Campagnolo Nuovo/Record Bottom Bracket Spindle too Short
I bought what I thought to be a Campagnolo Nuovo Record bottom bracket. When it was installed, the spindle appears too short and is loose in the bottom bracket even though the length matches what is on Velobase.com. I searched and found that there were both thin walled and thick walled cups on these bottom brackets. I am thinking I may have thin walled cups with a regular spindle? Below are the specs and pics. I'd like to make sure what I need before I try and replace the cups.
68 mm bottom bracket Spindle marked 68-SS-120; 112 mm; 51 mm between the bearing races Campagnolo Nuovo Record crankset with 11 in a square, which Velobase says takes a 112 mm spindle If there is anything else needed to make a determination, let me know. Here are the pics. I should have taken a pic of the bearings, but there are 11 bearings in a race. That also matches Velobase for the bottom bracket. There is also a 14 bearing 3/16" race for the thin walled bottom bracket on Velobase. These are indoor pics, one with a flash and one without. https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/dgCFCT.jpg https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...924/qH6c4O.jpg Spindle markings https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/CdUFHf.jpg Adjustable Cup https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/rGD7no.jpg |
Yes, those are thin (un-r!fled) cups. And your crank is post cpsc (1978), so should take a 114.5 mm spindle. You may need a whole new unit. I may be interested in a straight swap for what you've got. I am 99% sure I have a 114.5/thick cup 68 English BB in my stash.
Here's my cheat sheet: Italian 70mm BB: Double -Pre CPSC: 113mm. Post: 115.5mm Triple - Pre: 118mm. Post: 124mm English/French 68mm BB: Double - Pre: 112. Post: 114.5 Triple - Pre:117. Post: 123 Spc -- ≻ c - record Ssa -- ≻ croce d'aune Ssb -- ≻ chorus Ssg -- ≻ athena |
That is helpful. I do have another crankset without a date, which puts it early 1970s, I believe. Now that you mention it, that crankset was purchased at the same time from the same person as the bottom bracket. I grabbed the other crankset because it had the chainrings I wanted (52-42 vs 52-48), but I can just swap those. The crankset without the date code would need a 112 mm spindle, correct?
|
What is the Spc --> c-record notations at the end of your post?
|
Originally Posted by Shrevvy
(Post 20228802)
What is the Spc --> c-record notations at the end of your post?
|
the rifled NR cups had to be thicker, to put in that grit shedding spiral, so axle inner races were closer together.
without the thickness for the spiral the cups, thinner, axle races further apart.. 68 - ss- 120 is from 5 speed era. |
I'm building up a bike with a Record Crank from 1978 and use a 68mm BB with an 114,5mm spindle. The crank still hits the frame. Anyone has a solution for this?
|
Originally Posted by HennyB
(Post 23182077)
I'm building up a bike with a Record Crank from 1978 and use a 68mm BB with an 114,5mm spindle. The crank still hits the frame. Anyone has a solution for this?
Or the crank arms taper interface is stretched? |
Thank you for your reaction. It's only the drive side, the other side is fine.
How can I see if the cranks arms taper interface is stretched? I tried another Record crankset and this one has the same problem. |
Originally Posted by jeirvine
(Post 20228530)
Yes, those are thin (un-r!fled) cups. And your crank is post cpsc (1978), so should take a 114.5 mm spindle. You may need a whole new unit. I may be interested in a straight swap for what you've got. I am 99% sure I have a 114.5/thick cup 68 English BB in my stash.
Here's my cheat sheet: Italian 70mm BB: Double -Pre CPSC: 113mm. Post: 115.5mm Triple - Pre: 118mm. Post: 124mm English/French 68mm BB: Double - Pre: 112. Post: 114.5 Triple - Pre:117. Post: 123 Spc -- ≻ c - record Ssa -- ≻ croce d'aune Ssb -- ≻ chorus Ssg -- ≻ athena |
Originally Posted by HennyB
(Post 23182246)
Thank you for your reaction. It's only the drive side, the other side is fine.
How can I see if the cranks arms taper interface is stretched? I tried another Record crankset and this one has the same problem. Ive installed them backwards on multiple occasions...I’ve also struggled thinking I have the right BB length only to have to work around it. |
Originally Posted by repechage
(Post 23182258)
my assessment is that the cups shown by the original poster came from a later OR bottom bracket, the reveals I see are for the seals. I have not measured those, only seen in images.
|
I have measured the spindle and its not symmetrical. Unlike the spindle in the photo above, mine does not say 120, but only 68 ss. So everything seems to be correct. The only option then remains that the crank arms taper ends interface is stretched?
|
The assembly is a jumble of parts.
what is the date code on the back of the drive side crank arm? a more recent arm, will want a longer approx 115mm +/- .5 mm spindle WITH the later Nuovo Record cups- reverse rifling in the bore. there are other no go assembly configurations. very rare for Campagnolo arms to expand- they WILL radiate cracks and expand. I have tossed such. Previous gorilla mechanics. always possible for the frame to have been over faced. Check overall BB shell width. I do not know the dimension specifics of the OR cups. in short measure frame check drive side crank date use spindle for that arm era use correct cups. in your case a 1mm washer behind the fixed cup to translate arm is not going to help. to confuse things, Campagnolo DID make spindles with +1 or 1.5 even, they are stamped so. They were not rare 50 years ago but uncommon. |
Originally Posted by repechage
(Post 23182516)
very rare for Campagnolo arms to expand- they WILL radiate cracks and expand. I have tossed such. Previous gorilla mechanics.
