stylish external BB cranksets
 

http://www.andel.com.tw/Archive/_eng...7-5639T_B1.jpg

From Andel's site. I can't find these anywhere, though, nor can I find many other good examples of external BB cranksets that resemble more classic cranks (thin arms, non-alien looking center spider).

Does anyone know a way to order just one of these Andel cranksets, or know of any other model of external crankset that might also look similar? Thanks :)

I would stay away from any web site that does not list the location, phone number and street address for the company.

They look like a new company, too. Couple that with the above and you have a solid reason to stay away. The cart is apparently not up and functioning yet, despite their reference to the cart.

They're a Taiwanese company. That's why.

Hang in there... what you're after should become less rare soon as that BB tech becomes more ubiquitous.

Looks nice, here's the contact info for the company

http://www.biketaiwan.com/database/t...?custid=005284

Thanks for the link, Yokev.

Mike - I've actually seen Andel cranksets on Surly LHTs - the last year's model was spec'ed with them, replacing the Sugino crankset from the year before - which was why I was wondering if they sold Andel cranksets by themselves? Milwaukee Cycle shop sells Andel track cranksets, but I haven't seen their external BB cranksets anywhere on the web as of yet.

Umm... Campy???

are external bearing BB's really all that and a bag of chips?

I've heard there's not much noticable difference b/w them and square taper, but I am curious to try for myself.

http://www.suginoltd.co.jp/english/o...in_english.htm

that's some bike jewelry right there.

I would say that external bottom bracket systems are slightly superior to spindle-based crank systems from an engineering or mechanical perspective, but like many bicycle components, not everyone needs the best stuff out there...or would even notice or benefit from the upgrade. And when I say superior I mean...if there was a challenge where teams of engineers were to sit down and sketch out the best way to join two crank arms, external bottom brackets would currently be the best means to do so.

Do they reduce weight significantly? I'm just wondering if there's a stated advantage (read:Marketing Hype) aside from the Bearings being further outboard.

it sorta seems to me like an odd invention because I'd imagine it increases the Q factor...don't people usually want a narrower Q factor?

think of it this way...

which is more stable: holding a broom stick with both fists next to each other in the middle of the broom....or with each fist at the ends of the broom?

The egg-shaped cutouts on that crankset look ridiculous, but it is a step in the right direction.

-Kurt

often lighter, much stiffer (is that desirable? I dunno -- that's up to you), incredibly easy to service/install/remove. tread is often increased quite a bit, yes, but the sugino that I linked to solves that problem.

downsides: bb's tend to wear out faster and the bb shell must be faced properly (not a downside in and of itself, just more precaution is necessary with this type of setup).

that said, I use square-taper on all my bicycles and I'm cool with that.

Few people even talk about Q factor lately but I expect that to change. I have one set of external BB cranks on a cross bike and 2 BB30 cranks on a road a cross bikes (Cannondale.) It's hard to quantify changes because the frames are all so different (Carbon to Alu) but they have all preformed well. BB30 has all the advantages of the external but less Q factor and lighter. BB30 can use an Alu spindle because its shell is wider and is shorter.

Where these really shine is in servicability. They are very easy to remove and reassemble with the exception of the BB30 bearing which are press-in.

I really like the external BB crankset (RaceFace Cadence) on my fixed, but that's also oversize lugged steel. I can feel a diference in bb stiffness over the 6spd era 600 crankset I had on before, but then again I guess I should be able to. I don't think the Qfactor was any more than the 600 was with the recommended 116mm bb.

As far as the Andel cranksets go, they seem to have a good reputation with the fixie crowd. I imagine they'll be readily available as soon as someone specs them for OEM. With this new trend towards retro-inspired steel, DT shifter bikes, I would expect to see that crankset on one of them.

You're right. But Chris at VO is into Q. Lists the value on all the cranks he's selling.

"Now listen up, 007. Q is going to address us on the topic of Q."

http://copiousnotes.bloginky.com/files/2008/11/q.jpg

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Mind you though, I'm not surprised that Chris has a noticeable interest in Q-factor. When you're selling something that's a modern interpretation of the TA Pro 5 Vis, Q-factor is the first thing that will come into most customers' minds (C&V minds, anyway).

-Kurt

I have a set of Sugino Alpina's that fit the bill, but I'd really like to find a set of the new Sugino Mighty Tour's with a square spindle.

I like them, and understand the width/stiffness part, so a CF setup like that is on my modern bike. I like it, too.
However, for sheer lack of resistance to spin, my Campy ball bearing bb is still king of the herd. Nearly effortless spinning.

Better, schmetter. More stable? Q factor? "Hear a lot about it"...

It is rare that something is truly better. The question is not which is better but which are good enough.

If you are far from home and your bike breaks down, your key concern will be maintainability/availability of parts, not stiffness or "stability" of the spindle.

That you might hear a lot about this is more likely driven by marketing than facts.

Cheers!,
Your local curmudgeon


P.S. - Don't get me wrong, they do look nice and I am totally in favor of real innovation. I have even been known as an early adopter of technology. I do reserve judgement on some things.

My one remaining brain cell just fired.

If I were going to improve/redesign a bottom bracket assembly, I think I would design one that is generic and adjustable so one unit fits everything out on the market - singles, doubles, triples, all threading, all widths,... compatible with new and old frames, alike.

Definitely! I don't doubt that this is a driving factor behind industry's adoption of external BBs (as well as compact frame design - it's easier to make just one frame that fits a range of people when standover's not an issue).

Wrong forum, Jesse. :)

Seriously, though, I have no need or desire for an external bottom bracket. Aesthetics are important to me. I consider Q-factor when I select a crankset. I do not resist change, but I cannot think of a reason for me to even consider external bottom brackets.

Uh, except that the best looking cranks are square taper.