TA Cyclotouriste, alternative BB needed
02-19-19 | 07:30 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Have bike, will travel
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,286
Likes: 317
From: Lake Geneva, WI
Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
TA Cyclotouriste, alternative BB needed
I have an authentic TA Cyclotouriste from about 1975. I was using it on a Motobecane Grand Record, that bike had a correct BB for TA cranks.
I'm considering a new build on a bike with a British BB shell. What are my options for readily available bottom brackets?
I'm considering a new build on a bike with a British BB shell. What are my options for readily available bottom brackets?
02-19-19 | 07:39 AM
#2
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 679
From: Madison, WI
Well, I'm sure someone who has done more thinking and research about this will reply, but here is my confusion on this topic.
Sheldon says "old French cranks" take ISO BB tapers.
Velobase says the TA cranks take ISO BB tapers.
Jan Heine on the Rene Herse site says TA cranks take a JIS taper, because the Japanese copied the old French standard when developing JIS.
So which one is it?
I used a regular ol' Tange/Shimano JIS cartridge BB when replacing the TA BB for my 3 pin TA Professional cranks recently, and the chainline looks pretty much the same as it was before, although I did not measure the before and after specifically. I guess it doesn't matter too much because the taper degree is the same on both, but it might change your chainline.
Sheldon says "old French cranks" take ISO BB tapers.
Velobase says the TA cranks take ISO BB tapers.
Jan Heine on the Rene Herse site says TA cranks take a JIS taper, because the Japanese copied the old French standard when developing JIS.
So which one is it?
I used a regular ol' Tange/Shimano JIS cartridge BB when replacing the TA BB for my 3 pin TA Professional cranks recently, and the chainline looks pretty much the same as it was before, although I did not measure the before and after specifically. I guess it doesn't matter too much because the taper degree is the same on both, but it might change your chainline.
02-19-19 | 08:21 AM
#3
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 4,834
From: Peoria, IL
There was a recent discussion about BB tapers on the I-Bob list....
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...ob/2P9PEr_-mK0
I'll tack on the best info, provided by Greg Reiche, below.
I'm interested in the answer, mostly because I keep thinking about getting a nice old TA CycloTouriste crank myself. I did buy a SunXCD clone as a stopgap measure, and was a bit surprised to find that the taper didn't match an old Specialized cup & cone BB. Since they are both Japanese, I assumed that they would fit. They were "close", but I did need to snug up the bolts periodically as the crank adapted itself to the axle's taper.
Steve in Peoria
here's the info from Greg Reiche:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...ob/2P9PEr_-mK0
I'll tack on the best info, provided by Greg Reiche, below.
I'm interested in the answer, mostly because I keep thinking about getting a nice old TA CycloTouriste crank myself. I did buy a SunXCD clone as a stopgap measure, and was a bit surprised to find that the taper didn't match an old Specialized cup & cone BB. Since they are both Japanese, I assumed that they would fit. They were "close", but I did need to snug up the bolts periodically as the crank adapted itself to the axle's taper.
Steve in Peoria
here's the info from Greg Reiche:
First though, it is anachronistic and incorrect to refer to any pre-standard crank or BB taper as "ISO" or "JIS", because those standards simply didn't exist until around 1991. Before standardization, companies' tapers were proprietary, and though the taper angles are (almost*) always 2°, the square end size, and the length of the tapers are different. Even after standardization, companies were/are free to ignore the standards; compliance is voluntary. So don't make the mistake of thinking ISO and JIS are the only two tapers out there, even on post-1991 parts.
Now regarding the two standards:What is known as the JIS standard started as the Sugino "Maxy" taper, used by practically every far-eastern manufacturer for the vast majority of their cotterless cranks. It's close to the TA taper, in fact. But it is also similar to the Stronglight taper, except that the Stronglight taper was asymmetrical (longer on the right than the left), while the JIS/Maxy is symmetrical, as was TA. (Interestingly, according to Stronglight's web page, all their current square-taper production is JIS standard, while TA's is ISO. Not sure if this has always been the case with post-1991 Stronglight though.)
