I want to find out how my Miyata 1000 3-ring tourer would feel stripped down into a fixed-single speed format with a high tech crank set instead of the old heavy triple that is on there now. The info. that I have come across from Rivendell and others suggests that BB flex comes more from the BB axel rather than the BB shell itself. The info. also says that Q-factor ( the span measurement outside of crank to outside of crank) has alot to do with peddalling efficiency and power transfer.

The extra length of the crank axel required for triples is pointed out also in the Sierra Club Guide To Outings On Wheels as a good reason to stay with doubles even on a loaded tourer.

The non-sealed axel I now have on the Miyata is 125 mm. in a 68 mm shell with English threading. I have a sealed cartridge on my racer (70 mm shell-Italian threading), with a total length of 110 mm or so.

My question is: Are the cups interchangeable between the type of cups that sleeve over a sealed unit, and the fixed and adjustable cups that come with a non-sealed unit? The later have races for bearings that the former to not, and therefore don't seat the same over a sealed unit. Am I right?

I have put the 110 unit in the Miyata shell and loosly put the crank arms that came with the unit on as well, and the clearances seem that they would be OK with the cranks tightened. I will not know this for sure unless I get the kind of cups that come with sealed units instead of the the English cups with the races, that came with the Miyata.

Is it possible that with a new crank that a 125 mm spindle could be swapped with one as small as 110? The measurements that I have taken seem to suggest so since the chain stays are the same diameter, they flare out to the 126 mm rear drop-out over a shorter disatance in the racer ( since the chain stays are shorter), and the tourer has an indent on the right chain stay for the second ring that the racer doesn't have.

Lastly, do you think that a bike could be rejuvinated by the improved Q-factor of the shorter axel, and the improved stiffness of a sealed-unit over a loose cup and cone axel?

I think you have fallen for a bit of bull.And, what does the sierra club know about bike mechanics, theory and engineering?Ask yourself how many loaded tourers DO use triples. The difference between a typical double and triple crank in spindle length is 10mm,and sometimes less.Look at the spindle and ask yourself how much more flex are you likely to get by addding 5mm to each end, considering where the bearing support is???? There can be considerable BB shell flex, as well as crank flex,especially in some of the old stuff........The cups are not interchangable between the cartridge and non cartridge types.......Better Q factor may help,but some are more sensetive to it than others.....Certainly you can swap a new crank speced for a 110 spindle for one that was speced for a 125 spindle.....Want the ultimate in alleged Spindle stiffness,then get a shimano 9 speed octalink double crank/ BB setup with a 109.5mm spindle.

Hi Pokey-Thanks for the reply. As to the Sierra Guide thing, I think they commissioned the book from the author Raymond Bridge. He is a seasoned cycle tourist and the author of 10 outdoor-related books. The book is a bit seasoned too, his references are to 5 and Ultra 6 speed set-ups, but his section on the drive train is in depth-35 pages.
His recommendation is:
46/42-14,17,20,24,28 for the five-speed
He likes this because the shifts are (eliminating the extreme two) as follows low to high:
6.8,4.5,4.9,5.4,4.6,15.6 (which can be spit if you want to use that last gear into 7.9 and 7.7 inches.
-the other jumps are almost perfectly spaced
-the high gear is about right for touring
-the 40 inch low is about right for a conditioned rider in the mountains.
-the first two shifts do not require a double, so no hesitation on the hills
-After that every second is a double, so easy to remember.

He sees these reasons for not going to a 3-rings:
1-the crank axle is longer
2-the chain-line is moved out, so that unless the frame is beefed up, there is more whip.
3-" The tension on the right side...between the crank axle and the rear whell axle is given increased leverage by the longer dimension."
4-The angle of the chain is greater from either chain wheel
5-The extreme combination gears are worse than in the 2 chain wheel set-up.
6-The largest chain wheel is likely to wear quickly.
7-You must use a longer and heavier chain
8-You must use a large capacity rear derailleur which is less precise in shifting, and heavier.

