SR Royal vs Sugino Super mighty
06-09-22, 10:37 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
SR Royal vs Sugino Super mighty
I'm in the process of building 2 bikes (well, the most current 2 amongst the 8 other waiting for immediate attention). One will be for selling (too big) and the other as one of the N+1.
Now my noobie question: which crankset to keep, which one to mount on the other. I cant seem to find much on the SR Royal, is it less common than the Super Mighty and therefore should hang on to it? Are they pretty much just the same and i should just keep the one i like the best?
Oh, the SR royal is 170, the Sugino 165. Same BCD.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions, comments
Now my noobie question: which crankset to keep, which one to mount on the other. I cant seem to find much on the SR Royal, is it less common than the Super Mighty and therefore should hang on to it? Are they pretty much just the same and i should just keep the one i like the best?
Oh, the SR royal is 170, the Sugino 165. Same BCD.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions, comments
06-09-22, 11:56 PM
#2
verktyg
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4,008
Bikes: Current favorites: 1988 Peugeot Birraritz, 1984 Gitane Super Corsa, 1981 Bianchi Campione Del Mondo, 1992 Paramount OS, 1990 Bianchi Mondiale, 1988 Colnago Technos, 1985 RalieghUSA Team Pro, 1973 Holdsworth
Mentioned: 202 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1020 Post(s)
Liked 1,159 Times
in
625 Posts
165mm length cranks were intended for smaller size frames also for use on track bikes. Unless your bike/bikes fit those parameters, go with the SR cranks.
All things equal, my personal preference would be be the SR cranks over Sugino.
verktyg
All things equal, my personal preference would be be the SR cranks over Sugino.
verktyg
__________________
Don't believe everything you think! History is written by those who weren't there....
Chas. ;-)
Don't believe everything you think! History is written by those who weren't there....
Chas. ;-)
06-10-22, 12:02 AM
#3
Senior Member
Both are quality cranksets. Unless you have shorter than average legs go with the 170mm.
__________________
I.C.
I.C.
06-10-22, 01:18 AM
#4
Senior Member
Mount one drive-side crank to one side of your BB, and the other to the other side of your BB. Mount a fixed cog to both sides of a wheel with a two-sided hub, attach it to your bicycle, and chain up the drivetrain on both sides. Ride both cranksets until you decide which you prefer.
06-10-22, 04:43 AM
#5
multimodal commuter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,809
Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...
Mentioned: 566 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1887 Post(s)
Liked 476 Times
in
295 Posts
The difference between 170 and 165 is negligible, but I prefer 165's.
__________________
www.rhmsaddles.com.
www.rhmsaddles.com.
Likes For rhm:
06-10-22, 05:38 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,233
Mentioned: 638 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4707 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2,989 Times
in
1,850 Posts
The Royal was SR's top crankset in the 1970s. There was an ESL (Extra Super Light) version with lighter chainrings and titanium bolts but they're not part of the decision in this case.
As previously suggested, I'd make my decision based on which is the more appropriate length for your body measurements and riding style. That would be the 170mm Royal for most people. However, if you have a shorter than average femur and or prefer a fast cadence, the 165mm Super Mighty may be the better choice.
The other factor to consider is how they sit on your bottom bracket spindle. Different cranksets can sit at different positions on the spindle, affecting your chain line. In extreme cases, you may run into a situation with not enough engagement or one that pushes on so far that it won't stay tight.
As previously suggested, I'd make my decision based on which is the more appropriate length for your body measurements and riding style. That would be the 170mm Royal for most people. However, if you have a shorter than average femur and or prefer a fast cadence, the 165mm Super Mighty may be the better choice.
The other factor to consider is how they sit on your bottom bracket spindle. Different cranksets can sit at different positions on the spindle, affecting your chain line. In extreme cases, you may run into a situation with not enough engagement or one that pushes on so far that it won't stay tight.
06-10-22, 09:14 AM
#7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Thank you all, looks like before I make the decision I'll quickly mount them both to try the fit (leg-wise and bike-wise), as aesthetically and quality wise they seem pretty equal.
Although I might not follow HTupolev suggestion... ;-)
Although I might not follow HTupolev suggestion... ;-)
Likes For Cibi42:
06-10-22, 01:51 PM
#9
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,305
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1251 Post(s)
Liked 933 Times
in
624 Posts
I generally like 170mm cranks (or funky Sugino 171s (6-3/4" inches, in case anyone wonders where the "1" in 171 came from), but I switched to 165s on my UO-8 because of toe-to-tire overlap. (Mine has an aftermarket fork which puts the front wheel farther back than stock.) I still have toe-to-tire overlap with a 28x700C tire in front, but it is certainly easily tolerated and not a safety issue.
My UO-8 with barcon cables routed between the rack and the cylindrical Bellwether front bag.
My UO-8 with barcon cables routed between the rack and the cylindrical Bellwether front bag.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
06-10-22, 02:35 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Toledo Ohio
Posts: 1,159
Bikes: 1964 Frejus,1972 Fuji Newest, 1973 Schwinn Super Sport, 1983 Trek 700, 1985 Ironman, 1985 Torpado, 1983 Peugeot UO14, 1989 Miyata 1000LT and others
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 425 Post(s)
Liked 471 Times
in
267 Posts
Aren’t some of the Mighty cranks ISO taper?
