New cranks - square taper?

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about
my collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit
anything with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

I hear good quality people are still choosing square taper bottom brackets.

Besides, a large percentage of bikes use square taper, namely almost all
hybrids, almost all MTBs under $600, almost all road bikes under $800.
That's a fair chunk of bikeage.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

Lots of us... lots!

Quoted message said:

I hear good quality people are still choosing square taper bottom brackets.

Besides, a large percentage of bikes use square taper, namely almost all
hybrids, almost all MTBs under $600, almost all road bikes under $800.
That's a fair chunk of bikeage.

And ALL Campy bikes, which should be more than enough to convince
anyone that square taper bottom bracket spindles work. Just not for
Chalo.

I'd wager more people have trashed splined cranks due to problems with
the spindle interface than square taper cranks (on a percentage basis,
of course... the square taper cranks have been around "a little
longer"😉.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

My Bike Friday is older and splined cranks were not an option, but the
square taper spindle it came with hasn't caused any problems. And mine
is one without the usual internal hub gear with the result that I use a
rather large front chainring (60t) which won't pack right in the
suitcase unless I pull the cranks. So my cranks have gone on and off
far more often than normal. (Hope I haven't jinxed things now since I'm
planning to pedal it to Yosemite later this month if the rains stop
coming down for awhile.)

Frank Krygowski said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on components.

Quoted message said:

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

That's because he doesn't understand what makes cranks fail in that
mode, having not read about it here or in the FAQ:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/installing-cranks.html

Quoted message said:

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with
heavy touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's
page about failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and
I've read other accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12%
more rigidity" or whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm
very conscious about my collection of tools, knowledge and used
cranks that won't fit anything with splines.

So? What are you worried about? Just because some salesman says
something like that shouldn't deter you from listening to your
experience.

Quoted message said:

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

They have the same problem.

Quoted message said:

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

They are hard to find. I am looking for DuraAce spindles and cannot
find any. I use 70mm but would settle for 68mm if that could be
found. I can always get the BB faced off to be 68mm wide. I won't
settle for less than DuraAce because I have had torsion failures with
other brands.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my
collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

I did. Like you, I've never had a problem with square tapers so I see
no reason to try anything else.

Greg

--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

maybe, but you'll probably have saved enough on not having to change
rusted out bottombrackets by then.

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

[email hidden] wrote:

<snipped>

Quoted message said:

I am looking for DuraAce spindles and cannot
find any. I use 70mm but would settle for 68mm if that could be
found. I can always get the BB faced off to be 68mm wide. I won't
settle for less than DuraAce because I have had torsion failures with
other brands.

You may already be aware of this: Loose Screws lists *complete* DA 7402
c&c BBs in Italian (70x112mm). $75, a bit dear if all you want is the
spindle, but there it is.

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

The guy is clueless about current spline BB/cranks, ISIS and Octalink.
Lemme guess, it is harder for him to find square taper crank/BB...lazy-

Quoted message said:

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my
collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

We spec most with Campag, some with TA, a few with NOS shimano XT for
touring-all square taper.

Quoted message said:

- Frank Krygowski

Quoted message said:

They are hard to find. I am looking for DuraAce spindles and cannot
find any. I use 70mm but would settle for 68mm if that could be
found. I can always get the BB faced off to be 68mm wide. I won't
settle for less than DuraAce because I have had torsion failures with
other brands.

Jobst Brandt

103mm or 113mm? TA and now SKF have both BBs...plus I think I can still
get DA 7410 from EuroAsia...email if ya like.

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my
collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

- Frank Krygowski

My new Litespeed being built up will have square taper Race Face
Turbine LP cranks. 94mm bcd so it can take down to a 30 tooth inner
chainring. And up to a 50 tooth outer ring. Cranks were bought NOS of
course. Sort of cheap, $100. Square taper bottom brackets come in
almost all lengths so you can use a triple crank as a double. Its much
harder or impossible to do this with the integrated and splined cranks.
Although with ISIS they do come in 108, 113, and a few other lengths.
If you are getting on the double compact crankset band wagon craze to
be cool, you have to settle for 110 mm bcd if you want integrated
cranks or the splined ones.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my
collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

- Frank Krygowski

My new Litespeed being built up will have square taper Race Face
Turbine LP cranks.

On my Soma I went with the Sugino 500 XD2 34-48 cranks with an IRD BB.

Greg
--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons

frkrygow said:

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

Everyone who chooses Campagnolo, unless they've gone hollow too in the
last year or so.

There's no reason not to stick with square taper, and there will be plenty
of square taper cranks and BBs available for years to come.

Matt O.

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

He'll certainly make a better profit that way, but neither Octalink
nor ISIS has a demonstrably better record than square taper for
overall durability. Look at the reputation of the Campagnolo line for
evidence of how troublesome square taper is when executed properly.

Quoted message said:

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my
collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

One can always argue about things that one does not do; this is
Usenet, after all.

Quoted message said:

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

Ummmm...anyone who uses Campy, for a start?
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

peter said:

My Bike Friday is older and splined cranks were not an option, but the
square taper spindle it came with hasn't caused any problems. And mine
is one without the usual internal hub gear with the result that I use a
rather large front chainring (60t) which won't pack right in the
suitcase unless I pull the cranks. So my cranks have gone on and off
far more often than normal. (Hope I haven't jinxed things now since I'm
planning to pedal it to Yosemite later this month if the rains stop
coming down for awhile.)

Most of us aren't big enough, nor do we ride enough miles,
to have problems with square taper spindles. It's not removing and
replacing cranks that causes spindle breakage, but metal fatigue.

