Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Campagnolo Racing T Crank Bottom Bracket Puzzler

Notices
Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Campagnolo Racing T Crank Bottom Bracket Puzzler

Old 06-15-18, 06:02 AM
  #1  
H5N1
Cabbage Rustler
Thread Starter
 
H5N1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: BFE
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Campagnolo Racing T Crank Bottom Bracket Puzzler

Iím feeling bothered about a Campagnolo Racing T triple crankset installation.
Itís a square taper ISO crank, and the recommended Bottom bracket is a Campagnolo Centaur 68 X 115.5 cartridge.
With the bottom bracket and crankarms installed, the entire unit is shifted about 5-7mm toward the drive side.
I read some older discussions on the forum with regard to the Racing T triple and discussions about needing an assymetric bottom bracket, and that seems to be what this installation calls for.
I welcome your questions, comments and suggestions.
H5N1 is offline  
Old 06-15-18, 10:17 AM
  #2  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,366

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6981 Post(s)
Liked 351 Times in 271 Posts
I have a racing T (on 3* bikes) 111 symmetrical is for 1.125" seat tubes , 115.5 is for oversize seat tubes (31.8~35)
the extra 4.5 [/2 2.25 per side] is because the FD is moved outboard.. so derailleur swing moves with it

*2 Brit thd, 1 Italian* ,all 3 steel frames 28.6mm/1.125" seat tubes..

A Phil BB , can, be because of the design, user changing the offset...
the spindle is smooth, relies on precise fit with the bearings , but can be pulled through .

Read that the Record Triple Square taper BB was not symmetrical ,
but know nothing more..

* I have an un needed italian thread 115.5 to sell.. [pm]





..




....
fietsbob is offline  
Old 06-15-18, 03:53 PM
  #3  
Andrew R Stewart 
Senior Member
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 12,754

Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Raleigh Pro, Trek Cycle Cross, Mongoose tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2114 Post(s)
Liked 253 Times in 205 Posts
Asymmetrical BB spindles usually have the extra length on the drive side, to better locate the rings to not scrape on the chain stays. But the OP suggests that he might need a asymmetrical spindle off set to the non drive side. Not common in "factory assembled "cartridge" BBs.

So I suggest doing actual measurements of current chain line, spindle length and centering offset (if any) and determine about how much closer into the frame both crank arms (and rings) can be and still leave a few MMs of clearance. Then do the math. How much change to get the ideal chain line? Will this result in ring or arm contact with the stays? Is this BB spindle set up available? Where are you willing to compromise? Cost, dimensional results? Andy
__________________
AndrewRStewart
Andrew R Stewart is offline  
Old 06-16-18, 04:19 AM
  #4  
H5N1
Cabbage Rustler
Thread Starter
 
H5N1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: BFE
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It seems to have something to do with this particular crankset, ie. the Racing T triple.
The bike is a Black Mountain Cycles road bike. 28.6 tubing, not oversize. 68mm bottom bracket shell, English thread.
It's usually set up with a Sachs New Success (re-branded Campy Chorus) and a 68X107mm JIS cartridge bottom bracket.
There's no problem with this setup (chainline is good, but I don't recall the numbers), but if I plop the triple onto the 68x107 JIS bb, I get the same result:
Everything is shifted toward the drive side by about 5-7mm.
I've seen other threads where an "adjustable" bottom bracket was used with the Racing T crank.
I'm told that Phil Wood makes one. I was put off by the expense, but would consider doing that to get a liveable result.

Addendum:
It looks like Miche makes an adjustable cup bb, and I already have the installation tool I need. 68x107 ISO would be too short, though. My current Campy Centaur 68x 115.5 ISO is a perfect fit save for the offset problem.

