Need 39t ring for old campy crank

I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

tnx

chuck

cciaffone wrote:
I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

tnx

chuck

Chuck,

As an old Campy rider myself, I can say that 42 was "officially" the
smallest ring you could get. However, I know that at least one maker
produced a 41 that would also fit. Getting a 39 is out of the question
due to the crank spider's 144mm bolt circle (see
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_bo-z.html#bcd).

To achieve your ends, I have had to move to newer cranks. This isn't
necessarily a bad thing since those old cranks can and definitely do
break (see http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-009/000.html). I have the
pedal eye snap off the arm at an inopportune time (isn't that always the
case) causing a crash on a short but sharp uphill I was charging at.

If you want to keep that retro look and some of the other
characteristics of those old cranks, see the Velo Orange website at
http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/components/cranksets/cranks.html.
While it is a track crank, this new Phil Wood crank (see
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/08/bikes-and-tech/eurobike-day-one-the-big-brands-can-wait_190644/attachment/phils-crank)
does use the same BCD as your current crank. But I doubt they will make
a road double model.

In article ,
cciaffone wrote:

I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

tnx

Will not fit.
Easiest is to replace with a triple and keep the corncob.
Probably will need to replace the front changer, but maybe not.

--
Michael Press

Well thanks for all the help. Not what I really
wanted to hear, but ... the alternative is to
get fit again, I guess. Kinda scary to get old.

chuck

Michael Press wrote:
In article ,
cciaffone wrote:

I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

tnx

Will not fit.
Easiest is to replace with a triple and keep the corncob.
Probably will need to replace the front changer, but maybe not.


I would strongly urge you to NOT go with a triple. It is by far not the
easiest or most cost effective way to get lower gearing or a wider range.

Going from double to triple, assuming you have a full old-style Campy
setup, will likely require (a) new crank, (b) new BB, (c) new FD, (d)
new RD, (e) new chain.

Better to consider compact gearing which employs smaller chain rings on
a new crank - typically with 110mm BCD (since your existing crank will
not support this). In this case, the most you will have to do after
swapping cranks is lower your FD (if clamp on, this is easy but can
usually be accomplished with a braze-on - if not, I have a "fix") and
cut a couple links from your existing chain.

With compact gearing, you can get very close to the same gear ratio
ranges as one would expect from a road triple plus you retain the
snappier shifting and lower weight that is often lost with triple cranks
and FD.

Spend a few minutes with any gear chart or calculator and you can see
for yourself. If you still need shorter gears, you might be able to add
a slightly larger cogset on the back. depending on the cogs involved and
your RD make/model, you may have to consider a new RD. But many old
Campy RD can support up to 26 or 28 teeth back there.

On Sep 1, 11:13*am, David White wrote:
Michael Press wrote:
In article ,
*cciaffone wrote:

I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

tnx

Will not fit.
Easiest is to replace with a triple and keep the corncob.
Probably will need to replace the front changer, but maybe not.




Lot of false statements in this post.


I would strongly urge you to NOT go with a triple. It is by far not the
easiest or most cost effective way to get lower gearing or a wider range.

A triple is the easist. New crank and bottom bracket and you have
very low gears and a wide range. Compact cranks do not get you much
lower gears. Assuming the normal change from a 39 ring to a 34 gets
you about 13% lower gears. Not much really. With a triple you can go
from a 39 or 42 to a 30 inner chainring. But of course anyone with a
brain replaces the 30 tooth inner ring with a 24 tooth ring to get
rreal low gears. From a 39 or 42 to a 24 and you get very low gears.




Going from double to triple, assuming you have a full old-style Campy
setup, will likely require (a) new crank, (b) new BB, (c) new FD, (d)
new RD, (e) new chain.


Yes new crank and bottom bracket. Although I would likely try the new
square taper triple crank on the old bottom bracket and see if it
clears the chainstays. If so then no need for a new bottom bracket.
No new front derailleur required. Double front derailleurs shift
triples just fine. I had a Sora double shifting a 45-42-20 triple
crankset. No new rear derailleur required. A short cage rear
derailleur will wrap enough chain to use all but the small ring and
small cogs. You don't use those cogs anyway so no need to worry about
them. And having the chain hang loose on the bottom does not cause
any harm anyway. New chain? Your old crank is 53 big ring. Triple
is 53 big ring. Same cassette. Why would you need a new chain? Do
you own stock in a bicycle chain manufacturing company and want
everyone to replace their chain every week?




Better to consider compact gearing which employs smaller chain rings on
a new crank - typically with 110mm BCD (since your existing crank will
not support this). In this case, the most you will have to do after
swapping cranks is lower your FD (if clamp on, this is easy but can
usually be accomplished with a braze-on - if not, I have a "fix") and
cut a couple links from your existing chain.

