twocicle

Check out this post... https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...1#post15412301

We got the Cobra Wing, which I believe is the same as the Viper, but diff in name only AFAIK.

bradcycles

lol. I can't see the trends continuing on reducing the weight of the bike or our OLH time. We'll have to upgrade to a Paketa or Calfee someday to get a much lighter bike, I think. I can't see my contribution to our OLH time improving that much (I'm close to a fitness peak right now). Sandy, on the other hand, seems to be improving her fitness by leaps and bounds from week to week... (no pressure, Sandy ).

bradcycles

We got down to 31.88 pounds with Sandy's new lighter weight saddle and the new stem (which only reduced weight by .04 pounds with the shims and longer seatpost). I've attached photos of the current weight and the current setup (as weighed).

DubT

You can cut the seat posts off and save several grams, just make sure that you do not cut them off too short.

twocicle

Since you already had a cowhorn stoker bar w/o heavy stoker grips, your net savings on the carbon Viper bar will be less substantial. Though, I bet you could hit 30 lbs or less with just a couple more items swapped: crankset, Gates belt, carbon captains bars. At least the list is getting shorter at this point!

Ritterview

Lightning cranksets would save over a pound, but, alas, this is where the Santana proprietary standards comes in again. The BB shell width is too long for the Lightning spindle. The Santana can't be faulted for no Gates potential, as the frame pre-dates the Gates.

Edit:
What is the sync chain? If it is a nine-speed chain, there are potential savings there. The Shimano 9 speed chain weighs 321 grams, whereas the new 11-speed Dura Ace chain weighs 243 grams. The length of the synd chain, and the weight savings is larger.

twocicle

I was lazy and didn't go back to find his frame's BT measurement vs the current models, so yeah. For a much more economical choice of cranks, da Vinci is very doable and the integrated timing spider setup is the least weight timing option other than having a belt. Assume TandemGeek (Mark) is probably the forum reference to chime in on this setup.

waynesulak

If you want to spend the money for Lightening cranks, I suggest calling about availability for a Santana. I would think they will work because the crank page indicates that they are made for the fairly common MTB 73mm BB shell that Santana adopted. See copy below from the page at:

https://www.lightningbikes.com/cranks/index.html

[h=2]Key features[/h]

• Weight: 395 grams without chainrings, 500 grams with Extralite chainrings, 520 grams with TA Syrius chainrings, 540 grams with Lightning 7075-T6 chainrings (110 BCD 34×50, 170mm SL arms, BB86/BB90; other BB types add 30 grams with ceramic bearing, 40 grams with steel bearings).
• MTB crank weight: 440 gram without chainrings, 600 grams with XX rings and spyder ( 175mm SL arms, BB91/BB95; other BB types add 30 grams with ceramic bearing, 40 grams with steel bearings).
• Tandem set weight: 930 grams without chainrings (130 BCD spyders, BSA or BB/PF30 ceramic bearings, add 20 grams for steel bearings)
• 100% hollow Unifiber integrated arm/spindle high pressure carbon molding
• Super precise ABEC-5 stock steel bearings 100% filled with waterproof grease
• Optional super smooth ABEC-5 hybrid ceramic bearings with low friction seals 100% filled with high performance low friction grease. Not available for BB86/90/91/95.
• 2024-T3 CNC machined spindles, cups, and pedal fittings
• 6AL 4V Ti spindle center bolt
• Hard anodized spindles, cups, and spyder
• Increased strength and stiffness compared to existing cranks
• Length: 160, 162.5, 165, 167.5, 170, 172.5, 175, 177.5, 180, 182.5, 185, 190mm
• Adaptability: Standard Road & MTB Bottom Bracket shells with BSA (English) threads, 68mm (Road), 68 or 73mm (MTB), also BB30, OSBB, BB86/ BB91, BB90/BB95, PF30 Press Fit 30, BB Right, and EVO386.
• Removable, interchangeable aluminum spyders
• Compatible with Power2Max power spider and Specialized spyders.
• Available Lightning Spyder sizes: 110, 130, and 94 double; 130×74 road triple; 64×104 MTB reversible double or triple.
• Triple and 104/64 double cranks include 2024-T3 aluminum inner chainring bolts.
• Q factor: Road double; 150mm. MTB; 175mm, 140mm inside Q factor.
• Chainline: Road double — 43.5mm. MTB double — 48mm. MTB Triple — 50mm. SRAM XX — 51.5mm
• 100 kilogram (220 pound) rider weight limit (SL version); 130 kilogram (285 pound) rider weight limit (HD version), (20 grams heavier)
• Made in USA
• Patent awarded

waynesulak

If the original Santana cranks are still on the bike then there would also be weight savings from using daVinci or FSA cranks which both work on the 73mm shell.

Carbonello

Hey Brad, if Ritterview joins our ride this Saturday, warning, do not lift his bike. It might cost you, uh $15K ??

Ritterview

Right again, waynesulak. I emailed Lightning's Tim Brummer, who replied:

Yes our cranks will fit a 73mm shell, if fact the wider shell is better when using a wider rear wheel like 145mm.

That Lightning crank is downright protean in its manifestations.

twocicle

Not to mention the $1650+ price tag. Doh, just did.

Tim's responses seem to be typically a bit too brief. What is he referring to concerning "when using a wider rear wheel like 145mm", when the frame in question is a Santana that has 160mm spacing?

bradcycles

Yikes! I think I've already spent more in upgrades on the bike than I did on the bike itself. I don't think I'm ready to sink much more money into this bike as of now. I think nicer/lighter cranks will have to wait for my next bike.

ksisler

OP; Clearly you have to get your stoker fitted and that seems to be driving a new rear post. Give the right diameter...