Last edited by H5N1; 06-16-18 at 05:15 AM.
H5N1 is offline  
Old 03-25-19, 08:11 AM
  #5  
H5N1
Cabbage Rustler
Thread Starter
 
H5N1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: BFE
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well,
I'm back and more perplexed than before.
I will confirm that with a Campy Centaur 68x155.5 BB, the crankarm-chainstay gap is significantly wider on the drive side than on the non-drive side!
Worse than that, I've repeated this experiment by purchasing ANOTHER Campy Racing T in 170mm crankarm length, and the results are identical: The data is in and it's a very robust finding.
Ok, what the hell is going on here, and which assymetric BB (shorter on the drive side) is going to work?

Last edited by H5N1; 03-25-19 at 09:18 AM.
H5N1 is offline  
Old 03-25-19, 09:34 AM
  #6  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,366

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6981 Post(s)
Liked 351 Times in 271 Posts
A Phil Wood BB, the current offerings, you can pull the spindle through the bearing ( accurate press fit ) by hand..

and dial in the relative offset , yourself.. I have done so , myself

2 mounting ring tools stacked, a flat washer , the crank bolt & 2 wrenches 1 holds the axle , 1 turns the bolt..






....
fietsbob is offline  
Old 03-26-19, 08:52 AM
  #7  
DaveSSS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 5,671

Bikes: TWO Colnago C-RS w/Chorus 12

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked 108 Times in 85 Posts
Post your question on the paceline forum. Old Potatoe probably knows the answer to your problem.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 03-27-19, 08:00 PM
  #8  
H5N1
Cabbage Rustler
Thread Starter
 
H5N1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: BFE
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ok,
I'll give that a go.
H5N1 is offline  
Old 02-07-20, 08:46 AM
  #9  
AJI125 
Poser
 
AJI125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 39

Bikes: 1990 Bianchi Giro | 1999 LeMond Buenos Aires (650b) | 2005 LeMond Alpe D'Huez

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Sorry for the Zombie thread revival. But I was looking for a little info on a Racing T (considering picking one up) and was hoping you solved your problem. I've got this page from the 1998 Manual that just confirms what others have said. 111mm for smaller seat tubes, 115.5 for larger, and symmetrical. At this time Athena was 9 speed, I'm not finding anything older in my (incomplete) copies of things.

AJI125 is offline  
Old 02-09-20, 09:44 PM
  #10  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,628

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 74 Times in 68 Posts
Originally Posted by H5N1 View Post
Well,
I'm back and more perplexed than before.
I will confirm that with a Campy Centaur 68x155.5 BB, the crankarm-chainstay gap is significantly wider on the drive side than on the non-drive side!
Worse than that, I've repeated this experiment by purchasing ANOTHER Campy Racing T in 170mm crankarm length, and the results are identical: The data is in and it's a very robust finding.
Ok, what the hell is going on here, and which assymetric BB (shorter on the drive side) is going to work?
Just realized this is a zombie thread, so apologies to the Thread Starter, who probably no longer needs an example. But I think it's a worthwhile example for others dealing with the oddities of triples and the "fitting" of replacement BBs. Additional general information can be found in Sutherland's Fifth and in Barnett's.

I don't see a problem, necessarily. I've had a number of Campy doubles install (with the BBs originally supplied or recommended by Campy) with the crankarms evenly spaced from the chainstays, and with correct chainline - Nuovo Record, the first "streamlined" Record, first generation 1995 Chorus, several Centaur square-taper and Power-torque compacts, and a couple of carbon Records. I don't generally expect the Triples to install the same way. I have a Racing T on Mrs. Road Fan's Georgena Terry road bike. I will post the Q-factor, front chainline, rear chainline, chainstay clearance to crank arm left and right, and chainring clearance to the drive-side chainstay. You may want the narrowest possible Q and left-right pedal balance, but it just might not be possible with either BB. There are too many reasons why a BB and chainset may not fit right, that i think we simply need to look at the key dimensions of your installation and see which of the two satisfies the critical points and does not not terribly mess up the non-critical points. I want to do this to illustrate that sometimes what you have is the best you can practically get. I suggest making these same measurements and seeing if you have any available degrees of freedom.

