|
[MENTION=266503]JaccoW[/MENTION], I installed a new 11-speed derailleur and shifter on my tandem. The new derailleur design is pretty fantastic.
|
Since I have a number a of bikes with Pro 5 Vis cranks, I though a few pictures were in order.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...93a74e5663.jpg Jack Taylor tandem - TA Pro 5 Vis cranks with SunXCD spider and TA ramped and pinned chainrings https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6ec1c54451.jpg Jo Routens Randonneur - Stronglight 49D cranks with TA Cyclotourist rings https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...463ab7ef42.jpg Alex Singer Tandem - Stronglight 49D cranks with Cyclo Rosa Chainrings. TA sync rings on opposite side. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3a9fc2b730.jpg 1940's Randonneur - Maxiplum cranks, period 80 BCD spider and TA chainrings Reid |
Originally Posted by ReidH
(Post 22043137)
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3a9fc2b730.jpg
1940's Randonneur - Maxiplum cranks, period 80 BCD spider and TA chainrings Reid |
Originally Posted by Roger M
(Post 22040198)
Crank arm length question:
Which 50.4 arms are/were available in a 175-180mm length. I've seen a pair of the Sugino Maxy in a 175mm. However, in my ebay searchs all of the available lengths seem to be 167.5-172.5. I like the SunXCD unit, but it maxes out at 172.5. Sugino also made the PX in 175mm, which I run on my tourer as double with the 46 and 28 rings from the Super Maxy. |
Originally Posted by ReidH
(Post 22043137)
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...463ab7ef42.jpg
Alex Singer Tandem - Stronglight 49D cranks with Cyclo Rosa Chainrings. Reid https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...618a36607c.jpg |
Originally Posted by non-fixie
(Post 22044302)
Thanks for your post, Reid! Much appreciated. This picture I find particularly interesting, as I currently have these on my desk. I was thinking of combining them into a similar setup for an upcoming build. The steel rings are fairly hefty, though. I believe you were the one who identified my rings as Cyclo-Rosa a number of years ago. Now I know why. :)
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...618a36607c.jpg Most I have seen are plated steel in 1/8" or 3/32" chain size. They were sold early on by Cyclo, possibly 1920's and certainly sold from the 30's through 50's. There were Alu versions also, but any I have seen were worn out. Recent Stronglight 110BCD chainrings with a SunXCD spider are a good facsimile of these old Cyclo rings. See the pic of my Jack Taylor. I mistakenly identified the rings as TA, but I could see in my own picture that they are Stronglights. Reid |
Originally Posted by juvela
(Post 22039978)
-----
one o' me favourite five-pin chainwheel patterns are the ones with the "pickles" cutouts suspect they were produced by more than one manufacturer does anyone have any hard information on them? [image courtesy of condorino.com] ----- |
The latest and greatest for me. FB. As seen in the 1933 Doniselli catalog.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...da67836f_h.jpgPaglianti 01 by iabisdb, on Flickr |
Update on the spacers that [MENTION=512318]oneclick[/MENTION] made for me.
They seem to have solved the problem of the 11-speed chain on this crankset dropping in between chainrings. The 3.6mm thick spacer were replaced with 2.1mm thick ones (which is because 11-speed chain is 1.5mm narrower than 9-speed chain. Shifting performance seems good but I need to check it under load while riding tomorrow. For those interested I could shoot a video to show how shifting performance is on a 48/28T x 11-34 setup without pins and ramps. http://i.imgur.com/rKSlddn.jpg http://i.imgur.com/SFsgLFd.jpg http://i.imgur.com/2l4Buc3.jpg http://i.imgur.com/OOFThFy.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ewwxqPa.jpg |
Originally Posted by abshipp
(Post 21779090)
VO doesn't seem to shy away from spending money on tooling. I mean, over the past few years they've come out with what, 3 or 4 new frame models? All selling at less than a $1k price point with lots of braze ons, etc, so there's got to be a decent amount of stuff being made. The way to get costs down that low is to streamline the process, which implies lots of fixturing.
Regarding the chainrings in particular, I wonder if the ramp/pin design for a 46/30 chainring set is "common industry knowledge" by this point so there wouldn't be much engineering involved. Ramps and pins are overkill for me, that's for sure. The bike they are on has downtube shifters, so shifting under load just isn't a thing that ever happens. I think I just bought the VO ones because they were the most economical :) I do kind of wish I would have gone with the TA rings, and just a little bit smaller. I think a 44/28 or 44/26 would be pretty perfect for how I ride that bike. 1. with a smaller chainring radius, the cage moves closer to the BB since they seem to work better with just a few mm gap between the cage and teh big ring. 2. One of the ways to design a cage that can handle a 16 tooth (46-30, 50-34, et cetera) is to make a long cage that sticks out far behind the BB axis, and closer to interference with the chainring. 3. The chance for interference is worse with a larger BB drop. With an 8 cm drop the chainstay sweeps up higher than for the now more common 6.5 cm geometry. If you look back at Jan Heine's bike designs you can see he designed a short, deep cage that does not hang out behind the chainring. I think this is the best way to go for a 40-24 or 42-26, or smaller. |
-----
"LUXE" chainwheel as seen on Galibier folder from Belgium, 1967 - https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...68f8471bb.jpeg ----- |
26/36/46/56
Just for ***** & giggles. I'll never use it on anything. I just like looking at it. https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...71a472e424.jpg |
[MENTION=7614]Sierra[/MENTION], I would use that on my tandem. The bottom gear can never be too low, and the top gear can never be too high.
