Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Bicycle Mechanics (https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/)
-   -   Trek 820 - Is this right? (https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/900373-trek-820-right.html)

GregBed 07-09-13 07:33 AM

Trek 820 - Is this right?
 
5 Attachment(s)
My brother-in-law picked up a Trek 820 (2006) off of Craigslist and in going over it, it seemed that the gap between the left crank and the bottom bracket is a bit wide. The bottom bracket is firmly seated in the frame and the distance from the edge of the frame to edge of the crank is about 3/8". There is no play in the bottom bracket. If this is too wide of a gap, should the crank be able to seat further in on the bottom bracket?
Thanks
Greghttp://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=328162http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=328163http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=328164http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=328165http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=328166

cny-bikeman 07-09-13 07:36 AM

It's fine. You may be used to looking at bikes that have traditional bottom brackets, where the distance from BB shell to crank is less apparent. Look at the gap between the end of both crank arms and the chainstay - you will probably find they are very similar.

FBinNY 07-09-13 09:45 AM

+1,

It's 100% normal. Yes, possibly a shorter BB might be fitted, but this doesn't depend on the crank/BB clearance. The issue is crank/chainring to chainstay clearance.

As CNY said, the gap you see is greater because this type of BB shows the spindle back to a recessed bearing, rather than to the face of a cup that's 1/8" beyond the face of the BB shell.

Don't go looking for problems where there aren't any. As this, or any bike, gets ridden enough real wear and tear issues will crop up to keep you entertained.

GregBed 07-09-13 09:26 PM

Thanks for the help. Back to the road and trail.

BikeWise1 07-10-13 07:47 AM


Originally Posted by GregBed (Post 15833117)
Thanks for the help. Back to the road and trail.

Trail? Paved, or hardpack, OK, but real ATB trails? Not with a Trek 820! It has a freewheel, not a cassette, and we see these with bent and broken rear axles frequently. Plus, that front fork isn't up to any actual shock absorption duties.....

GregBed 07-10-13 03:14 PM


Originally Posted by BikeWise1 (Post 15834013)
Trail? Paved, or hardpack, OK, but real ATB trails? Not with a Trek 820! It has a freewheel, not a cassette, and we see these with bent and broken rear axles frequently. Plus, that front fork isn't up to any actual shock absorption duties.....

Thanks for the heads up. I have a Trek 4500 and been out on some decent trails in Centre County, PA. I was thinking he could take his 820 wherever I went. Although, I know the RST doesn't have the same amount of travel and no rebound adjustment. The 820 is a 2006 (different than the earlier Antelope model with the same numeral designation). Trek lists the rear as a Cassette Sunrace 13-34, 7 speed (http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/2006/archive/820). Are they misusing the term "cassette"? I wasn't aware of the freewheel/cassette distinction, so I appreciate you pointing it out.
We are just riding on hardpack and paved trails in South Jersey right now, but I've been wanting to start on some trails in the Pine Barrens. No jumping.
If he gets to that point, do you have any suggestions for a fork that wouldn't be a lot of sheckels?
Greg


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:47 PM.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.