Per JIS D 9403:
Most high-end Japanese cranks, before and after JIS, did not use the Maxy/JIS taper. Early Dura-Ace, Sugino Mighty, and Suntour Superbe cranks notably had tapers much closer to the Campagnolo taper (but not always identical.) Sugino now calls the "Mighty" taper the "75" taper, and it's still used on their excellent traditional 75 cranksets. It is not ISO, nor is it JIS low-profile. Not to say it wouldn't work with other tapers, but it is its own thing.
The ISO taper is NOT "based on" the Campagnolo taper, rather it is a compromise taper intended to be functionally compatible with as many pre-standard European crank tapers as possible. The pre-standard Campagnolo taper starts bigger than ISO, is shorter, and is symmetrical. TA is a bit bigger still, and symmetrical. The Stronglight taper starts even bigger, but as noted, is asymmetrical. The ISO taper starts smaller than all three, so as to be able to work with Zeus, Nervar, and possibly even Ofmega cranks, but is asymmetrical, being again longer on the right side, so as (hopefully) to be compatible with Stronglight and TA cranks. Being a compromise, ISO is not a perfect fit for any.
After its adoption, AFAIK most surviving European crank and BB manufacturers followed suit, including TA and Campagnolo (who were practically the only remaining ones of consequence, and almost certainly had a hand in the formation of the standard.)
Per ISO 6695:1991:
That said, some BB manufacturers make both tapers, so either check documentation, or measure the square end (across flats) and taper length to determine. Note that the JIS square end is measured at the spindle end, while the ISO is measured 1.5mm from the spindle end. Because of the taper, an ISO axle will be measurably smaller at the end than a JIS. As Stephen said, one measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions.
Note that Phil Wood made their own compromise taper back in the day. It was between the Campagnolo, Stronglight, and TA, and intended to work acceptably with them all. Now they make only the modern standard tapers.
Greg Reiche
CA USA
*Sakae made a 3° taper crankset and BB for a while. Rare, thankfully.
Now regarding the two standards:What is known as the JIS standard started as the Sugino "Maxy" taper, used by practically every far-eastern manufacturer for the vast majority of their cotterless cranks. It's close to the TA taper, in fact. But it is also similar to the Stronglight taper, except that the Stronglight taper was asymmetrical (longer on the right than the left), while the JIS/Maxy is symmetrical, as was TA. (Interestingly, according to Stronglight's web page, all their current square-taper production is JIS standard, while TA's is ISO. Not sure if this has always been the case with post-1991 Stronglight though.)
Per JIS D 9403:
For a bolt-type axle:
Taper 2° each side
Taper flat length 15mm minimum
Width of taper at end: 12.65mm
For a nutted axle: the same except the taper flat length is 16mm minimum.Taper 2° each side
Taper flat length 15mm minimum
Width of taper at end: 12.65mm
Most high-end Japanese cranks, before and after JIS, did not use the Maxy/JIS taper. Early Dura-Ace, Sugino Mighty, and Suntour Superbe cranks notably had tapers much closer to the Campagnolo taper (but not always identical.) Sugino now calls the "Mighty" taper the "75" taper, and it's still used on their excellent traditional 75 cranksets. It is not ISO, nor is it JIS low-profile. Not to say it wouldn't work with other tapers, but it is its own thing.
The ISO taper is NOT "based on" the Campagnolo taper, rather it is a compromise taper intended to be functionally compatible with as many pre-standard European crank tapers as possible. The pre-standard Campagnolo taper starts bigger than ISO, is shorter, and is symmetrical. TA is a bit bigger still, and symmetrical. The Stronglight taper starts even bigger, but as noted, is asymmetrical. The ISO taper starts smaller than all three, so as to be able to work with Zeus, Nervar, and possibly even Ofmega cranks, but is asymmetrical, being again longer on the right side, so as (hopefully) to be compatible with Stronglight and TA cranks. Being a compromise, ISO is not a perfect fit for any.
After its adoption, AFAIK most surviving European crank and BB manufacturers followed suit, including TA and Campagnolo (who were practically the only remaining ones of consequence, and almost certainly had a hand in the formation of the standard.)
