cranks, BB
 

so now that my bike's fit and comfort is where i want it, i'd like to upgrade my drive train. i want a quiet, smooth, responsive crank. the sugino's seem like obvious candidates but i was curious if there was another crank that is popular among you all. i also noticed that if you purchase the crank with the chain ring, the highest one they have is 46t, and i want a 48t. (i ride 48 - 15 with a 1/8 chain). the messenger chain rings look nice and stiff. my ride is also the kilo tt, so the price for the sugino's seem appropriate.

i was also thinking, if i get cranks i might as well upgrade the stock BB. this dude is selling his HATTA - R9400 locally for $60. good deal? what other BB's can i consider with regards to price, performance, etc.?

When you are buying bottom bracket, you have to take spindle length into account. If you are going to get the Messegner, make sure that the bottom bracket you're getting is 110mm long and it is JIS taper. It is the best to get the bottom bracket that is made for the Messenger, like this one.
http://www.tracksupermarket.com/inde...roducts_id=627

I think the TruVativ that came with the Kilo is good enough...just buy a the Messenger chain ring if you think they are stiffer.

thanks, vixtor. i've also read that the cranks are decent on my kilo, it's not like i have a problem with it. i'm just really picky about chain tension and lube, just as i'm sure you all are, so i was curious if a better crank set would be noticeable upgrade. i didn't even think about just getting a chain ring first, thanks for the advice. messenger's are 130 bcd, would they fit my truvativ?

Your best option may be to buy whatever crank you're interested in, along with a 48T chainring. Then just sell the 46T on Craigslist without ever riding it.

from what i read somewhere, road cranks are 130 BCD and track cranks are 144 BCD? is this true? if so, what is the reason?

that may be a 'trend' or common occurrence but it's not 'true' in any universal sense. they are just bolt center diameters for different amounts of strength and dynamics.

reasons why you'd want a 130 bcd for the road: gearing can be made smaller or more compact so you get the same gear ratio with:
less weight
more ground clearance or ability to utilize a low bb for aerodynamics and handling
less chain to get slacky requiring longer derailleur sweep/pull/whatever its called

reasons why you'd want a 144 for track:
longer crank spindle arms mean less radial distance per set chainring diameter to prevent warping and keep good chain tension and line at all points of crank spin
track bikes have a high bb and you don't need ground clearance on a track so larger chainrings are easier to produce and stronger than smaller cogs

reasons not to use either for either purpose:
none unless you have specific clearance/cost issues.

generally, if you're using a ring of 44 teeth or more, 144bcd is going to give you a stiffer front drivetrain with less chance of bent rings.

but you certainly don't need one for the other and if you buy a lower quality ring or set, you'll lose any possible physical performance advantage to low quality inefficiencies.

Kilo TT's TruVativ uses 130 BCD chain ring.

Track cranks use 144BCD chainrings because of strength issues. A chainring with more teeth will have a larger circumference than one with less, and a larger crank spider will provide a larger area for the chainring to sit on without the chainring flexing too much when it's being pedalled . If you put a 52t chainring on a road crank, it will flex a bit more than the track crank with the same size ring.

thanks, that's what i was thinking, but you guys put it so eloquently :) you guys are radical.