks are long. It's not a scientific test, though.

One of my bikes has 155mm cranks, and they're perfectly comfortable for me.

eschlwc

oh yeah. gotta have perfectly smooth braking. new rims don't look out of place when you can easily remove the labels if they bug you.

the vo cranks look a little better without the dust caps in place. a little less 'dressy.' but you should be able to find a nice vintage crank with good rings for that kind of money.

Chombi

Only real thing that looks a bit different from "equivalent" C&V cranks is the arms look a bit chunkier and maybe a bit "squarer" at the corners. Which could translate it to be just a bit heavier. That, and the mirror polished finish which was unusual in the 70's and 80's with aluminum alloy cranks.....

Chrome Molly

Not a fan of the self extracting bolts. Having removed mine (different model) the removal is tenuous at best. Prefer the right tools for the job at hand. I do think the VO rings are nice though.

Essthreetee

I like mine. I like the way they look. I did however break a tooth off of the stock big ring.

lostarchitect 

Depends on you, you need to try them and find out. For me, 165 is great, 170 is fine, and 175 is almost intolerable.

rowebr

Been using the Grand Cru 48-34 crankset on my Bianchi for about 3 years. No problems, shifts very nicely with a modern shimano front derailleur, still looks good. +1 to extracting these cranks with the standard tools, don't try to self extract using the bolts and dust caps.

ThermionicScott 

I doubt I'd notice a difference between 170's and 172.5's, or 172.5's and 175's, but about half of my bikes are on 165's and the other half on 170's. With the 165's I'm aware that my feet are spinning a smaller circle and I don't have as much leverage when climbing a steep hill out of the saddle. It's not the end of the world -- it just may be helpful to have a slightly lower gear available if you go shorter on the cranks.

I've had 175's on a mountain bike or two, but never put enough miles on them to form an opinion. If set up with the right amount of leg extension at the bottom, your knees will come up a little higher at the top, and your feet back and forward a little more than with the shorter cranks. I suppose if one had ROM issues, they might not enjoy them as much, but a person with long legs might find them a lot more natural than shorter cranks. How's that for a meandering answer?

jeirvine 

I like the Velo Orange 50.4 BCD arms. You can use TA and Stronglight rings, no funny extractors needed, and they come in longer sizes. I'm a big fan of 172.5 and have in five years of looking found exactly one single orphan TA drive side crank arm in that length.

rhm

Moving to a smaller crank arm feels a little strange for a little while, but you get used to it very quickly. Once you've done that, moving back to a longer crank arm is not easy. Longer crank arms may have some advantage at very low cadences, but none at higher cadences.

fender1

The VO cranksets seem fine but I hate the giant, VO logo. VO makes a copy of the TA ProVis V crank:

Grand Cru 50.4 BCD Crankset MK II - Cranksets - Components

They would not look out of place and rings are still available in many sizes for inner and outer rings. VO sell 46/30 but Boulder Bikes sells a wider range of TA rings. You can also make this a triple crank if you choose to in the future.

FSA made3 a similar crank for Electra. I like it more than the VO because there is no branding, it fits the TA/VO rings and the crank arms are flared a little bot more to help with front derailleur clearance.
This is the Electra (made by FSA):
Electra Ticino 39 50 Sprocket 172 5 Road Touring Racing Bicycle Crankset TA Pat | eBay

vtchuck

I hear you, but it my case its most important that I have a bike I can ride. My age and the terrain here in Vermont (the Green Mountain state) require
more forgiving gearing. The best I can do w/ a NR drivetrain is 42-26 or 28. Also vintage 175mm cranks w/ a BCD under 144 are not that common (or inexpensive).

If you are aware of vintage double cranksets that are 175mm, fit a 38T or smaller inner ring, don't require a special crank puller, accept English thread pedals, has a readily
available chainrings in various sizes AND is reasonably priced.... well I'm all ears.

IMHO, the Holdsworth model I bought has a vintage look with the fluted arms & drilled rings. I would prefer it be without the lettering, but I can live with it.

vtchuck

Never tried 172.5, but for me there's a noticeable difference between 170 & 175. Maybe i'm just picky.

vtchuck

Thanks for the suggestions and ideas. I'll post a photo of the PX-10 once I get the new cranks.

Here's what it looks like now:

Salamandrine 

For decades the answer to that would have been TA. They were decent quality, came in different lengths, could be configured however you wanted, and were half the cost of campy. Until 10 or 15 years ago they were still pretty easy to get, but that is no more.

Stronglight 93 did come in 175, but they are exceedingly rare, are usually french thread, and obviously take a special puller.

Of the modern TA clones, only the VO comes in 175, and those have rather funky super compact chainrings sizes.

So yeah, using a modern retro crankset is a much more pragmatic decision.