Paul Cranks

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

12-16-06 | 09:38 AM

#26

moki

Senior Member

Joined: Aug 2005

Posts: 1,152

Likes: 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by me thinkst

Agreed, They are purdy. The chainline is 44 mm. You could possibly use a shorter BB to get it down to 42.5, if you have the clearance. If you use Paul hubs yer stuck at 44 though.
Really though, the difference between Campy standard chainline (42.5) and Paul's (44) is 1.5 mm (less than one sixteenth of an inch). Maybe not worth losing sleep over.

Article on chainline from Sheldon "straight ahead" Brown: https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chainline.html
According to his data, the Phil hubs are close to 43.25 mm when using a Campy 1/8" cog.

good point. Paul has perhaps taken some flak over the 44mm chainline.

According to St. Sheldon:

Phil hub + EAI 1/8 cog gives a line of 43.48 mm =(

ENO + DA = 46.13!

much closer to 42mm are surly + surly, DA + DA,

Perfect or close to: Promax + DA, Promax + Gigas (yeah, right)

44mm seems fine to me. not diggin the style of the cranks, though, and the splined interface weirds me out. A normal sized ring and a little BCD (like olde TA cranks) makes me think of flex. Ring flex on this system seems even tougher to battle.

Yeah, the chainrings seem beefy, but why work against yourself?

12-16-06 | 09:52 AM

#27

me thinkst

mofo

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 152

Likes: 1

Also read the article from this link: https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...highlight=paul
They say in addition to just the "flush" & "circles" chainrings they will be making a 144mm BCD spider.

Paul makes good stuff. I wish they would make the Racer brake in a non-centerpull version though.

Is anyone running the cranks with a Black chainring?
If so, how is the anodizing holding up?

Last edited by me thinkst; 12-18-06 at 07:29 AM.