Other than that and the obvious tune-up effort, I would recommend you give it a full season of riding before engaging in any upgrading, twiddling or component dieting. After a season, you will have a better feel as to whether the bike is going to be acceptable long term and thus worth a few tweaks. Could be it is just the wrong bike and you can save the upgrade money, sell the bike, and by combining the funds get the right bike.

If you blast forward and do new wheels, don't hesitate to PM me to see if I would buy the old wheels. I have a fondness for Hadley based santana wheels (but don't expect me to hand you stupid-sized money for them).

bradcycles

I like this idea! This sounds like a low cost weight savings option. I'm assuming it's an older 9 speed chain. The drivetrain is 9 speed. Will any 11-speed chain work OK with the spacing on the 9 speed drivetrain?

twocicle

Chain durabliity and reliability work opposite the "speed count". While in theory you could use a 10 or 11 spd chain on the timing side, it is not recommended. Also, an 11 spd chain will not function well if at all on a 9 spd drive side.

Ritterview

I have seen these claims asserted, but not substantiated. Do Pro Sprinters eschew 10 or 11 speed chains for fear that their >1000 watt efforts will snap the chain?

I discussed the sync side, not the drive side. If it is a 9-speed chainring on the sync side, a 10/11 speed chainring is an economical upgrade.

twocicle

Regarding drive side comments, that was clearly a response to brad's question about drivetrain and sought to differentiate between timing vs drive side.

I understand what you are saying about pro usage, but consider this as a very basic point of observation... in all the years of bike racing & riding I have seen but one chain failure in person. Conversely, watching pro races on tv I have seen 4 that I recall. It is a fact that pro machines are maintained by expert mechanics and that the equipment is typically near new. That is unlike typical general public gear which stays on bikes until performance is noticably sub-par.

waynesulak

"Better"
I don't know about better but not all bad or as bad as some believe.

bradcycles

What do I need to order to get these upgrades? I'm not at all familiar with sync chains or sync chainrings. I'm assuming it's a 9-speed chainring on the sync side, since it's a 9-speed setup on the drivetrain side. So, I need to order one or two 10/11 speed chainrings? And a sync chain (where do I buy that)?

Thanks for your help!

waynesulak

I believe that the inner portion of 10 and 11 speed links where the teeth engage are the same size as 9 speed. Is it not just the outer size of the link that has been reduced?

I may be wrong about that but I have had no problem using a 10 speed sync chain on the dead simple cog to cog system. The main issue is the extra cost of the 10 speed over 9 , 9 or even single speed chains which can be dirt cheap in comparison. The problem with thin chains in general is the lack of plate wall thickness.

twocicle

Since you insist, just find a long piece of pasta noodle.

bradcycles

so helpful!

twocicle

While Campy and stainless Wipperman 10spd chains seem to do fairly well, others tend to "stretch" more quickly the thinner you go. It's common knowledge and discussed much already in this forum. If you want to find out about timing chains (sync chains), then do a search yourself. Try TandemGeeks Google search tip, for example: site:bikeforums.net tandemgeek “sync chains”.

Ritterview

You would purchase two 10/11 speed chains, and use all of one and part of the other. At one point I calculated the chain length in an effort to estimate the weight savings of a Gates Carbon Drive. So, I'll copy/paste that post below, so that you can calculate the weight savings of a 10 or 11 speed chain.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________

Since the efficiency question with the Gates drive isn't going to be answered definitively anytime soon, I'd like to at least figure out the exact weight savings, since 8-10 oz! is not itemized and is a marketing claim. Weight savings are increased if a heavy chainring and chain are used. I'll consider the case where these are lightweight.

To know the weight of the timing chain, I have to know the length.

The formula for figuring out chain length is as follows:

Given a boom tube length of 28.25", and 42T rings, this works out to:

78.5" = ( 2 x 28.25") + 42/4 + 42/4 + 1

This must be pretty close, since 78.5" is 1,994 mm, very close to the 2000 mm of the Gates belt. I'd think the chain would be longer, however, because a chain isn't as taut as the Gates belt. Maybe someone who has switched to Gates Drive (merlinextraligh ) can measure the length of the removed timing chain.

Campagnolo Record chain is relatively light, 245 grams for 114 links, which is 57" as chains have a 1/2" pitch.

So timing chain weight should be (78.5" / 57") x 245 gm = 337.4 grams.

This allows an itemization of the weight savings:

Gates Carbon Drive
Belt...................................105 gm
Belt drive rings (2).............190 gm
Total..................................295 gm


Conventional Timing Drive
TA Specialties 42T chainrings (2)........70 gm.
Timing chain.......................................337 gm
Total.............................................407 gm


Weight savings of a Gates Carbon Drive over a lightweight chainring and chain:

• 112 gm
• 0.247 lb
• 3.95 oz

A weight savings of 112 gm is modest especially in comparison to the immodest $525 cost, which works out to $4.69/gram. The 8-10 oz. claim must have been made with very heavy chainring and chains.

This puts the whole efficiency question into the forefront, because if the weight savings are only 112 g, any efficiency loss whatsoever negates the weight advantage many fold.



____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________

Since sync chainrings don't have to do any shifting, you might be able to get away with lighter chainrings. Like Fibrelytes, which should weigh around 25 grams, or 50 grams for a pair, saving 20 grams from TA's.