On the other topic though if I order new cups will I see an improvement in swaping a 125 mm free axle unit weighing 305 grams with a 110 mm sealed unit weighing 233 grams ( cups included), in terms of stiffness and Q-factor?

I think the stated reasons for 2 chainrings vs 3 is mostly applesause.It's an OLD book and things have changed.There are now triple axels that are shorter than many of the old doubles.Shimano splined spindles are also stiffer. Frames are stronger.Don't use the extreme gears.The largest chainwheel wears least quickly.You co not need a longer heavier chain.You don't even have to use a long cage rear derailer. IT"S MOSTLY HOOEY!.....I think many would take exception to his 46/42 crankset and 28 tooth big cog for loaded touring in the mountains.I could not say how much improvement you will see since I don't know how much of a real problem you have especially with BB spindle flex. I use the shortest BB spindle I can get away with .There could be an improvement in shortening the spindle by 15mm,but your crankset and frame could be the bigger problem.

Pokey- Your applesauce detector may be getting a bit over-used on this one!
1-I recognize that the book is dated, and I referred to that.
2-I don't think though that you have yet made a convincing argument for the triple.
3-Provided that the points he made, dispite your protests, have some merit, his argument in the present tense would be stronger not weaker: The rear wheels now have now 9 or more gears-with that gear range why would it still be necessary to add another range with a third ring? Perhaps now should be the time to shelve the third ring, which I agree still had some merit in certain situations when the cog count on the rear was 5 or 6.
4-My undestanding about chain ring wear is that the inside ring would usually have the truer line, and if so the larger would wear quicker, am I wrong?
5-The low gear quoted was 40.5 inches, he goes on to say that you may want to opt for a 44/40 with a 28 for a 38.6 inch gear, or a 46/42 with a 32 for a 35.4 inch gear. The options that he was dealing with were few due to the five or six freewheels, but he was doing this in such a way as to eliminate annoying ( and therefore unlikely to be used) double shifting.
6-We live in a more is better culture. If the manufacturers think that they will be at a disadvantage trying to sell a bike with a double for touring, they make do that even though the math would indicate that it is not necessary with the new cassette range available.
7-Raymond Bridge was writing in response to a situation that existed then: Bikes were coming out with alpine gears 52/40 with 14 to 28 cogs, and being sold to tourers who were going to be carrying a heavy load. The shifting sequence was awful and the high gear went along for the ride (100.3 gear inches.) I do though understand that bikes have changed and that the triple axles are shorter than then, splined may make a difference as well, but the central point remains-why the third ring and the still necessary longer spindle?
8-Proper gear range is important. When I knew even less than I do today I rode to Mexico in a 52/42-14 to 24-47.3 gear inches. Derailleur would not permit a larger cog, including up Look Out Mountain fully loaded. My friend on a 30 zipped past me like I was standing still.
9-The funny thing is I think that we may agree. You mention that you use the shortest spindle that you can get away with, I don't think that you would then rush off to add a triple even for full touing either.

I have a number of triples! They all use a 118 or shorter spindle, and one uses a 107! I also have new cranks and new frames.Flex is NOT an issue.I use the shortest spindile I can depending on whether the crank is a double or triple.The new splined spindles stuff does not give much choice as in the past(109.5 double or 118.5 triple road).The triple allows low gearing and close cog spacing without alot of shifting.Duplicate gears bothers alot of people.Not Me.If you can get the gearing you want with a double,I'm not going to argue with you,just saying alot of his reasons are lame,especailly in todays world.Even Grant Petersen likes a 1/2 step with granny. Ever notice how much of his stuff is hyped with a triple,built and sold that way?With a triple,the crank has to move out,chainline is optimized for the middle ring.Chainring wear may be theoretical,but I'm not going to worrry about it.I think people put up with alot in the past because of what was available.Spindles are now shorter and stiffer,cranks are stiffer,frames are stiffer lots of triples are available.Why fight it?No doubt the old stuff was great in it's time,and I have read Grant's and the Rivendell stuff.I'm on the new page.I have 6 speed freewheels and 10 speed with Carbon Fiber bits.I'm really not going back.....FWIW,I just pulled the BB out of a bike with a Campy mirage triple crank.Spindle length was 110mm!! Try a modern triple crankset with short or hollow splined spindle.You might be surprised and even like it.......I also pulled a crank from an old triple setup that used a 128mm spindle! I'm going to use that crank on a beater,but without the granny ring and with about a 115 spindle.