With compact gearing, you can get very close to the same gear ratio
ranges as one would expect from a road triple plus you retain the
snappier shifting and lower weight that is often lost with triple cranks
and FD.


No. Compact cranks don't provide anywhere near as low a gear as a
triple. Triple cranks can accept a 24 tooth inner chainring, 74mm
bcd. Compact cranks with 110mm bcd can accept a 33 ring. Big
difference between 24 and 33. Snappier chifting? My triple bike
shifts between the 52 and 42 rings as nicely as my double bikes shift
between chainrings. Of course I use Campagnolo shifters on that
bike. But even my touring bike with 44-33-20 rings shifts between the
outer and middle rings just fine. It uses 5700 shifters.





Spend a few minutes with any gear chart or calculator and you can see
for yourself. If you still need shorter gears, you might be able to add
a slightly larger cogset on the back. depending on the cogs involved and
your RD make/model, you may have to consider a new RD. But many old
Campy RD can support up to 26 or 28 teeth back there.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

cciaffone wrote:
I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.
Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.
Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??
What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

Revised series Nuovo Record (post-1968) are 144mm making 42t
the designed minimum. There were 41t made but some runs of
that crank may need a touch with a file on the crank web
between rings if the chain links hit. (42 to 41 is a tad
past two percent change, i.e., not much)

[1060~1968 original Record were 151mm, hence 44t low]

Modern (post-1986) Campagnolo road sets are 135mm with a 39
low. Square taper format start about $95, UT format about $190

Modern compacts are mostly 110mm with a 34t low (34-48,
34-50 etc) Start about $50, Campagnolo from $149.


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

wrote:
On Sep 1, 11:13 am, David White wrote:
Michael Press wrote:
In article ,
cciaffone wrote:
I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.
Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.
Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??
What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???
tnx
Will not fit.
Easiest is to replace with a triple and keep the corncob.
Probably will need to replace the front changer, but maybe not.




Lot of false statements in this post.

I would strongly urge you to NOT go with a triple. It is by far not the
easiest or most cost effective way to get lower gearing or a wider range.

A triple is the easist. New crank and bottom bracket and you have
very low gears and a wide range. Compact cranks do not get you much
lower gears. Assuming the normal change from a 39 ring to a 34 gets
you about 13% lower gears. Not much really. With a triple you can go
from a 39 or 42 to a 30 inner chainring. But of course anyone with a
brain replaces the 30 tooth inner ring with a 24 tooth ring to get
rreal low gears. From a 39 or 42 to a 24 and you get very low gears.



Going from double to triple, assuming you have a full old-style Campy
setup, will likely require (a) new crank, (b) new BB, (c) new FD, (d)
new RD, (e) new chain.


Yes new crank and bottom bracket. Although I would likely try the new
square taper triple crank on the old bottom bracket and see if it
clears the chainstays. If so then no need for a new bottom bracket.
No new front derailleur required. Double front derailleurs shift
triples just fine. I had a Sora double shifting a 45-42-20 triple
crankset. No new rear derailleur required. A short cage rear
derailleur will wrap enough chain to use all but the small ring and
small cogs. You don't use those cogs anyway so no need to worry about
them. And having the chain hang loose on the bottom does not cause
any harm anyway. New chain? Your old crank is 53 big ring. Triple
is 53 big ring. Same cassette. Why would you need a new chain? Do
you own stock in a bicycle chain manufacturing company and want
everyone to replace their chain every week?



Better to consider compact gearing which employs smaller chain rings on
a new crank - typically with 110mm BCD (since your existing crank will
not support this). In this case, the most you will have to do after
swapping cranks is lower your FD (if clamp on, this is easy but can
usually be accomplished with a braze-on - if not, I have a "fix") and
cut a couple links from your existing chain.

With compact gearing, you can get very close to the same gear ratio
ranges as one would expect from a road triple plus you retain the
snappier shifting and lower weight that is often lost with triple cranks
and FD.


No. Compact cranks don't provide anywhere near as low a gear as a
triple. Triple cranks can accept a 24 tooth inner chainring, 74mm
bcd. Compact cranks with 110mm bcd can accept a 33 ring. Big
difference between 24 and 33. Snappier chifting? My triple bike
shifts between the 52 and 42 rings as nicely as my double bikes shift
between chainrings. Of course I use Campagnolo shifters on that
bike. But even my touring bike with 44-33-20 rings shifts between the
outer and middle rings just fine. It uses 5700 shifters.




Spend a few minutes with any gear chart or calculator and you can see
for yourself. If you still need shorter gears, you might be able to add
a slightly larger cogset on the back. depending on the cogs involved and
your RD make/model, you may have to consider a new RD. But many old
Campy RD can support up to 26 or 28 teeth back there.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I don't want to get in a ****ing match with you or anyone else.

