Re: Ta & Stronlight triples - just longer bolts ?

[Phil Brown]

>When they made up triples for the cranks like the Stronglight 93
>and TA's of the same era, did they just use longer bolts and
>an extra spacer ? Or was the crank arm actually different with
>some extra support for the inner chainwheel ?

Just longer bolts and, of course, some spacers..
Phil Brown

[Phil Brown]

>When they made up triples for the cranks like the Stronglight 93
>and TA's of the same era, did they just use longer bolts and
>an extra spacer ? Or was the crank arm actually different with
>some extra support for the inner chainwheel ?

Just longer bolts and, of course, some spacers..
Phil Brown

[John Thompson]

On 2004-10-12, Retro Bob > wrote:

> When they made up triples for the cranks like the Stronglight 93
> and TA's of the same era, did they just use longer bolts and
> an extra spacer ? Or was the crank arm actually different with
> some extra support for the inner chainwheel ?

Looking at the TA Cyclotouriste and Stronglight 99 cranks I have here,
it's just longer bolts.

--

-John )

[John Thompson]

On 2004-10-12, Retro Bob > wrote:

> When they made up triples for the cranks like the Stronglight 93
> and TA's of the same era, did they just use longer bolts and
> an extra spacer ? Or was the crank arm actually different with
> some extra support for the inner chainwheel ?

Looking at the TA Cyclotouriste and Stronglight 99 cranks I have here,
it's just longer bolts.

--

-John )

[Donald Gillies]

Retro Bob > writes:

>When they made up triples for the cranks like the Stronglight 93
>and TA's of the same era, did they just use longer bolts and
>an extra spacer ? Or was the crank arm actually different with
>some extra support for the inner chainwheel ?

Yes. No.

I hope this answers your question.

- Don "owns a stronglight 93 triple" Gillies
San Diego, CA

[Donald Gillies]

Retro Bob > writes:

>When they made up triples for the cranks like the Stronglight 93
>and TA's of the same era, did they just use longer bolts and
>an extra spacer ? Or was the crank arm actually different with
>some extra support for the inner chainwheel ?

Yes. No.

I hope this answers your question.

- Don "owns a stronglight 93 triple" Gillies
San Diego, CA

[Donald Gillies]

Retro Bob > writes:

>On 12 Oct 2004 14:52:51 GMT, (Phil Brown)
>wrote:

>>
>>Just longer bolts and, of course, some spacers..
>>Phil Brown

>I assume that they typically used a longer crank axle when going
>triple to move the crank out to the right a bit on these ? Or since
>you use the small with the leftmost rear cogs typically was it just
>allowed to come more to the inside ?

Standard stronglight bottom bracket spindle is an eye-popping 118 mm
wide, which is roughly equivalent to a Campy Triple. If you have a
post-1972 stronglight 93 crankset with a chain protector, you can just
throw away the chain protector (mail it to 4448 cather ave, san diego,
ca, 92122, for proper disposal), shift all the rings outwards, and install a
small chainring in the innermost position.

- Don Gillies
4448 Cather Ave
San Diego, CA 92122

[Donald Gillies]

Retro Bob > writes:

>On 12 Oct 2004 14:52:51 GMT, (Phil Brown)
>wrote:

>>
>>Just longer bolts and, of course, some spacers..
>>Phil Brown

>I assume that they typically used a longer crank axle when going
>triple to move the crank out to the right a bit on these ? Or since
>you use the small with the leftmost rear cogs typically was it just
>allowed to come more to the inside ?

Standard stronglight bottom bracket spindle is an eye-popping 118 mm
wide, which is roughly equivalent to a Campy Triple. If you have a
post-1972 stronglight 93 crankset with a chain protector, you can just
throw away the chain protector (mail it to 4448 cather ave, san diego,
ca, 92122, for proper disposal), shift all the rings outwards, and install a
small chainring in the innermost position.

- Don Gillies
4448 Cather Ave
San Diego, CA 92122

[gwhite]

Retro Bob wrote:
>
> On 12 Oct 2004 14:52:51 GMT, (Phil Brown)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Just longer bolts and, of course, some spacers..
> >Phil Brown
>
> No kidding ? It looked like that to me but I thought that I must
> be missing something.


The sleeved nuts are longer too. They seem to be more uncommon than long bolts,
since long bolts are common for granny gears (on other cranks) that bolt
directly to the crank.


> I assume that they typically used a longer crank axle when going
> triple to move the crank out to the right a bit on these ? Or since
> you use the small with the leftmost rear cogs typically was it just
> allowed to come more to the inside ?


I have an 86 BCD Sakae, and it can be run as a single, double, or triple.
Obviously the right crank will likely need to be moved outwards when going (for
example) from a double to a triple. This relocation is traditionally done by
applying a different spindle.

[gwhite]

Retro Bob wrote:
>
> On 12 Oct 2004 14:52:51 GMT, (Phil Brown)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Just longer bolts and, of course, some spacers..
> >Phil Brown
>
> No kidding ? It looked like that to me but I thought that I must
> be missing something.


The sleeved nuts are longer too. They seem to be more uncommon than long bolts,
since long bolts are common for granny gears (on other cranks) that bolt
directly to the crank.


> I assume that they typically used a longer crank axle when going
> triple to move the crank out to the right a bit on these ? Or since
> you use the small with the leftmost rear cogs typically was it just
> allowed to come more to the inside ?


I have an 86 BCD Sakae, and it can be run as a single, double, or triple.
Obviously the right crank will likely need to be moved outwards when going (for
example) from a double to a triple. This relocation is traditionally done by
applying a different spindle.