|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Suprebe Pro crank
What is the recommended spindle length and taper for the old school
Suntour Superbe Pro crank? Thanks, J.P. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
What is the recommended spindle length and taper for the old school Suntour Superbe Pro crank? How old? The model that was available until the mid-nineties (with "Superbe Pro" printed along the crank) used a Suntour 109mm spindle as standard, according to the Sunotur catalogue. These are now scarce. A Campagnolo AC-H 111mm is a good modern alternative. I've also used a Shimano UN-72 107mm - the taper engagement isn't as good as with the Campag, but chainline is the same, and it's been reliable. A Campag Chorus or Record 102mm with a 3mm spacer under the fixed cup also works well. There may be better alternatives, but those are the ones I've tried. James Thomson |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
James Thomson wrote:
wrote: What is the recommended spindle length and taper for the old school Suntour Superbe Pro crank? How old? The model that was available until the mid-nineties (with "Superbe Pro" printed along the crank) used a Suntour 109mm spindle as standard, according to the Sunotur catalogue. These are now scarce. A Campagnolo AC-H 111mm is a good modern alternative. I've also used a Shimano UN-72 107mm - the taper engagement isn't as good as with the Campag, but chainline is the same, and it's been reliable. A Campag Chorus or Record 102mm with a 3mm spacer under the fixed cup also works well. There may be better alternatives, but those are the ones I've tried. James Thomson no, tim has it - campy is the way to go. i had this issue with a superbe pro crank about 4 weeks ago. the veloce bb is the right taper & length, shimano definitely not. and the incorrect taper on the shimano exacerbates the bb length problem. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"jim beam" wrote:
no, tim has it - campy is the way to go. i had this issue with a superbe pro crank about 4 weeks ago. the veloce bb is the right taper & length, The AC-H I recommended above (111mm) is equivalent to the Veloce model, but of better (Centaur) quality. Campagnolo doesn't sell a 113mm bottom bracket. shimano definitely not. "the taper engagement isn't as good as with the Campag" Nevertheless, it's been reliable for a great many miles now, and I'm in no hurry to replace it. and the incorrect taper on the shimano exacerbates the bb length problem. There is no length problem if the length (107mm) is chosen to account for the differing taper engagement. The third option (Chorus 102mm with a spacer) is my favourite for its very low Q, at the expense of a little asymmetry. Chainline is fine, and the taper is - of course - the same as the AC-H. James Thomson |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
James Thomson wrote:
"jim beam" wrote: no, tim has it - campy is the way to go. i had this issue with a superbe pro crank about 4 weeks ago. the veloce bb is the right taper & length, The AC-H I recommended above (111mm) is equivalent to the Veloce model, but of better (Centaur) quality. Campagnolo doesn't sell a 113mm bottom bracket. shimano definitely not. "the taper engagement isn't as good as with the Campag" Nevertheless, it's been reliable for a great many miles now, and I'm in no hurry to replace it. and the incorrect taper on the shimano exacerbates the bb length problem. There is no length problem if the length (107mm) is chosen to account for the differing taper engagement. well, that's what the shimano bb was on the track bike i was trying to fix had and chain line was about 7mm off, primarily because taper was such a bad fit. and that's an issue on a track bike. of all the different shimano bb's i've measured, the different spindle length affects the non-drive side only, not the drive side, so there's no chain line advantage with the 107 vs the 110 or 113. the superbe pro is a truly great crank so i'm not sure why you'd want to even think of risking ruining such a fine & irreplacable component by having it working loose & damaging the taper. The third option (Chorus 102mm with a spacer) is my favourite for its very low Q, at the expense of a little asymmetry. Chainline is fine, and the taper is - of course - the same as the AC-H. James Thomson why buy an over-short bb & then use a spacer? the veloce bb [same as the centaur] has /real/ buttery bearings - so no quality issues there. and i'd be really surprised is you'd get away with the 102. the 111 has minimal clearance between the crank root & the bb shell as it is. in addition, this crank already has very low bb/pedal eye relative displacement, so q's not much of an issue. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"jim beam" wrote:
