edweird

Hi all - - -

Having recently returned to cycling after a 17-year hiatus, I see the technology's evolved a bit. It's going to be interesting to see how long it takes to break the habit of pulling the left-hand lever all the way back to downshift while approaching red lights, like I've been doing on motorcycles for quite a while. Someone suggested swapping cables right/left, but I'll wait to see how many times I lock up the front wheel and go flying over the handlebars first.

Being of modest means, after contemplating a number of options, I bought what appeared to be the most bang for the buck for less than half a grand: a 2015 Fuji Absolute 1.7 on clearance sale.

By my primitive standards, it's a wonderful, slick thing to ride. Nice tall frame, cheap but technologically advanced components and very fragile paint. The latter items I plan to address one at a time, starting with those horrid stamped steel chainrings. I've been scouting around the web in search of a nice old 177.5 mm Campy Record crankset, or something of that ilk, and have noticed that vintage crank arms tend to be straight, whereas the Shimano ones on my bike have a slight outward curve.

Does anyone know how much difference this will make in pedaling effort or feel? Did the old cranks require a longer BB axle, or is this all just about aesthetics? Is the difference more of an issue with old-school toe clips, which is what I plan to use?

Also a question on the weird chainstay-mounted center-pull rear brakes: does it matter much that one pad hits slightly ahead of the other one, causing a tiny bit of rim flex with the wheel spinning unloaded? Is this hard on rims? I haven't quite figured out a technique for the spring preload adjustment on this style of calipers.

Thanks kindly for all your input.

-e.

cny-bikeman

Different crankarm models may require different BB spindle lengths, and yes, the newer cranks use a shorter spindle. So you can't just slap on any crank to your current BB spindle. Won't make any appreciable diff in riding, use of clips, etc.

Miele Man

The 'curved" crankarms are to widen the Q-factor (distance between pedals) so that the crankarm doesn't hit the chainstays which are now spread further apart with 9, 10 or 11 cogs on the rear wheel than they were in the days of 6,7 and 8 speed systems. As in days of yore, cranksets are still matched to recommended bottom bracket spindle lengths.

Cheers

Lakerat

I have C&V bikes with straight cranks and more modern with splayed crank arms. One observation is how well pedal systems with no float limits work with splayed cranks. Speedplay light action on straight cranks causes my heels to bang on crank near the BB sometimes. Splayed cranks work better with pedals with large amount of float.

Seizedpost

Good choice of bike, if you don't like drop bars. My brother has one.
What makes you say the paint is fragile?

fietsbob

A benefit of Curved arms is the ankle bone is less likely to hit the end of the arm..

& The curved arms clear fatter tire clearing curved chain-stays , better..

Mr IGH

Your new bike has a triple, the chainrings may look cheap but there's a reason for the look, the shifting is much improved over the old chainrings. Fitting a vintage set of double cranks to a newer 3x bike isn't a straight forward process and many younger mechanics don't have any experience with the task.

If it was my bike, I'd leave things stock and ride/enjoy it for a few months. I expect you'll be fine with it as-is.

edweird

Good idea. I figured on riding it for a decent amount of time with the stock chainrings, mainly to make sure I'm probably not going to ever feel inclined to shift off the middle cog, same as I always did with my Rockhopper in years past. However, as light as this bike is (by my lowbrow standards) I might surprise myself and use the tall gears once in a while.

edweird

I actually do like the new style of "anatomic" drop bars, and may switch to that down the road. The flat bars with bar-end handles added are good enough for now, seeing as how I'm way too out of shape to be riding a racy-looking bike. In response to your paint question, it just seems like a cheap paint job. Flakes off and chips very easily.

79pmooney

Q-factor. One of the big changes from the old cranks. Many old steel bikes had right cranks that almost hit the chain and front derailleur and left cranks that were well within a cm of the chainstay. Great for those of us with knees that do not fare well with large Q-factors. Shimano has lead the way to tons of clearance on the right side, both for better(?) front derailleurs that require a lot more space and the coming 12, 13 and 14 tooth cassettes (it seems). To make matters worse for those of us Q-factor challenged, they insist on left-right symmetry so the left crank is the same mile off the chainstay.

I know this sounds nuts, but my knees prefer going up hill on my fix gears with old school straight Sugino cranks (esp the track-narrow 175s).

I would like to see someone (Sugino maybe?) make modern cranks as straight and low Q-factor as possible. Miss the chain and left chainstay by just a few mms. Forget about symmetry. (My knees, butt and head have never noticed the symmetry or lack of while riding.)

Rant rant.

Ben

Miele Man

I think the 'splayed" crankarms are due to the wider rear triangle and/or thicker tubing on used to build bikes especially aluminium alloy frames.

I rode one of the modern splayed cranks and it wasn't very long until my back was absolutely killing me. I thought I'd have to walk home the pain was so bad. Got home and swapped out that crank for the old school straighter arm ones and volia no more pain. Absolutely nothing else but the Q-factor was changed yet the pain went away. I guess i'm one of those who needs a narrow Q-factor. Since then I've kept my eyes open for old school cranks and have bought a number of use in good condition Shimano triples and doubles as well as some Sugino ones. I guess I'm set until I ride into my next life.

Cheers