INSTALLATION OF RacingT on Mrs. Road Fan's Terry:

Q-factor, 155 mm
Front chainline, 46 mm
Rear chainline, 43 mm
Chainstay clearance to crank arm left, 9.5 mm
Chainstay clearance to crank arm right, 18.2 mm
Chainring clearance to chainstay, 1 mm (small chainring)

I'm pretty sure my BB is the 115 mm Centaur model.

In my case the left and right crank arm clearances are wildly mismatched, 18 mm on the right and 9.5 mm on the left (non-drive side). No complaints about this from Mrs. Road Fan, so it's not a problem. Same for the mismatch between the front and rear chainlines. Q-factor is better than many other triples, if I measured it right, but not as good as many Campy doubles. nonetheless it would seem nice to try the 111 mm BB perhaps with a 1 mm drive side shim under the right cup.

HOWEVER, there is only 1 mm clearance between my small chainring and the painted chainstay! So there is zero margin to move the chainset closer to the centerline of the frame. This installation cannot be better aligned. Campagnolo designed a functional triple chainset, but did not solve all the potential problems.

To be fair, this Terry frame doesn't have any dimples on the chainstay, for whatever reason - it could have determined to be that way by Ms. Terry, or it could have been an implementation decision by Wilier, who actually built these frames. But having installed this chainset on this frame, my installation is about as good as it can get.

Last edited by Road Fan; 02-10-20 at 07:22 AM.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-10-20, 07:32 PM
  #11  
H5N1
Cabbage Rustler
Thread Starter
 
H5N1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: BFE
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The Proposition Will Be Tested

No apologies needed. The thread has laid fallow for a while, and that has allowed some time for info like yours to come in, which is great.
I just ordered a Phil Wood bottom bracket, which should be here next week. It should have enough lateral adjustment available to solve this vexing issue. Stay tuned.



Originally Posted by Road Fan View Post
Just realized this is a zombie thread, so apologies to the Thread Starter, who probably no longer needs an example. But I think it's a worthwhile example for others dealing with the oddities of triples and the "fitting" of replacement BBs. Additional general information can be found in Sutherland's Fifth and in Barnett's.

I don't see a problem, necessarily. I've had a number of Campy doubles install (with the BBs originally supplied or recommended by Campy) with the crankarms evenly spaced from the chainstays, and with correct chainline - Nuovo Record, the first "streamlined" Record, first generation 1995 Chorus, several Centaur square-taper and Power-torque compacts, and a couple of carbon Records. I don't generally expect the Triples to install the same way. I have a Racing T on Mrs. Road Fan's Georgena Terry road bike. I will post the Q-factor, front chainline, rear chainline, chainstay clearance to crank arm left and right, and chainring clearance to the drive-side chainstay. You may want the narrowest possible Q and left-right pedal balance, but it just might not be possible with either BB. There are too many reasons why a BB and chainset may not fit right, that i think we simply need to look at the key dimensions of your installation and see which of the two satisfies the critical points and does not not terribly mess up the non-critical points. I want to do this to illustrate that sometimes what you have is the best you can practically get. I suggest making these same measurements and seeing if you have any available degrees of freedom.

INSTALLATION OF RacingT on Mrs. Road Fan's Terry:

Q-factor, 155 mm
Front chainline, 46 mm
Rear chainline, 43 mm
Chainstay clearance to crank arm left, 9.5 mm
Chainstay clearance to crank arm right, 18.2 mm
Chainring clearance to chainstay, 1 mm (small chainring)

I'm pretty sure my BB is the 115 mm Centaur model.

In my case the left and right crank arm clearances are wildly mismatched, 18 mm on the right and 9.5 mm on the left (non-drive side). No complaints about this from Mrs. Road Fan, so it's not a problem. Same for the mismatch between the front and rear chainlines. Q-factor is better than many other triples, if I measured it right, but not as good as many Campy doubles. nonetheless it would seem nice to try the 111 mm BB perhaps with a 1 mm drive side shim under the right cup.