Pokey-You mention that it is "lame" for me to use the argument of the writer of the book. I did so since you referred to it as "applesauce" or "hooey" etc. I was put into a situation where I felt it was necessary to unfold his points since they were being challenged by you.
Points well taken concerning the triples in todays market and your own bikes.
The discussion got a little off-track, what I am trying to diferentiate is the cadence feel of different BB setups with the heavier triple with higher Q, and the lighter double with reduced Q as opposed to the flex in the BB shell itself and possibly the longer rounder chain stays. I just found that after my racer, I did not enjoy the cadence feel on my tourer, and since I am converting my Miyata to a Phil Woods flip-flop hub, I thought I would try the stripped down bike with the racer drive train after getting new cups, since you informed me that the cups are not interchangeable. This would then allow me to compare BB shell and chain stay flex between the two bikes by interchanging the drive trains, and the wheels since the 700c's will work on the Miyata with cantilever brakes.
This appeals to me since I have had a problem with the cup on the drive side, and the right lock ring unspinning on the Concorde.
I may not be doing it tight enough though. If this cartridge works well on the Miyata, I may purchase a Phil BB for the Concorde in the hopes that it would not be inclined to torque out as much with the retaining rings.
That is what got me into the whole topic. But thanks for the info., I was not aware that it was possible to get a triple with a 107 mm spindle.

The loosening of the right side of the italian threaded BB is caused by not tightening it enough. As I understand it you want to use the 'racer' cranks interchangably on both bikes to compare.In that case you need an english thread BB for the Myita that has the same or early the same length as was in the concorde racer.I don't think I said you were lame,but that the books Author's reasons against a triple were lame. Mine with a 107 spindle is a cobbed affair using a DA 8 speed double crank,TA tripilizer ring, and logic said a 113 spindle shoulld have been right.It was wider than necessary, and a 107 worked in that application.Current campy triples use a 111mm.

You also need to make sure that the BB you buy for the myita to use the racer crank on has the same taper as the racer crank.You did not mention crank brand on the racer,but campy and most other european cranks/BB use ISO taper and oriental cranks are mostly JIS.They are technically incompatible,but compatible enough that things can be mismatched either way without disastrous results,but once done,you cannot go back the other way without consequences.

Thanks Pokey. You phrased it better than I did I think. But, I am moving the crank ( Edco Competion ) and BB (Edco) to the Miyata, so I will not face imcompatabilty issues between the crank and the BB-they came together. The BB comes out of the Italian BB shell (70 mm) into the Miyata (68 mm) shell. The main unit of the cartridge is 67 mm, so I don't think there is any problem there. But I can't tighten up until I get the English threaded cups to work with the cartridge.
There is a huge weight differential between the crank sets, and also some between the BB cartridge plus cups, and the cup and cone system. I guess I want to see what effect this will have on the tourer to make it more enjoyable to spin fixed. If it works I will get a new BB for the Concorde, and new crank set.
I am not ready to admit that either of the bikes are deficient until I work on the drive train and wheels on both. If they still flex too much under stress, I will entertain the thought that "It is the bike" after all.

Now I know what you are talking about with the Edco cartridg and the 'cups' on it.If you can find english thread 'cups' they interchange and should work with the cartridge in the myita.I got one with english threads and ISO taper,but plan to use it. I thought you were talking shimano or campy cartridge type.

I think I can get them at Harris Cycle. Will post a thread if I get it together.
Thanks for the help, and debate.