Old 02-16-16, 12:17 PM
  #23  
shlammed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 197

Bikes: Norco Bigfoot, Miyata 110, Giant TCR Advanced 0

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by twocicle
Just IMO, I think if you want to use standard/single FSA MegaExo bike cranks you would be better off implementing this with a right-side drive and installing the cranks on their proper sides.

We currently have this setup with FSA SLK Light cranks (double front, triple rear) and a Gates CDX/Centertrack belt drive on the outside of the triple. A timing chain would be easier to setup than the belt drive as the chain would require less space and less precise alignment front to rear. This setup allows us to use 1-130bcd ring in the middle position of the triple spider, and 1-74mm ring in the granny/inner position (we are running 48t/30t chainrings).

The right-side drive does not torque the rear axle and load up the BB in the same manner that a crossover drive does. I would be curious if the FSA tandem crankset has a beefier rear axle and also the bearing cups might differ than the single double version. With right-side drive it doesn't matter because most of the pedaling forces are cancelled out at the timing + drive.
Thinking this over last night, I wont be doing a "right-side drive" on our bike. there isn't enough room to run three full sized chainrings and maintain chainstay clearance between the innermost chainring.
shlammed is offline