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...a132388a47.jpg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...ecca5f9969.jpg The third one is another, later crank (don't know what year, pic collected from the internet) https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...cd8e678e32.jpg |
Somewhere I had a pic of a really badly cracked Campy arm at the spider to arm join. Dangerous lookiing.
I don't ride these parts anymore. you are paying inflated prices for used parts, you do not know to what indignities they have been subjected, and just about impossible to piece together a matched set. you can go to Eye Bicycles in Osaka and see rows and rows of complete sets new in box. Don't ask the price. here's this one which is on display here, unused, and probably never will be. 2nd Gen titanium super duper record with the "nuts" nuts /markp https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...4ca4214514.jpg |
2 Attachment(s)
Campagnolo bottom brackets can be … complicated. This document may help, and gives the offset and shoulder spacing measurements Mark asked about, above. It was printed before the C-Record era, though, so none of that info is included. C-Record era bottom bracket spindles were symmetrical, though, so that ought to help identify whather what you have is of that era.
|
Originally Posted by HennyB
(Post 23182077)
I'm building up a bike with a Record Crank from 1978 and use a 68mm BB with an 114,5mm spindle. The crank still hits the frame. Anyone has a solution for this?
Originally Posted by HennyB
(Post 23182246)
Thank you for your reaction. It's only the drive side, the other side is fine.
How can I see if the cranks arms taper interface is stretched? I tried another Record crankset and this one has the same problem. If you're talking about some sort of loose ball BB unit, and you're sure the BB spindle is in the right way, and you still get interference, it's unlikely the arm sockets are "stretched". I note that you're using the designation "Record" crank. "Record has been used and re-used by Campagnolo a lot over the years. Record, New Record, C-Record, Super Record ..... I honestly do not remember all of them. But the original Record crankarms are a little different from New Record, which is what this original thread was about. Here's a link to the Rene Hearse site, for some of the different SKF options they sell that should work for Campy. If it's an original, old style, Record crank (the ones with a BCD of 151), it needs a longer spindle, per Sheldon Browne's website, of 116, I think. A lot of this fitting a crank to a frame is just trial and error sometimes. And it also depends on what you have to start with. Which I'm still not sure of. The basic principles are outlined here. If your crank is hitting your frame, you need a longer spindle, or some way to move the spindle outward in the direction of the interference, until it goes away. |
Originally Posted by mpetry912
(Post 23182661)
Somewhere I had a pic of a really badly cracked Campy arm at the spider to arm join.
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e8d761b87a.jpg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8e8b1893dc.jpg Pics courtesy of Don Pardo. No, not that Don Pardo (the TV announcer for over 70 years, voice of Saturday Night Live for its first 38 seasons. Yes, 38, not a typo!) Different guy! |
Originally Posted by Shrevvy
(Post 20228799)
That is helpful. I do have another crankset without a date, which puts it early 1970s, I believe. Now that you mention it, that crankset was purchased at the same time from the same person as the bottom bracket. I grabbed the other crankset because it had the chainrings I wanted (52-42 vs 52-48), but I can just swap those. The crankset without the date code would need a 112 mm spindle, correct?
|
Thank you all for the help and quick responses. I bought a very thin spacer and will try as soon as possible. Of course I will let you know.
|
.
...is this possibly a triple crank ? If it's loose ball and you move the fixed cup too far over, eventually you get to a point where you lose the threads on the adjustable side for the lock ring. In theory, at least, a 114.5 spindle should work OK with a double. But this is an operation that often defies theory. :) If this gets too frustrating, after a while I just go with a sealed unit, of which there are many that will work. |
Originally Posted by bulgie
(Post 23182842)
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...2919c76de6.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e8d761b87a.jpg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8e8b1893dc.jpg Pics courtesy of Don Pardo. No, not that Don Pardo (the TV announcer for over 70 years, voice of Saturday Night Live for its first 38 seasons. Yes, 38, not a typo!) Different guy! the 7000 series material confirmation only finally arrived from display advert copy in the 1980’s. The full page advert where there was a photorealistic rendering of the crank set. regarding Record and Nuovo Record… always treacherous. my take is the early pre rifled cups were Record. The rifled cups were Nuovo Record. both paired with Record Cranks. The Super Record were by chainrings. an argument can be solidly made that the very late fluteless arms with the CNC machining on the back to beef up the spider stress riser point were Super Record. keeping in mind that by the bike shops, for simplicity of marketing in the late 1960’s on, post brake intro, a full Campagnolo bike was called “Nuovo Record” riffing off the rear mechanism. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:05 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.