Trouble deciding between TA Alize and Campy Triple crankset

Llatikcuf said:

I'm buying a new crank and need some help deciding between the TA Alize
(130/74) and a Campy Triple (eiter a NOS Racing T or Centaur).

This will be for use on a Shimano Ultegra 6500 9s *STI* system with a
105 front der. So the rings need to be 52/42/30.

The Campy is cheaper, but damn the replacement rings are expensive! Not
many aftermarket ring makers. Do campy rings last long enough that this
should not be an issue?

Anybody have any thoughts? Tried either with Shimano STI's.

Thanks,

n

Do chainrings actually wear out? I have thousands upon thousands of
miles on a few and they seem to be just fine.

But, according to the Peter White Cycles webstie, the TA chainrings for
130mm bcd and 135mm bcd are identical in price. So if you replace your
chainrings with identical TA quality, you pay the same price for
either. Yes you can find really cheap 130mm bcd chainrings if you
decide to go that route. But for equal quality, you pay the same.

Look at the TA Alize and TA Vento chainrings.

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/chainrings.asp

I'd go with the Campagnolo crankset if its cheaper than the TA crankset.

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out? I have thousands upon thousands of
miles on a few and they seem to be just fine.

I had a friend of mine, who has good info, tell me that if I didn't
change a worn out chain, I would ruin my cogset and chainrings in short
order. He said my new-for-me setup will demand a new chain every 1,000
miles. I thought that incredible, but will trust he knows what he's
talking about.

Curiously, the current thinking on motorcycles is to change the
sprockets at the same time as the chain. That is, a new chain on old
sprockets will only become a bad chain in short order. In older days, we
only changed sprockets when they were obviously worn.

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out?

I've worn out inner chainrings -- the teeth get hook-shaped.

Outer rings -- not so much.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out?

I've worn out inner chainrings -- the teeth get hook-shaped.

Outer rings -- not so much.

I've worn out an outer chainring. Runnign with barely-lubricated very
elongated chain, kind of thing.

Jasper

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 15:30:13 -0600, Paul Cassel <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out? I have thousands upon thousands of
miles on a few and they seem to be just fine.

I had a friend of mine, who has good info, tell me that if I didn't
change a worn out chain, I would ruin my cogset and chainrings in short
order. He said my new-for-me setup will demand a new chain every 1,000
miles. I thought that incredible, but will trust he knows what he's
talking about.

1000 miles is a pretty low estimate. Lubricate well and it should last a
few thousand miles, but the only real way to do it is simply to measure,
rather than replace every set number of miles.

24 links when the chain is new will be exactly 12 inches. When it gets to
be somewhere between about 12" and 1/16 and 12" and 1/8 is time to change.
Opinions vary. Park says acceptable wear ends at 1 percent for steel cogs
and .75 for alloy cogs (equivalent to 1/8 and 3/32 per 12 inch
respectively), Rohloff says .6 percent or a hair over 1/16th per 12 inch.

Either way, you're exchanging chain life and cog life. The elongated chain
will, from wear, get a longer pitch, and this will wear down cog teeth.

Quoted message said:

Curiously, the current thinking on motorcycles is to change the
sprockets at the same time as the chain. That is, a new chain on old
sprockets will only become a bad chain in short order. In older days, we
only changed sprockets when they were obviously worn.

What is the ratio between chain costs and the cog's cost for motorcycles?
In derailer bike drivetrains, it's something on the order of 1 in 4. I
suspect that in motorcycles, the chain is more expensive than a set of
cogs, and therefore it makes more sense to wear out the cogs to get longer
life from the chain.

Jasper

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out? I have thousands upon thousands of
miles on a few and they seem to be just fine.

I'm a mountain biker that is starting to road bike more. On my MTB
chain rings (RaceFace) I get about 5000 miles (2500mi/year x 2 years)
per my middle chainring (32t). I don't use the inner chainring much
(22t), so it does not get changed vary often. Outer chainrings (44t)
last about 5 years. I change my chain at the beginning of every season
and keep it well lubed, clean it first of course.

Do road bike chainrings have a longer life?

