Originally Posted by
TurbineBlade
Cottered cranks are pure, 100% crap. Man I love my old Raleigh LTD-3, but I have no confidence in those cranks. Even after installing them filed, with hammer taps (not a press -- no way I'd pay for a press for those pieces of ****) after about 3 rides the cranks are either not at 180 degrees, or have a slight amount of play.
Yeah - they worked for who know how long before something else was designed, but my vote would be to spring for the threadless or Phil stuff if you really love the bike.
I liked the idea of cottered cranks, but in practice wanted to tie the entire bike to last year's Christmas tree and sink it in the lake for crappie beds.
Turbine-
I'm beginning to suspect you're right re: the cottered cranks. The more I eff with them, the more I realize that theywere designed to infuriate anyone evolved enough to have known the pleasures of square taper. I have a bike with an ashtabula crank, and while that is a terribly heavy and primitive creature, at least it can be taken apart and reassembled with one adjustable wrench. (If ya don't have that, a rock of the proper weight and shape will do.) The whole mess reminds me of when I was a shop drone, and we'd always include a "Crank upgrade" on customers who were converting an old cottered roadie to a fixed gear. At first, I thought this was an immoral scheme to run the price up on these fools, but as I got a closer look,I realized it was totally worth the cost of the upgrade, even at the viciously inflated retail-level, with installation fees to boot.
I actually hate the idea of cottered cranks on any bike that's younger than I am. The only thing that makes me want to retain this one is the incredible pimptitude of that chainwheel. But a phil wood BB would cost more than the complete cost me, and that is at odds with my sense of bicycle justice.
-rob