HOWEVER, there is only 1 mm clearance between my small chainring and the painted chainstay! So there is zero margin to move the chainset closer to the centerline of the frame. This installation cannot be better aligned. Campagnolo designed a functional triple chainset, but did not solve all the potential problems.

To be fair, this Terry frame doesn't have any dimples on the chainstay, for whatever reason - it could have determined to be that way by Ms. Terry, or it could have been an implementation decision by Wilier, who actually built these frames. But having installed this chainset on this frame, my installation is about as good as it can get.
H5N1 is offline  
Old 02-11-20, 01:45 PM
  #12  
Wildwood
Veteran/Pacifist/Resister
 
Wildwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 9,473

Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?

Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2134 Post(s)
Liked 447 Times in 298 Posts
I have RacingT 9 and CompTriple10 with symmetric axles - and when I first get on those bikes the wide Q-factor is noticeable. I always think my knees or ankles or hips will hurt, but nothing bad seems attributable to the slightly 'wider stance'.

Last edited by Wildwood; 02-11-20 at 01:49 PM.
Wildwood is offline  
Old 02-11-20, 08:45 PM
  #13  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,628

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 74 Times in 68 Posts
Originally Posted by H5N1 View Post
No apologies needed. The thread has laid fallow for a while, and that has allowed some time for info like yours to come in, which is great.
I just ordered a Phil Wood bottom bracket, which should be here next week. It should have enough lateral adjustment available to solve this vexing issue. Stay tuned.
H5N1, thanks for the appreciation and kind words! But, on my wife's frame a BB with a shorter right-end length (called SER for "side-end right) will not help to move the right crank arm/spider toward the center of the bike because my chainrings will hit the frame. I haven't looked yet at all the current postings in the thread - have you replicated my measurements? How much room do you have between the closest part of the chainrings or bolts, and the chainstay? That is what you have to work with. With that frame and chainset you might be limited, as is my setup for Mrs. Road Fan's bike.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-11-20, 09:49 PM
  #14  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,628

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 74 Times in 68 Posts
Originally Posted by Wildwood View Post
I have RacingT 9 and CompTriple10 with symmetric axles - and when I first get on those bikes the wide Q-factor is noticeable. I always think my knees or ankles or hips will hurt, but nothing bad seems attributable to the slightly 'wider stance'.
The RTs are inherently wide cranks for sure. I've never had a Comp Triple. It was said to be Record grade, FWIW. Wide Q doesn't cause me much discomfort or pain, but with low Q (such as the 140 to 145 mm of a Record double or a vintage Chorus double, I spin well and more freely than with a wide stance. So I have at least a comfort preference for low Q.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-12-20, 03:58 AM
  #15  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,628

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 957 Post(s)
Liked 74 Times in 68 Posts
In this re-awakened zombie thread https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-m...placement.html is the information that Token has or had a 115 mm ISO taper BB, 115 mm with a longer right spindle, intended for Campagnolo triples such as the Racing Triple. Token would be worth looking at for other Campy replacements. I know I used to see them on Ebay.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-12-20, 07:10 AM
  #16  
HillRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 31,902

Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 141 Times in 115 Posts
Unless you already have the Racing Triple crank, I recommend looking for a more modern but currently out of production Chorus Triple crank. I had one from 2006 installed on a Litespeed Tuscany using the matching Chorus/Record 111 mm Asymmetrical bottom bracket. This combination worked extremely well.
HillRider is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
nesteel
Classic and Vintage Sales
0
04-30-16 08:19 PM
Tomate85
Classic & Vintage
34
11-25-14 08:43 AM
anixi
Bicycle Mechanics
27
07-02-12 08:25 AM
coldehammer
Bicycle Mechanics
6
08-03-11 12:36 PM
02Giant
Bicycle Mechanics
3
06-30-11 12:46 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.