Quoted message said:

But, according to the Peter White Cycles webstie, the TA chainrings for
130mm bcd and 135mm bcd are identical in price. So if you replace your
chainrings with identical TA quality, you pay the same price for
either. Yes you can find really cheap 130mm bcd chainrings if you
decide to go that route. But for equal quality, you pay the same.

TA Chainrings seem overpriced to me. You can find Shimano chainrings
for a lot less. I have found those to be of good quality. If I were to
get a TA crank, I would probably outfit it with Shimano chainrings when
the originals wore out.

http://www.performancebike.com/shop/profile.cfm?SKU=2949&subcategory_ID=5122

Quoted message said:

Look at the TA Alize and TA Vento chainrings.

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/chainrings.asp

I'd go with the Campagnolo crankset if its cheaper than the TA crankset

I know the quality of the campy is impeccable, I only hesitate because
it is 135bcd vs 130bcd.

Any idea on what the shifting is like? I've heard that it works - but
have no idea how smooth it is.

-n

Jasper Janssen said:

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 15:30:13 -0600, Paul Cassel <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

1000 miles is a pretty low estimate. Lubricate well and it should last a
few thousand miles, but the only real way to do it is simply to measure,
rather than replace every set number of miles.

24 links when the chain is new will be exactly 12 inches. When it gets to
be somewhere between about 12" and 1/16 and 12" and 1/8 is time to change.
Opinions vary. Park says acceptable wear ends at 1 percent for steel cogs
and .75 for alloy cogs (equivalent to 1/8 and 3/32 per 12 inch
respectively), Rohloff says .6 percent or a hair over 1/16th per 12 inch.

Either way, you're exchanging chain life and cog life. The elongated chain
will, from wear, get a longer pitch, and this will wear down cog teeth.

My friend prefaced his comments by saying that the chainrings and cogset
for my particular groupo are both very expensive. I think he was being
conservative intentionally. I will monitor the chain using a length of
material cut to 12.1" and use that as a do not exceed gauge. Obviously,
any chain stretch will cause cog wear.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Curiously, the current thinking on motorcycles is to change the
sprockets at the same time as the chain. That is, a new chain on old
sprockets will only become a bad chain in short order. In older days, we
only changed sprockets when they were obviously worn.

What is the ratio between chain costs and the cog's cost for motorcycles?
In derailer bike drivetrains, it's something on the order of 1 in 4. I
suspect that in motorcycles, the chain is more expensive than a set of
cogs, and therefore it makes more sense to wear out the cogs to get longer
life from the chain.

This cost varies widely. The most expensive to replace motorcycle drive
line I currently own will cost roughly $110 for the chain and a a bit
less for the sprockets (cogset?). If properly cared for, this will last
from 15k to 20k miles. Anyway, yes, you are right - the ratio is at
worst, 1:1.

At one time we thought to use very cheap chains and replace them at
short intervals. However, a chain snap can ruin an engine if it holes
the case so we've moved back toward good chains and longer intervals.

-paul

Llatikcuf said:

I'm buying a new crank and need some help deciding between the TA Alize
(130/74) and a Campy Triple (eiter a NOS Racing T or Centaur).

This will be for use on a Shimano Ultegra 6500 9s *STI* system with a
105 front der. So the rings need to be 52/42/30.

The Campy is cheaper, but damn the replacement rings are expensive! Not
many aftermarket ring makers. Do campy rings last long enough that this
should not be an issue?

Use TA chainrings. Very high quality and cheaper. 135/74 very easy to
find from TA. We have 'em and use TA as replacement rings for jus about
every crank. Either will work fine with STI. The BB for the Campag
crank will be easier to find.

Quoted message said:

Anybody have any thoughts? Tried either with Shimano STI's.

Thanks,

n

Paul Cassel said:

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out? I have thousands upon thousands of
miles on a few and they seem to be just fine.

I had a friend of mine, who has good info, tell me that if I didn't
change a worn out chain, I would ruin my cogset and chainrings in short
order. He said my new-for-me setup will demand a new chain every 1,000
miles. I thought that incredible, but will trust he knows what he's
talking about.