|
Originally Posted by Sierra
(Post 22062989)
26/36/46/56
Just for ***** & giggles. I'll never use it on anything. I just like looking at it. https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...71a472e424.jpg SPECTA used to show these at their trade show booths in the seventies & eighties have never seen one offered for sale or listed in any catalogue might have been a bit of a challenge BITD to locate une derailleur avant with enough lateral travel to accommodate it... ----- |
We made at least one quad-ring crank that I remember, at Santana in about 1977, using TA Pro 5-vis rings. I didn't take pictures unfortunately
Here's a pic I found somewhere of a Singer tandem with quad-ring drive: https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6cff7ddbd9.jpg This one uses a Huret parallelogram front derailleur. Whether the mech needed to be modified to cover the spread, I don't know. Here's a Rebour drawing of a Singer single bike with a quad. Bespoke Singer derailleur: https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...fefdbd78da.jpg It makes more sense on a front-drive tandem though, since chainline between the crank and the freewheel becomes very unimportant, almost a moot point. And no tire clearance issue, no diverging chainstay that needs an indent to clear the inner ring, problems you usually have with a rear-drive tandem or a single bike. Mark B |
Originally Posted by bulgie
(Post 22064631)
This one uses a Huret parallelogram front derailleur. Whether the mech needed to be modified to cover the spread, I don't know.
Here's a Rebour drawing of a Singer single bike with a quad. Bespoke Singer derailleur: Mark B Aside from the lateral movement required, mine has a 30 tooth difference(26/56) between the smallest and largest chainring. I don't know of any front derailleur that could handle that. |
I recently came across this 50.4 BCD cottered steel crankset. Drive side has the Williams logo. Non-drive side has no logo. Chamfer on back side is just a little larger on drive side crank.
Both are marked "Made in England" on the front and "1/2" on the back. Any suggestions for date of manufacture? What is the significance of the letter "Z" below the Williams logo? https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...dd64c027f.jpeg https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...19b95c43f.jpeg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...55325b593e.jpg https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f471f3eda.jpeg Brent |
I recently pulled a Sugino Super Maxy 5 vis crank from an 84 Univega Alpina Uno and wanted to use the crank on a 91 Trek 950 (68mm bb shell). The original axle measured around 127.75mm (asymmetric) and resulted in the non-drive side grazing the chainstay. I'm not sure how to go about figuring out the correct axle length. It's also currently set up as a triple, and I plan to convert it to a double (2x9 ultimately), which I believe means getting different bolts/spacers, correct?
Any help would be appreciated! |
Originally Posted by Rooney
(Post 22227071)
I recently pulled a Sugino Super Maxy 5 vis crank from an 84 Univega Alpina Uno and wanted to use the crank on a 91 Trek 950 (68mm bb shell). The original axle measured around 127.75mm (asymmetric) and resulted in the non-drive side grazing the chainstay. I'm not sure how to go about figuring out the correct axle length. It's also currently set up as a triple, and I plan to convert it to a double (2x9 ultimately), which I believe means getting different bolts/spacers, correct?
Any help would be appreciated! |
Ordered bolts from VO, thanks!
Still looking for assistance on spindle length, if anyone has recommendations. |
I’ve been having a sort out recently and discovered I’ve still got a pair of TA “Cyclotouriste” cranks in 185mm length.
in my youth I used to compete in hill climbs, and used this with a single 39t chairing and fixed wheel. I’m 6’3” and the length was fine. Interestingly overlap was never a problem. I’ve not seen these cranks in that length elsewhere though |
Picked up another example of my favorite chainset style today at a jumble sale. An early Stronglight 49D. I don't recall having seen this version before.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...7044da6e66.jpg |
The TA I installed on my Raleigh Super Course, freshened up with new stainless hardware from V/O and a little bit of polish. Currently 54/40, but I plan to go lower gearing.
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3c80316682.jpg |
Originally Posted by BFisher
(Post 22518295)
Currently 54/40, but I plan to go lower gearing.
;) Nice lookin 5-vis there. I bet the 54 came off an early-'70s Schwinn Sports Touring, do we know? It has the extra set of bolt holes where Schwinn had TA add a shifting ramp that prevented the chain from ever skating on the tops of the teeth ("neutral") rather than engaging down on the ring in the correct way. A problem which I have never seen happen without the ramp, but Schwinn knows best... Mark B |
Originally Posted by bulgie
(Post 22518421)
No! 50-40 or fight!
;) Nice lookin 5-vis there. I bet the 54 came off an early-'70s Schwinn Sports Touring, do we know? It has the extra set of bolt holes where Schwinn had TA add a shifting ramp that prevented the chain from ever skating on the tops of the teeth ("neutral") rather than engaging down on the ring in the correct way. A problem which I have never seen happen without the ramp, but Schwinn knows best... Mark B What I found with the Schwinn spec. on that TA unit was that they used 5mm spacers between the rings, which is bigger than the spacing on all of the cranks I have. With the shifting ramp all worked well, but I did have some engagement issues when I ran it without the ramp, intermittent, but I could never get it to completely go away. I kind of wanted to remove the ramp and outer guard for aesthetic reasons. The Velo Orange hardware utilizes 3.6mm spacers, closer to all of my other vintage setups. Plus, the old nuts and bolts were looking a little tired. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:56 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.