Question on cranks compatible with bottom bracket
 

Hello,
I recently purchased a replacement set of cranks (2004 Campagnolo Centaur) on ebay and question if they are compatible with my existing bottom bracket (Shimano, early 90's).

Both use a square taper spindle, but the new cranks only slide partway onto the spindle. The bearing suface inside the cranks is about 3/4 inch, but the spindle only slides in about half an inch.

The old cranks slid pretty much all the way around the spindle.

Should I be concerned about using these two together? Should I get a replacement bb?

Thanks for the input.

as you have found out, the two are not 100% compatible with each other.
they both look similar, but campagnolo uses ISO and shimano uses JIS which results in what you're seeing there.

You should look for an ISO square taper BB for centaur and below. Chorus and Record square taper uses yet another standard and will result in further complications.

I would check the sheldon BB spindle length database to see what you need.

What? Explain this? Aren't they all ISO?

Bump

I'm curious about that too

Yes, the tapers are all ISO but the spindles for Centaur and below are symetrical while Chorus and Record use asymetrical spindles.

Have you tightened the crank bolts? Where the crank sits when you hand fit tit isn't where it'll sit when fully installed.

But I'd worry more about the chainline. Just because a crank will mount on a BB does not mean that it fits. The sprockets in front have to line up with the sprockets in back.

Actually all the campagnolo BBs are iso, the problem is the length of them. Chorus and Record uses a 102 BB and the one u need is 111mm if im not mistaken. The spider arms may be set differently than in the High end stuff and that's why u need a longer axle.

Now, the shimano axle might work, again... it might work fine. It is not the ideal situation but it might work ok? (some people might say that it does not work, yes it might work fine), now i'll xplain why. The differences in the tapper are so minimal that sometimes u can get away with it, but the crank might set in the wrong position and u might start having problems with the chainline. Critical? maybe not because will be off maybe a few millimeters only..

What i would do is to check out the length of that shimano bb and do a test. U have to check it out.

Sometimes an axle looks way longer than other ones in numbers but is not that much sometimes... for example from 118 to 111 are 6 millimiters of difference, 6/2 = 3.. it means that u are off only 3 milimeters in both sides... thats not that much. (please do not think in track bikes, because the situation changes and 3 mms is a big difference)

I say test it, if it works fine great u save your self 50 bucks!.

sigh.

Does that mean agreement, disagreement or what?

all the 102 BBs are symetrical just in case, even the 111 the OP might need is symetrical too. Now if we are talking about the old campagnolo stuff, yes some ofthem uses asymetrical BB axels ... Hmmm not that i remember campagnolo record pista (the new stuff) uses asymetrical BB.

Thanks everyone for the feedback. Because the BB was about 20 years old, I was resigned to getting a new BB anyway. But I have a bigger problem - chainring bolts.

The crank set (from ebay) did not come with any bolts. I have a bunch of single speed chainring bolts that I thought would work, but I have found that campy uses a different standard than shimano. Two LBS's have stated that the five bolts I need would cost about $100.

So now, unless I can figure out a solution to the chainring bolt problem, it looks like I will be looking for another crankset - this time a JIS type.

PS, anyone want to buy a nice carbon campy crankset?

My 2006 Chorus crank uses an asymetrical Campy square taper bb.

I found an easy fix and thought I would bounce it off you guys.
The crank holes are too small for the female piece of std chain ring bolts (sleeve) to fit through so the chain ring could not be fully tightened to the crank.
I found by flipping the female pieces around and threading the bolt through the back end, the sleeve fits nicely into the chain ring holes, which are grooved.
Double length bolts with single length sleeves works nicely. Still plenty of clearance between the sleeves and the frame.
Any thoughts?

Not all square tapers are the same. Shimano bottom bracket spindle/crank tapers use the JIS standard, not ISO. Campy cranks should ideally be mated with a BB that has ISO tapers. That's why they don't seem to fit.
I don't understand what you're talking about with the chainring bolts. The female half will fit through the bores in one direction but not the other? That makes no sense.

+1

Maybe he just wasn't trying hard enough. Sometimes you need to jiggle the chainring for the nut to go through, especially if things aren't clean.

The holes in the 2004 (?) campagnolo centaur carbon crank are smaller than any I had seen before. The female end of the chainring bolts do not fit through the holes.

Oh, the carbon version. They use special stepped bolts and I don't think there's any way around that. They are expensive too.

These guys have them for a relatively decent price:
http://ecyclingshop.com/index.php?ma...roducts_id=576
http://ecyclingshop.com/index.php?ma...roducts_id=577
http://www.harborcountrybike.com/CAM...p/crkp1086.htm
http://www.harborcountrybike.com/CAM...p/crkp1093.htm
You'll need 4 x FC-CH003, 4 x FC-CH010, 1 x FC-CH002, and 1 x FC-RE105

"grooved?" Do you mean that they're countersunk?

If the bolts are tight, the rings are seated, and nothing's moving, I'd say you tricked Campy.

Countersunk.
yes that's the word.