There is no length problem if the length (107mm) is chosen to account for the differing taper engagement. well, that's what the shimano bb was on the track bike i was trying to fix had and chain line was about 7mm off, primarily because taper was such a bad fit. and that's an issue on a track bike. The taper issue accounts for roughly 2mm of chainline discrepancy. The remainder of your error must have come from another source. of all the different shimano bb's i've measured, the different spindle length affects the non-drive side only, not the drive side, so there's no chain line advantage with the 107 vs the 110 or 113. I don't have a 110 available to measure, but that's not true of the 113. the superbe pro is a truly great crank I agree - it's a jewel. so i'm not sure why you'd want to even think of risking ruining such a fine & irreplacable component by having it working loose & damaging the taper. First, it's not irreplaceable. There's still a considerable amount of old stock in the pipeline (especially in 172.5, the length I normally use) and I have two complete sets squirreled away. I bought my first Superbe Pro chainset NOS through the local classified ads paper, and kept it in reserve for a racing bike I was planning to build. An accident with a car obliged me to revise my plans and press it into service sooner than expected, and I ended up having to build a commuting bike from parts on a Sunday afternoon in order to get to work for my shift that evening. I found myself without a suitable bottom bracket, so I took the cranks to the only local bike shop that was open on a Sunday afternoon to buy a suitable BB. They only had Shimano bottom brackets in stock, and told me that a 115mm axle was the best choice. I quickly discovered I'd been misinformed. The axle was far too long, and it was obvious that the taper engagement was less than perfect. Nevertheless, I needed to get to work, the shop had shut for the day, and I was obliged to use the parts I had. The next day I pulled the cranks and bottom bracket, and made some measurements to determine the best replacement. I had no internet access, and no great faith in the advice of any of my local bike shops. I therefore decided to stay with the Shimano taper, and calculated that a 107mm axle would be the best length to use. Many years and many thousands of miles later, the cranks are fine. The taper engagement may not be perfect, but I wouldn't have any qualms about using this setup again if it were necessary. If I feared ruining the cranks, I would change the bottom bracket. I'll be sure to post if I ever do. The third option (Chorus 102mm with a spacer) is my favourite for its very low Q, at the expense of a little asymmetry. Chainline is fine, and the taper is - of course - the same as the AC-H. why buy an over-short bb & then use a spacer? "for its very low Q" In fact, I had the Chorus BB already, bought for use with a record chainset which I later sold. I like low-Q cranks. This combination gives a very low Q, and the chainline is fine. The slight asymmetry doesn't bother me. the veloce bb [same as the centaur] The dimensions were the same, but the Veloce group came with the AC-S (solid-spindled) unit. I note that Centaur now has a new BB. has /real/ buttery bearings - so no quality issues there. I have no criticisms of the AC-S, and it's very inexpensive. and i'd be really surprised is you'd get away with the 102. the 111 has minimal clearance between the crank root & the bb shell as it is. If you had the parts in front of you, there would be no surprise. There's plenty of clearance - in the 3 - 5 millimetre range. The AC-H and AC-S have a thick, flat flange face to both cups, while the Chorus and Record models are recessed. Some frames might have a clearance issue between the end of the crank and the left chainstay. Mine doesn't. in addition, this crank already has very low bb/pedal eye relative displacement, so q's not much of an issue. For me, less is more. I've never found a combination I felt was too narrow. I think calling this combination "my favourite" should have conveyed that this was a personal preference - but you don't seem to be reading particularly carefully. James Thomson |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
For an answer to this very long post. the last gen Superbe Pro needs a 110mm,
Campagnolo taper BB. The Centaur and on down work great. 102mm, Record and Chorus are not the right choice. Also the 'q factor' of all Campagnolo double cranks is the same regardless of BB length. Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302 (303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene" |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Qui si parla Campagnolo " wrote in message ... For an answer to this very long post. the last gen Superbe Pro needs a 110mm, Campagnolo taper BB. The Centaur and on down work great. 102mm, Record and Chorus are not the right choice. Also the 'q factor' of all Campagnolo double cranks is the same regardless of BB length. Does anyone know what is the Q factor of Campy cranks? Q factor being the distance between the pedals at the *outside* of the cranks. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 | Mike Iglesias | General | 4 | October 29th 04 07:11 AM |
New bicycle idea | Bob Marley | General | 49 | October 7th 04 05:20 AM |
Splined hub and crank maintainence | gerblefranklin | Unicycling | 14 | April 16th 04 12:32 AM |
Adjustable crank idea | onewheeldave | Unicycling | 93 | February 13th 04 10:34 PM |
Nut dents crank? | Klaas Bil | Unicycling | 11 | January 16th 04 07:53 AM |