Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Campy cranks

Started by scituatejohn · · Last activity · 12 posts · 1,913 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
19 November 2003
Last activity
23 November 2003
Original author
scituatejohn
Posts
12
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,913
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–12 of 12
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I noticed that the Campy cranks are still using the tapered bottom brackets. I wonder why they don't come up with their own splined interface, or use the ISIS? Is this an important consideration when selecting which group to use?

  2. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by scituatejohn
    I noticed that the Campy cranks are still using the tapered bottom brackets. I wonder why they don't come up with their own splined interface, or use the ISIS? Is this an important consideration when selecting which group to use?

    Because the whole splined thing is a worthless gimmick of planned marketing obsolescence. No human can develop enough torque to strip a PROPERLY seated, interference fit, four sided spindle. Campy knows this!

  3. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by scituatejohn
    Is this an important consideration when selecting which group to use?

    No, and the others are not without their flaws.

  4. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by DesertRider
    Because the whole splined thing is a worthless gimmick of planned marketing obsolescence. No human can develop enough torque to strip a PROPERLY seated, interference fit, four sided spindle. Campy knows this!

    I know the old standby solid taper axle works fine, but aren't the hollow splined cranks more about weight savings on the axle and crank arms? To properly seat that interference fit requires a lot of meat on the crank arm. Predict Campy will get on the bandwagon soon, and when they do, hope they move to the ISIS open standard rather than invent their own.

    Dan

  5. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by scituatejohn
    I noticed that the Campy cranks are still using the tapered bottom brackets. I wonder why they don't come up with their own splined interface, or use the ISIS? Is this an important consideration when selecting which group to use?

    John: You could always use a Campy group with an ISIS bottom bracket and an FSA crankset.....just like Cinelli is doing on their built bikes currently.

    Dan

  6. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by dhk
    John: You could always use a Campy group with an ISIS bottom bracket and an FSA crankset.....just like Cinelli is doing on their built bikes currently.

    Dan

    you can also stick a DA crank on an otherwise campy ride. :eek:

  7. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by boudreaux
    you can also stick a DA crank on an otherwise campy ride. :eek:

    SACRILEGE!:eek:

  8. I ride Campy Record and switched my 8/9-speed Record crankset and BB for an FSA carbon setup with matching BB. I could feel the increased stiffness when I stomp. However, I now have to grease my splines and tighten the crank bolts every 2 weeks or so to eliminate the creaking noise - I never had to do that with the tapered BB. I wish I had sprung for the Campy carbon crankset, but the FSA was about 1/3 the cost. Live and learn.

  9. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by Davefromaine
    I ride Campy Record and switched my 8/9-speed Record crankset and BB for an FSA carbon setup with matching BB. I could feel the increased stiffness when I stomp. However, I now have to grease my splines and tighten the crank bolts every 2 weeks or so to eliminate the creaking noise - I never had to do that with the tapered BB. I wish I had sprung for the Campy carbon crankset, but the FSA was about 1/3 the cost. Live and learn.

    Anyone else have the problem with creaking noises? Clive @ glorycycles.com is helping me build up a new bike, and we're debating the upgrade to FSA Pro Team crankset and bottom bracket. Everything I've read about the FSA carbon crankset has been very positive, even if it is overkill.

    Jurgen

  10. The good old for sided BB shaft has worked for years and Campagnolo know that there has never been a need to change this. Shimano gimmickery is often unreliable and inaccurate. And more splines means more chance of getting the cranks misaligned when you put them on.

  11. I like splined shafts. Not too long after they came out, I picked up a RaceFace Next crankset for my MTB dirt cheap, because it had the old square spindle.

    Darned if I could tell any performance difference, but the financial difference was substantial...

  12. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by turbo6bar
    Anyone else have the problem with creaking noises? Clive @ glorycycles.com is helping me build up a new bike, and we're debating the upgrade to FSA Pro Team crankset and bottom bracket. Everything I've read about the FSA carbon crankset has been very positive, even if it is overkill.

    Jurgen

    Have only heard positive from my builder here as well. Cinelli is using FSA, both the Energy AL and the Carbon cranks with ISIS instead of Campy. I'm don't think they would have switched if they experienced creakiing problems.

    The standard Carbon and Energy cranks also look like good values at the OEM prices. I first selected the Energy crank, but then moved to the Pro Team mostly for looks.

    Dan

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.