Per ISO 6695:1991:
Included taper angle: 4° ± 10min
Length of flat: RH 18mm +.05 -0, LH 16mm +.05 -0
Across flats, 1.5mm from spindle end: 12.6mm +.02 -.05
Spindle end to bolt seat: Loose 3mm, Tight 1.5mm
(This was revised in 2015, but I don't have access to the revision.)Length of flat: RH 18mm +.05 -0, LH 16mm +.05 -0
Across flats, 1.5mm from spindle end: 12.6mm +.02 -.05
Spindle end to bolt seat: Loose 3mm, Tight 1.5mm
That said, some BB manufacturers make both tapers, so either check documentation, or measure the square end (across flats) and taper length to determine. Note that the JIS square end is measured at the spindle end, while the ISO is measured 1.5mm from the spindle end. Because of the taper, an ISO axle will be measurably smaller at the end than a JIS. As Stephen said, one measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions.
Note that Phil Wood made their own compromise taper back in the day. It was between the Campagnolo, Stronglight, and TA, and intended to work acceptably with them all. Now they make only the modern standard tapers.
Greg Reiche
CA USA
*Sakae made a 3° taper crankset and BB for a while. Rare, thankfully.
Last edited by steelbikeguy; 02-19-19 at 08:26 AM.
02-19-19 | 01:41 PM
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 21,845
Likes: 5,807
From: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Bikes: A bunch of old bikes and a few new ones
I like to use like parts/brands whenever possible. A while back, I had plans to install a Stronglight 49d to a Raleigh Super Course. I gathered that Stronglight and TA bb parts were interchangeable. So off to the co-op I went.
After digging through a 100 gallon size bin of greasy drivetrain, I returned home with three TA spindles, one Stronglight spindle, and an assortment of both Stronglight, and TA cups for cheap (other than for dirty nails and a couple hours carved out of an afternoon)!
Two of the spindles I procured were the #374 triple. I’ve since sold one of them, but I’ve also since bought two junk project bikes for parts. One is French, the other is British, and each is sporting a Cyclotouriste. Both cheap Craigslist finds.
I’d think if someone lives within reasonable traveling distance to a metropolitan area known to have a tradition of cycling culture, and at least one decent co-op, in time, could find what they need regarding the Cyclotouriste.
After digging through a 100 gallon size bin of greasy drivetrain, I returned home with three TA spindles, one Stronglight spindle, and an assortment of both Stronglight, and TA cups for cheap (other than for dirty nails and a couple hours carved out of an afternoon)!
Two of the spindles I procured were the #374 triple. I’ve since sold one of them, but I’ve also since bought two junk project bikes for parts. One is French, the other is British, and each is sporting a Cyclotouriste. Both cheap Craigslist finds.
I’d think if someone lives within reasonable traveling distance to a metropolitan area known to have a tradition of cycling culture, and at least one decent co-op, in time, could find what they need regarding the Cyclotouriste.
Yeah I like digging thru the local co op. I scored a bunch of TA and strongligh 86 bcd chainrings that way.
I need to go back and do some more digging soon.
02-19-19 | 02:08 PM
#5
Overdoing projects
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,464
Likes: 1,371
From: Rotterdam, former republic of the Netherlands
Bikes: Batavus Randonneur GL, Gazelle Orange Excellent, Gazelle Super Licht, Gazelle Grand Tourist, Gazelle Lausanne, Gazelle Tandem, Koga-Miyata SilverAce, Koga-Miyata WorldTraveller
I have mine on an ISO spindle. Works just fine but as [MENTION=113466]steelbikeguy[/MENTION] mentioned it does seem to work itself loose after a while (1000+ km for me).
02-19-19 | 05:12 PM
#6
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,098
Likes: 353
Installed a TA last year on a regular Campy Nuovo Record. Because the Campy was already in the bike and it was worth a try. Lined up perfect, tightened up perfect, has been used a lot. If you'd asked me I'd have said this had not even a 5% chance of working. But it does.
02-19-19 | 06:10 PM
#7
Banned
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,480
Likes: 450
I concur with steelbikeguy above. Likely most are 2° taper but its the taper length that gets to be trouble.
This is different than overall or between bearings.
