BB7700 is very hard to get these days in English thread. Most/all are Italian threading... Learned that the hard way..

Thanks Dalai... I figured they would be fine, but hadn't tried them on boards myself.

I have used Vittoria Pista's on boards and they are brilliant!

JMR

I have Pista Evo CL's on my double discs. I personally can't feel the difference and find the Vittoria Corsa Evo CX's a great compromise as they wear really well on concrete. I'm pretty sure I am on the same rear tyre on the old Zipp disc now for a couple of years...

Octalink
 

You can also use the Ultegra or 105 Octalink BB.

http://techdocs.shimano.com/media/te...9830608710.pdf

Ultegras work very well and don't have the susceptibility to side-loading issues that needle-bearing'd DAs do.

That said, the Ultegras are also getting trickier to find.

What are your collective thoughts on FSA chainrings? I think I've asked this before and the general consensus was they were "fine" at what point are they "not good enough"?

There are 3 qualities that you want in a chainring (in order of importance)

- Round
- Strong
- Lightweight

It must be Round and Strong to be good enough. A Round but weak chainring is unacceptable (it will become un-round after a while). A non-round but strong chainring is unacceptable.

When you add lightweight, that is even better...and maufacturers know this and charge you more.

Compare the FSA Pro chainrings with the Sugino ZEN. Both are very round and very strong and feature a solid disc style for strength.

http://www.bikepartsplace.com/images/med/31712504.jpg
http://businesscycles.com/graphics/zen_heads2.jpg

The Zen has material carefully removed from the back side to add the "lightweight" component. This process costs more to do.

http://www.marctreble.com/wp-content...5-1024x682.jpg

Compare that to the rear of the solid FSA:
http://static.lfgss.com/attachments/...670-d569_1.jpg


So, Round and Strong are good enough. Lightweight is a bonus.

There are other great chainring options out there. I just used those two as examples that look and function very similarly but one is double the cost of the other.

When you have the watts of Theo Bos, and are at the level of a world championship final.

*nevermind, Theo used FSA rings for at least one of his championships.... so, there you are.

Other rings are rounder, lighter, and better looking - but you'll never actually "need" better.
Tela Crane (current US Sprint champ) uses them by the bag full, you'll be fine unless you "want" to spend more.

I've seen FSA chainrings at World Cup and other similar events for sure. Think of them as one would the Nitto B123/125 sprint bars: strong, stiff, reliable, and bullet proof, and definitely good enough. Spend extra money for weight savings (Easton EC90 or 3T Scatto).

For any racer that is buying his own gear, FSA should definitely be an option (just like B-123/125 should be an option for a sprinter on a budget). Buying a full kit of chainrings is EXPENSIVE. A full kit would be 45-51t (give or take). A normal kit would be 47-50t.

Good to know, thanks guys!

I have a full set, 46-51. Good rings. I'll probably be adding a 45 and a 52 for next year, just to experience both sides of the famed 93" gear for sprint (45/13) and mass start (52/15). I'm intrigued.

I have a partial set of DA rings I'm working on expanding, but as Carleton said, rings are expensive. The FSAs will be in service for a good while longer.

Oh Man! Here we go again!

Wait a minute!
Do you mean to tell me, that after pages of post making me look stupid- I'm the only one of the 2 of us who has tried both big/big and small/small??? ;)

Full Speed Ahead chainring
 

They are the default standard for me, but there are others I like better.

FYXO/Chain Underground

http://cdn1.bigcommerce.com/server40...01.590.590.jpg

Nah. I've done it with other gears. (50/15 vs. 47/14, etc.) Besides, I was just offering up theories ;).

Nice. How much?

Cycle Undeground
 

$57 US delivered.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3758/1...50d18147d9.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8370/8...421c0ffa3c.jpg

i use zen and campy (cut out only) i can't tell the difference between the two.

fsa have ugly decals and teeth. i would anodize them.

fsa
 

function is more important.

Shopping around for some DA cranks and BB-7710 bottom bracket. Carleton probably knows the answer right off the bat with his Tiemeyer collection, but what size bb do I need for my Tiemeyer Signature track frame? I've seen posts of 68x109.5 and 68x110. Just want to make sure I get the correct size. Thanks!

109.5 should be the standard. The only other size is 115 which I'm pretty sure is for the road BBs

88mm rims to wide flange hubs? I'm pretty sure this was a bad idea because of the increased angle of the spokes to the rim but I'm stuffed if I can find where it was discussed before. Should I be going for low flange hubs?

I went out of my way to get the Low Flange Dura Ace hubs for my 88's-

since then i have seen plenty of sets laced to deep flange.. including the ones built at the factory in china.. a buddy of mine did HF DA hubs with Sapim spokes and i think the spokes were hard to get in that short length.. his wheels look nice!
i wouldn't worry too much about the spoke angle..

When I was looking at a BB for my DA cranks the conclusion I read is that the difference between 109.5 and 110 is nominal, which makes sense if you think about how large a 1/2 mm is. IIRC the track dura ace and maybe the road dura ace are labeled a different width than the road ultegra (I can't be bothered to remember the numbers), but as a practical matter they're the same.

a nissan cube (fsa chainring) is pretty functional but i'll stick with my subaru (sugino zen)