Don't trust him cuz he's wrong. Chain life is measured by stretch and a
good clean chain will last longer than 1000 miles. Tough to put milage
on a chain. Get a chain stretch checker or just a ruler to measure 1/16
of an inch over a fott. Then change yer chain.

Quoted message said:

Curiously, the current thinking on motorcycles is to change the
sprockets at the same time as the chain. That is, a new chain on old
sprockets will only become a bad chain in short order. In older days, we
only changed sprockets when they were obviously worn.

A motorcycle, altho they do use a chain, isn't really applicable to
bicycles. Something about many,many horsepower compared to less than 1
hp.

Llatikcuf said:

Quoted message said:

Do chainrings actually wear out? I have thousands upon thousands of
miles on a few and they seem to be just fine.

I'm a mountain biker that is starting to road bike more. On my MTB
chain rings (RaceFace) I get about 5000 miles (2500mi/year x 2 years)
per my middle chainring (32t). I don't use the inner chainring much
(22t), so it does not get changed vary often. Outer chainrings (44t)
last about 5 years. I change my chain at the beginning of every season
and keep it well lubed, clean it first of course.

Do road bike chainrings have a longer life?

Road chainrings have an almost infinite lifespan. People change road
chainrings because they want a different number of teeth. Or some
brand's marketing is working. Or they see some pretty anodized colored
chainring that will look just right with their bike's color scheme.
Replacement cost of chainrings is one of the last things to worry about
on a crankset provided it uses a readily available bcd such as 135 or
130.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But, according to the Peter White Cycles webstie, the TA chainrings for
130mm bcd and 135mm bcd are identical in price. So if you replace your
chainrings with identical TA quality, you pay the same price for
either. Yes you can find really cheap 130mm bcd chainrings if you
decide to go that route. But for equal quality, you pay the same.

TA Chainrings seem overpriced to me. You can find Shimano chainrings
for a lot less. I have found those to be of good quality. If I were to
get a TA crank, I would probably outfit it with Shimano chainrings when
the originals wore out.

http://www.performancebike.com/shop/profile.cfm?SKU=2949&subcategory_ID=5122

Dura Ace chainrings are $59.99 for the large and $49.99 for the small.
I presume your link was to cheap Ultegra chainrings. Do you compare
the Deore mountain bike chainrings to the XTR chainrings?

http://www.performancebike.com/shop/profile.cfm?SKU=11460&subcategory_ID=5122

http://www.performancebike.com/shop/profile.cfm?SKU=6355&subcategory_ID=5122

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Look at the TA Alize and TA Vento chainrings.

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/chainrings.asp

I'd go with the Campagnolo crankset if its cheaper than the TA crankset

I know the quality of the campy is impeccable, I only hesitate because
it is 135bcd vs 130bcd.

135mm bcd chainrings are made by numerous manufacturers.

http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&Category=203&type=T&SearchResult=yes

http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/chainrings/135.html

Even Nashbar carries 135mm bcd chainrings in 53 and 39 teeth. If
Nashbar carries them you know they are not hard to find. Only $24.95
for the big and $12.95 for the small. Cheaper than Shimano. Kind of
makes Shimano seem overpriced to me.
http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?category=81&subcategory=1032&brand=&sku=9279&storetype=&estoreid=&pagename=

Quoted message said:

Any idea on what the shifting is like? I've heard that it works - but
have no idea how smooth it is.

You're asking how smooth the front derailleur shifts between
chainrings? I've never had too many problems shifting between
chainrings on my double or triple Campagnolo cranksets. Hard to
quantify "smooth" though.

Quoted message said:

-n

IMO, XTR and DuraAce chainrings are a waste of money, proprietary bolt
circles and light weight funny alloys makes them too expensive. Unless
you are a racer, I see no need. I find Ultegra chainrings to be of high
quality as I do XT or LX chainrings, I think they are all comparable
for the type of riding I do. What I really like, and buy when I can are
steel chainrings, wear a lot longer and CHEAP! ~$20 for a 52t Sora
ramped and pinned.

Even Nashbar chainrings are alright, this year they are made by
Stronglight and seem to be of good quality, just no ramps or pins and
kind of spotty on stock for the road rings.