Mix and match is a crapshoot to get the chainline, avoiding the arm base casting too close and bb interference. Then just as one successfully has the non-drive perfectly seated, the other may not because the drive side taper might be longer!
For the bb spindle fastening bolt type, there are some hacks to make it work but most here would cry foul and club me. So never mind.... 💨
This is different than overall or between bearings.
Mix and match is a crapshoot to get the chainline, avoiding the arm base casting too close and bb interference. Then just as one successfully has the non-drive perfectly seated, the other may not because the drive side taper might be longer!
For the bb spindle fastening bolt type, there are some hacks to make it work but most here would cry foul and club me. So never mind.... 💨
02-19-19 | 09:04 PM
#8
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 4,834
From: Peoria, IL
I concur with steelbikeguy above. Likely most are 2° taper but its the taper length that gets to be trouble.
This is different than overall or between bearings.
Mix and match is a crapshoot to get the chainline, avoiding the arm base casting too close and bb interference. Then just as one successfully has the non-drive perfectly seated, the other may not because the drive side taper might be longer!
For the bb spindle fastening bolt type, there are some hacks to make it work but most here would cry foul and club me. So never mind.... 💨
This is different than overall or between bearings.
Mix and match is a crapshoot to get the chainline, avoiding the arm base casting too close and bb interference. Then just as one successfully has the non-drive perfectly seated, the other may not because the drive side taper might be longer!
For the bb spindle fastening bolt type, there are some hacks to make it work but most here would cry foul and club me. So never mind.... 💨
I also had a handful of Shimano cartridge BB's in the parts box too, which presumably would offer more options.
Having said that.. I was lucky that it worked out. Those bolts in the 50.4mm BCD get quite close to the BB shell! The arms did end up at least a mm or two further up the axle than they started. They do seem to have arrived at their final position, though.
I had a somewhat similar experience when mounting the standard Campy Record crankset on a new Phil titanium BB (on my Raleigh Team bike). They must not have been a perfect fit, despite Phil's assurances that it would be good. After a week or two of riding, the cranks got distinctly loose and required a bit of bolt tightening. Now I'm concerned that if I put the crank arms back onto a standard Campy axle, there will be a substandard fit. This is the sort of thing that makes me a little queasy about buying a used TA (or other) crankset.
Steve in Peoria
02-20-19 | 02:58 AM
#9
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,835
Likes: 1,816
From: Northern California
Bikes: Cheltenham-Pedersen racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.
This is where having a mid-length cartridge bottom bracket handy is great for testing the fit and the chainline dimension.
Starting with say a Shimano 113mm cartridge and test-fitting to determine if the needed bb will have to be longer or shorter than that.
Even a worn-out cartridge bb is usually fine for such test-fit purposes, so I keep a few around, in lengths that I don't have new ones.
I have (for example) used a 115mm Shimano cartridge bb to mount Stronglight 93 cranks, with a resulting optimal chainline and good overall fit and function.
As Chas has often said on this forum, "if it fits, it works"!
And, since these mid-length and shorter Shimano Cartridge bb's are symmetrical, it is possible to use a fixed-cup spacer to add a little offset, if needed, for chainring clearance or for front derailer downshifting performance. But I always try for a minimum amount of Chainline offset as a starting point, the better to reduce friction as the chain crosses toward the smaller cogs.
Starting with say a Shimano 113mm cartridge and test-fitting to determine if the needed bb will have to be longer or shorter than that.
Even a worn-out cartridge bb is usually fine for such test-fit purposes, so I keep a few around, in lengths that I don't have new ones.
I have (for example) used a 115mm Shimano cartridge bb to mount Stronglight 93 cranks, with a resulting optimal chainline and good overall fit and function.
As Chas has often said on this forum, "if it fits, it works"!
And, since these mid-length and shorter Shimano Cartridge bb's are symmetrical, it is possible to use a fixed-cup spacer to add a little offset, if needed, for chainring clearance or for front derailer downshifting performance. But I always try for a minimum amount of Chainline offset as a starting point, the better to reduce friction as the chain crosses toward the smaller cogs.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Silkworm
Singlespeed & Fixed Gear
16
01-01-10 09:46 PM