Matt O.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets
on new, good quality bikes these days?

They are hard to find. I am looking for DuraAce spindles and
cannot find any. I use 70mm but would settle for 68mm if that
could be found. I can always get the BB faced off to be 68mm
wide. I won't settle for less than DuraAce because I have had
torsion failures with other brands.

You might be interested in the new SKF ones going life recently:

Original German:
http://www.skf.com/portal/skf/home/products?contentId=191552&lang=de

English version:
http://www.skf.com/portal/skf/home/products?contentId=191006&lang=en

--
MfG/Best regards
helmut springer

G.T. said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.

The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.

Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my
collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
with splines.

Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
tapers? ;-)

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

- Frank Krygowski

My new Litespeed being built up will have square taper Race Face
Turbine LP cranks.

On my Soma I went with the Sugino 500 XD2 34-48 cranks with an IRD BB.

This illustrates the problem with 110mm bcd cranks used as a double.
34 tooth inner chainring is the lowest commonly available chainring it
will accept. TA does make a 33 tooth 110 mm bcd ring for about $50+
from the US dealers. Very pricey.

If you are going for a compact crankset to get low gears, get a
crankset that can accept small chainrings. Don't settle for a half
[censored] solution of the 110mm bcd cranks that are popular now.

Quoted message said:

Greg
--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

G.T. said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

>I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend
>toward being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.
>
>The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
>bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the
>crank arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.
>
>Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've
>ridden many, many thousands of miles with square tapers,
>including with heavy touring loads, and had zero problems. I've
>seen Sheldon's page about failures of (at least) early ISIS
>splined cranks, and I've read other accounts. I'm not a weight
>weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or whatever won't get me
>home any faster. And I'm very conscious about my collection of
>tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything with
>splines.
>
>Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing
>the tapers? ;-)
>
>Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets
>on new, good quality bikes these days?
>
>- Frank Krygowski

My new Litespeed being built up will have square taper Race Face
Turbine LP cranks.

On my Soma I went with the Sugino 500 XD2 34-48 cranks with an IRD
BB.

This illustrates the problem with 110mm bcd cranks used as a double.
34 tooth inner chainring is the lowest commonly available chainring
it will accept. TA does make a 33 tooth 110 mm bcd ring for about
$50+ from the US dealers. Very pricey.

If you are going for a compact crankset to get low gears, get a
crankset that can accept small chainrings. Don't settle for a half
[censored] solution of the 110mm bcd cranks that are popular now.

Why does that "illustrate a problem?" I use a 46 x 34 110 mm BCD on my
brevet bike and it's perfect. 95% of my riding can be done conveniently
in the big ring with an 11-28 cassette, with the small ring only being
needed for climbing steep grades. Nothing monobuttocked about it,
indeed for my purposes far less single-cheeked than the standard 53 x 39
road crank.

I don't need anything lower than the 34 x 28 which will get me up 20%
grades. I could probably use an 11-25 or 12-25 cassette just as easily;
it might even be a better choice but until the 11-28 wears out...

How many people need a 24 x 28 bottom gear, except maybe mountain
bikers? Most of them are already using cranks with smaller BCDs than
110/74.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

G.T. said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

>I'm bike shopping, this time for a Bike Friday. These tend toward
>being custom built, with lots of latitude on componentry.
>
>The sales guy discouraged from specifying a square taper bottom
>bracket, saying they fret at the interface, they can split the crank
>arm, etc., and that I should go with a splined crank.
>
>Of course, this runs contrary to my retro-grouchness. I've ridden
>many, many thousands of miles with square tapers, including with heavy
>touring loads, and had zero problems. I've seen Sheldon's page about
>failures of (at least) early ISIS splined cranks, and I've read other
>accounts. I'm not a weight weenie, and I know "12% more rigidity" or
>whatever won't get me home any faster. And I'm very conscious about

my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>collection of tools, knowledge and used cranks that won't fit anything
>with splines.
>
>Besides, if I use a spline setup, how can I argue about greasing the
>tapers? ;-)
>
>Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
>new, good quality bikes these days?
>
>- Frank Krygowski

My new Litespeed being built up will have square taper Race Face
Turbine LP cranks.

On my Soma I went with the Sugino 500 XD2 34-48 cranks with an IRD BB.

This illustrates the problem with 110mm bcd cranks used as a double.
34 tooth inner chainring is the lowest commonly available chainring it
will accept. TA does make a 33 tooth 110 mm bcd ring for about $50+
from the US dealers. Very pricey.

If you are going for a compact crankset to get low gears, get a
crankset that can accept small chainrings. Don't settle for a half
[censored] solution of the 110mm bcd cranks that are popular now.

Why? 34 is what I chose, not the bcd.

Greg

Quoted message said:

Frank Krygowski writes:

[snippage]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyway, how many people are choosing square taper bottom brackets on
new, good quality bikes these days?

They are hard to find. I am looking for DuraAce spindles and cannot
find any. I use 70mm but would settle for 68mm if that could be
found. I can always get the BB faced off to be 68mm wide. I won't
settle for less than DuraAce because I have had torsion failures with
other brands.

This is indeed a problem for cyclists who don't feel the need to use
only the so-called "latest and greatest": it quickly becomes hard to
find replacements for our older parts.

When we see our favorite bits getting "obsoleted" by the marketing
department, that's the signal to run out and buy a bunch (of the older
parts) quick. Sadly, I've missed the signal a bunch of times. Ebay
helps a lot, but not entirely.

Mark