When I asked how smooth the shifting was, I was referring to shifting
the Campy crankset with a Shimano 105 front der and Shimano chain. STI
shifters can be kind of picky about the chainrings you use.

Thanks for the help,

-n

Quoted message said:

When I asked how smooth the shifting was, I was referring to shifting
the Campy crankset with a Shimano 105 front der and Shimano chain. STI
shifters can be kind of picky about the chainrings you use.

I shift a Centaur triple crankset, 52-42-30 chainrings, with a Shimano
105 triple front derailleur. Ergo shifters and Campagnolo 9 speed
chain. Works just fine. The chainring size of 52-42-30 is identical
between Campagnolo and Shimano 9 speed cranksets. So if STI manages to
shift a Shimano triple crankset with 52-42-30 chainrings, it should
shift a Campagnolo or TA crankset with 52-42-30 chainrings.

I think the problem is associated with the curve in the front
derailleur not matching the curve on the chainrings. So the outside
ring is kind of restricted to 52/53, roughly. And/or the tail of the
triple front derailleur not clearing an incorrectly sized middle ring.
Dura Ace has this problem with the 42/39 middle rings.

Yes, chainrings get hooked teeth and wear out/skip, especially in the
smaller sizes (less than 40T).

TA invented the high-performance Chainring, in the 1950's. Campy
rings are also very good, but you cannot go wrong with TA chainrings.

TA supplies after-market chainrings to the world. Currently, Campy
charges ripoff prices for their chainrings; TA rings are a much better
deal.

- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA

Llatikcuf said:

Anybody have any thoughts? Tried either with Shimano STI's.

I just bought an Alize triple. My reasoning for buying Alize rather than Campy was that the Alize was available with any mix of chainwheels, whereas non-standard chainrings on Campy are expensive (have to buy TA ones).

The Alize cranks are very nice - beautiful finish, well made.

Regards,

Suzy

Quoted message said:

I think the problem is associated with the curve in the front
derailleur not matching the curve on the chainrings. So the outside
ring is kind of restricted to 52/53, roughly. And/or the tail of the
triple front derailleur not clearing an incorrectly sized middle ring.
Dura Ace has this problem with the 42/39 middle rings

You simply have to choose the right front der. 52/42/30 use an Ultegra
or 105, 53/39/30 use a DuraAce front der. Different shapes.

Also, STI's rely upon ramps and pins for shifting. No ramps/or pins and
it takes a shift and a half up then a downshift to move up a ring. I
not sure, but I believe Campy Ergo may be a little more forgiving when
it comes to rings. This difference between shifters is the stem of my
question.

-n

Llatikcuf said:

Quoted message said:

I think the problem is associated with the curve in the front
derailleur not matching the curve on the chainrings. So the outside
ring is kind of restricted to 52/53, roughly. And/or the tail of the
triple front derailleur not clearing an incorrectly sized middle
ring. Dura Ace has this problem with the 42/39 middle rings

You simply have to choose the right front der. 52/42/30 use an Ultegra
or 105, 53/39/30 use a DuraAce front der. Different shapes.

JFTR, I use a DA triple crankset and an Ultegra FD without problems. But I
agree, if installing a new (or just different) front derailleur, then choose
the "right" one whenever possible.

Sorni

Same here, not DuraAce, but a 53/39/30 with a 105 front der. I have to
shift the front a half step up or down depending on where I am on the
back cassette to get rid of a little annoying chain rub in high/low.
Did not have this annoyance until I switched the middle ring from a 42
-> 39.

-n

Quoted message said:

Also, STI's rely upon ramps and pins for shifting. No ramps/or pins and
it takes a shift and a half up then a downshift to move up a ring.

Campagnolo chainrings have ramps and pins and cutouts, etc. to ease
shifting.

Quoted message said:

The BB for the Campag crank will be easier to find.

AFAIK -Alize Triple uses a 116mm symmetrical ISO taper axle for 31.8
and 34.9 tubes.
Would it be that big of a deal to use a 115mm campy AC-H on a 31.8
frame?

-n