But the O.P. has a 42 tooth and asked for a 39. Now you are simply
assuming that he wants ratios available with a 20 tooth and suggest a
triple crank.

You don't seem to understand that not everyone would agree with you when
you say "And having the chain hang loose on the bottom does not cause
any harm anyway." Well I, for sure, wouldn't want that. A chain that
loose, if backpedaled, would likely chip paint on my chainstays. And if
I had a carbon bike (which I doubt the O.P. does) it would damage the
carbon on the chainstays thereby wrecking the frame (a weakness of
carbon frames but that is another story).

Your claim "You don't use those cogs anyway so no need to worry about
them" seems strange. How do you know what cogs the O.P. will want to use
any more than I.

Finally, you start your response by saying "A triple is the easist"
(your spelling). But you don't indicate how changing a BB and crank (at
the barest minimum) is easier that simply swapping a crank. Changing
cranks is certainly easier (less time, fewer special tools required,
less adjustments) than changing both crank and BB (again, at minimum).
Having personally done a change from old double Campy to a triple for a
trip to Italy with some bigger climbs than usual for me and deciding
after the trip that the result was less than stellar, I then read what
many others who are much smarter and more experienced than I about
compact cranks (see
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=907&bih=571&q=%2Bbenefi ts+%2Bcompact+%2Bcranks&btnG=Google+Search).
These folks include Tom Ritchey, Grant Peterson, and many others.

I am not saying that triples are crap or anything of the sort. I am
simply saying that compact gearing seems the easiest and cheapest method
for the O.P. to achieve achieve a gear range close to your suggestion of
a triple. Even easier would be to install a modern road double crank
with a 53/39 to achieve the small ring size the O.P. requested.

On Sep 1, 3:45*pm, cciaffone wrote:
I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

No, 42 teeth is basically it. Now many of the rear derailleurs were
advertised as capable of using a 28 tooth rear sprocket with a 1"
derailleur hanger and and 10 tooth difference in the front. You will
find however that more can be squeezed out of them particularly if you
have a smaller difference in ring size. The racing freewheels of
Regina went to 31 (or32) and Maillard to 32. If you want lower
gearing than these can accomplish then a longer gear hanger is usually
appropriate for reaching to a 36 or 40 (if you can source it) rear
sprocket.
Stretching the rear derailleur capacity with a big sprocket will
result in real gear changes unlike changing from 42 to 39 ring.


What inner rings might fit an old NR,
A 144mm BCD Nouvo Record can be fitted with a fabled 41 tooth up to
whatever clears your chainstay.

Sugino???

I'd take a guess that's the same BCD of 144mm and also limited to the
generally available 42 teeth and bigger.


tnx

chuck

On Sep 1, 9:45*am, cciaffone wrote:
I really need to gear down my old road bike to
suit my advanced years and weakened quads.

Currently riding an old 70's Campy NR crank
with 53-43 rings. Would love to change the 42
to a 39.

Will a 39 t ring fit the crank??

What inner rings might fit an old NR,
Sugino???

What is your layout on the freewheel on this bike? Assuming you're at
maximum there too, what about more modern components, if you're going
to make a change anyhow?

(possibly superfluous discussion follows):
FWIW, I have a "contemporary" (more or less) Campy triple setup on a
nice old steel Tommasini with horizontal dropouts. It works great; you
can't "powershift" onto the inner ring but otherwise the shifting is
very much on a par with the Campy double setups I have on the other
two bikes in "the fleet". I'm talking Record/Centaur brifters
(handlebar shifters) and a mix of Record/Chorus/Centaur/Veloce
components on the various bikes.

A triple works for me partly because I had a Campy triple back in the
late 70's-early 80's, which I used for touring (camping but not
"survival level") in the Rockies. You keep your normal "road gears"
and get a low (even with a 36t inner ring as on the N. Record triple
crankset). With the 30t inner ring on the Veloce triple, the low is
low enough to keep a road-ratio cassette (which is not a "corncob"),
something like a 13-23 as I have, so you have closely spaced gears and
a low range added.

Hey, I never "got over" the 42 inner (or middle) chainring. Climbing
on the 42 and off the 39 was like coming home g. Evidently, I'm not
much of a Compact candidate, although again FWIW, some older riders I
know of "went compact" and love it, while others came back in
something of a hurry. No telling who will like what, there. I just
wanted to testify in behalf of the modern triple, as a user.

Brifters? No culture shock there. Better shifting (by far), better
braking, which is much easier on the old fingers, like power-assist
auto brakes compared to the old Nuovo Record stuff and again, the
newer gear works just fine on fine old bicycle frames with horizontal
dropouts.

Um, "getting back in shape" might be an option but let's just say I
too broke a Nuovo Record crank at the usual/required "bad
moment" (with a safe landing, fortunately) and my "old stuff" or at
least the old old stuff, has been retired.
--D-y