CSPC w. non CSPC?
 

I am building up a "L'Eroica" bike http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u2zV...eature=related from a 1970 Crescent Pepita Special that is beat up just enough to be a perfect bike for this.

I had Bob Freeman at Elliot Bay drill and tap a pre CSPC Campagnolo Record Crank for a granny ring (26 tooth) that I will be running with a 42/47 middle and outer rings. I am using either a 13-26 Suntour Ultra 6 speed or a Shimano 14-28 5 speed freewheel in 120 rear spacing.

The crankarm is a pre CSPC one but I only have CSPC Record front derailleurs. Bob is mailing the arm back to me so I don't have it in front of me but I am hoping that if I am careful I can use the newer FD with the older arm.

Any info for me please?

Maybe you will need a triple FD to shift across the three rings and 19teeth, but the cspc change shouldn't have any impact. (just my 2 cents though)

I think you'll be fine. I have used a newer Campagnolo Record front derailleur with a triple.

Bad idea generally since the problem was the outer "Lip" of the derailleur which tended to hit the inside of the crank arm (we've all seen examples of this gouging on various crank arms just from badly set "normal" derailleurs too).

I think a greater issue would be to find a correct length axle (and cups) to accommodate the additional inner chainring. For some reason known only to Campy, their triple cranksets always used the "thin" (Record) cup sets rather than the "thicker" (Nuovo Record) cups - which were the ones with the water-shedding "rifling" in the axle holes. Later triple axles were longer than the earlier ones too.

So, what you really should look for is a thin cup set and a later triple axle. If you have thicker cups, the longer center section of the triple axles would simply not fit in the NR cups which is spaced for a shorter 49 mm center section.

The later axle would be stamped "68 SS 120 X3 (+1.0 +1.5)" or simply "68 SS X3" and the sections between bearing cones would measure 28-54-38... versus 27-54-35 for the earlier axles which are ONLY marked "68 SS 120 X3".

If it is of any use... you may be able to use a Sugino "Maxy" axle marked "3TB" which measures 32-52-39 ... although the tapers may push the crank arms outboard slightly..(but maybe not a bad thing in this case). :thumb:

Good Luck

I couldn't figure out what CSPC stood for. When Google said it stood for Center for Sex Positive Culture I was even more confused. When Stronglight mentioned the outer lip, I was able to figure out the OP meant the Consumer Product Safety Commision after some strange thoughts first went through my mind.

fyi,
it's *CPSC * as in consumer product safety commission

I always file the lip off CSPC front ders, which is what I suggest you do. If you are careful to file only the lip there will just be a small "cresent" where the plating will be gone. Just fill this area with yellow or red enamel, or whatever accent color will go with the rest of the bike.

I think it's a good practise, as it allows better adjustment to clear the chain in high gear without risking rubbing the back of the crankarm.

Is CPSC a Campy only thing? What were the changes and when did it happen? If I wasn't at work I'd check into the CSPC, too - sounds like an interesting organization.

No, it was a US "Ralph Nader era" thing. Campy was just lucky to have so many parts that were on the verge of maming and killing and needing to be "saftyfied".

I'm sure the agency did some good somewhere, but when you look at the the changes Campy had to make it is just ridiclulous BS and false consumer protection.

An Edco bottom bracket might work for you. It solved the problen for me when I ran into the thick cup triple spindle problem. It was worse for me because my bike is French.

http://inlinethumb32.webshots.com/39...600x600Q85.jpg

The design of the Edco allows you to adjust your chainline by a few millimeters either way.

I panicked when I looked at this picture because I thought there was a gouge in the threads. It's just a piece of wire from a cable.

http://inlinethumb13.webshots.com/23...600x600Q85.jpg


My crank is pre-CPSC, but so is my derailer. The Edco is pricey, but spidles suitable for Campy Record triples can also be pricey.

Those darn Masi's were unsafe at any speed you know.

Seriously-

IF you are very careful, and tweak the forward cage lip in a trifle, which can help downshifts, set the cage about 4mm above the large ring, it might just work. I have done it, works better under a 52 tooth outer ring I think.

But to make it work, you need the bike mechanic gods' on your side, as you will be riding a VINTAGE event with a capital V, no aero cable routing for example, locate a correct shifter, just look ofr one with the circlip to hold the upper arm in place, slightly younger than 1970, but so much better.

Thanks for all the feedback!! Sorry about the CSPC dyslexia.

The threading on the Crescent BB is Swiss!! And my cups are thick so instead of looking for an axle and thin swiss cups I will go with the sure bet Phil Wood that I know people have used successfully.

I have one flat non CpSc Record derailleur but it is an early one with the cable stop and the BB shell on this bike has guides brazed on so I can't use the cable housing and clamp on guide that is used with it. I do have a good user that I can file off or tweak the front lip...

Thanks!!

The CPSC...

The CPSC was a very weird Federal government bureau which began flexing its muscles during the mid 1970s. They were extremely overzealous when it came to bicycles. Because bicycles "could" be used by children (and, admittedly, in the US this was once the most common bike market), ALL bicycles suddenly fell into the category of "toys" - regardless of the age of the likely buyer or the size of the bike. :(

Examining our Toys, the CPSC bureaucrats decided that certain "sharp edged parts" on a bike could cause a severe gash to the "child" if the bike were to crash and impact that part against a leg... and this is where they noticed the potential cutting blade edge of the Campy front derailleur cage plate. Ironically, they somehow they neglected to focus on that circular saw blade directly below it (which we refer to as a chainwheel)... which was very fortunate for us all - otherwise, we might have been riding with Campy chainguards on our US-legal racing bikes, as well! :eek:

Around 1974 they had also (very seriously) proposed legislation making it mandatory to have reflectors mounted on all bikes which a car could see from a certain distance and "at any angle" to the bike, which in all sincerity they estimated would require some 27 different plastic reflectors positioned at various angles - Yes, they were absolutely serious! :lol:

As time passed, they gradually relaxed this blanket idiocy regarding all bicycles. And under pressure from bicycle manufacturing industry and retail merchant lobbys in Washington they also quietly backed off on the deadly derailleur issue too. All that now remains of those early Stalinist mandates is the current requirement for a front, rear, and two wheel mounted reflectors - those nasty things which we all immediately remove from any bike which we buy new in the US. My local bike shop has an entire barrel of the discarded take-off reflectors in case anyone ever wants to re-mount one... and I actually did salvage and mount one on the bracket of a rear luggage rack which I had mounted for an aged neighbor (at her request, of course).