Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

3-arm "circular" cranks vs. 5-arm starfish design

Search
Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

3-arm "circular" cranks vs. 5-arm starfish design

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-02-21, 11:16 PM
  #1  
parkerposey
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
3-arm "circular" cranks vs. 5-arm starfish design

Hi all. Currently building up a pretty frame from the 80s, and I like the look of the Dia-Compe ENE Ciclo double crankset -- I can't upload a photo, but the design has 3 arms, and the arms branch as they approach the outer ring, creating three 'circles', in contrast to the 'starfish' shape of standard 80s cranks. Other details include cold-forged arms. I read that this process makes them even stronger, but this made me wonder if the rings, on the other hand, were not more flexible than rings with 5 arms of support, if the "circular" design improves stiffness relative to 'radial' arms, etc., etc..

My question is for anyone who's experienced both this 3-arm design and the more common 5-arm starfish of 80s/90s Sugino cranks etc. What were your impressions, how did they compare? Thanks in advance for your input.
parkerposey is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 03:32 AM
  #2  
Kabuki12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,448
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 874 Post(s)
Liked 2,288 Times in 1,278 Posts
I have one bike that has a three arm Campy crank and the rest of my bikes all have five arm Campy or Ambrosio. At my age and strength , honestly, I can’t tell the difference in rigidity . I would go with the cranks that give you the best ratios gear wise to fit your type of riding.
Kabuki12 is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 03:48 AM
  #3  
oneclick 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 2,820
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,328 Times in 784 Posts
Absent finite element analysis or accurate mechanical testing, you have no way of knowing which set of arms is stiffer.

Neither does anyone else.

The various patterns you see in cranksets are all (supposedly) the result of careful compromise between the various factors of material cost, manufacturing cost, form, and function.

And I suggest that that is the order in which most manufacturers today consider them.
oneclick is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 05:37 AM
  #4  
nlerner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,158
Mentioned: 481 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3810 Post(s)
Liked 6,699 Times in 2,611 Posts
Here’s a photo of that Dia Compe crankset from the manufacturer’s site:


FWIW, there are a few other 3-arm sets currently available: Herse/Compass, Sun XCD, Andel.
nlerner is offline  
Likes For nlerner:
Old 02-03-21, 06:02 AM
  #5  
clubman 
Phyllo-buster
 
clubman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 8,847

Bikes: roadsters, club bikes, fixed and classic

Mentioned: 133 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2298 Post(s)
Liked 2,054 Times in 1,254 Posts
Just to be a pedant, the term Starfish is used to refer to one particular crankset made by Mavic. The rest are generally called 3 pin, or 5 pin.
Mavic courtesy Velobase.

clubman is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 06:34 AM
  #6  
top506
Death fork? Naaaah!!
 
top506's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The other Maine, north of RT 2
Posts: 5,325

Bikes: Seriously downsizing.

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked 629 Times in 280 Posts
I have a TA three-arm crank on a Gitane. Can't tell any difference from the TA Cylotouriste on a <otobecane.

Top
__________________
You know it's going to be a good day when the stem and seatpost come right out.

(looking for a picture and not seeing it? Thank the Photobucket fiasco.PM me and I'll link it up.)
top506 is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 06:34 AM
  #7  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,878

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

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1857 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 506 Posts
I agree there's no straightforward way to prove greater stiffness, at least at the consumer's level of technology. I'm also not clear on whether stiffness matters to a rider or is perceptible. But assuming cold-forged cranksets are stronger, you can get the same strength, if not stiffness, with the same or lesser amount of material. The sales metric, as with frames, is less mass with equal durability. So if the weight of this chainset is more like that of a Rene Herse than another double capable of 46/30 which is not cold-forged (I can't think of one at the moment), there's a tangible difference. Real nice looking design, though!
Road Fan is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 06:49 AM
  #8  
SJX426 
Senior Member
 
SJX426's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 9,579

Bikes: '65 Frejus TDF, '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '89 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8

Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1608 Post(s)
Liked 2,216 Times in 1,103 Posts
My suspicion is that the 5 pin is designed to survive lateral forces from accidents. A three pin would be optimal for driving a chain.
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
SJX426 is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 06:56 AM
  #9  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,515
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3241 Post(s)
Liked 2,512 Times in 1,510 Posts
I don't know how much riding the OP is going to do, but my choice would come down to the availability of different chainrings.

Last edited by seypat; 02-03-21 at 04:58 PM.
seypat is offline  
Likes For seypat:
Old 02-03-21, 07:13 AM
  #10  
bikemig 
Senior Member
 
bikemig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Posts: 20,435

Bikes: A bunch of old bikes and a few new ones

Mentioned: 178 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5888 Post(s)
Liked 3,471 Times in 2,079 Posts
Originally Posted by seypat
i don't know how much the op is going to do, but my choice would come down to the availability of different chainrings.
+ 1.
bikemig is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 08:01 AM
  #11  
francophile 
PM me your cotters
 
francophile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: ATL
Posts: 3,241
Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1137 Post(s)
Liked 590 Times in 422 Posts
Originally Posted by seypat
I don't know how much the OP is going to do, but my choice would come down to the availability of different chainrings.
This is the best answer, assuming OP plans to ride the bike far enough to wear out a chainring. I would modify to say "availability and cost of replacement chainrings" though. If there's a $50 crankset, but the chainrings cost $75 versus a $75 crankset with rings that cost $50 or the BCD is common enough to enable me to use a wide variety of rings, I'm going with the latter every time.

That said, I do like the look of that crankset.
__________________
███████████████

francophile is offline  
Likes For francophile:
Old 02-03-21, 08:02 AM
  #12  
bark_eater 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Eastern Shore, MD
Posts: 2,107

Bikes: Road ready: 1993 Koga Miyata City Liner Touring Hybrid, 1989 Centurion Sport DLX, "I Blame GP" Bridgestone CB-1. Projects: Yea, I got a problem....

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 753 Post(s)
Liked 737 Times in 422 Posts
Dia Compe has a 96 BCD. Old Shimano 600 cranks are 95 BCD. They could have at least revived an old standard and made some 30t chainrings.
bark_eater is offline  
Likes For bark_eater:
Old 02-03-21, 08:41 AM
  #13  
mechanicmatt
Hoards Thumbshifters
 
mechanicmatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Signal Mountain, TN
Posts: 1,157

Bikes: '23 Black Mtn MC, '87 Bruce Gordon Chinook, '08 Jamis Aurora, '86 Trek 560, '97 Mongoose Rockadile, & '91 Trek 750

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 246 Post(s)
Liked 335 Times in 192 Posts
It should be said too, that if you already have a Sugino crankset they are great and sturdy and polish beautifully.
mechanicmatt is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 09:02 AM
  #14  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,515
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3241 Post(s)
Liked 2,512 Times in 1,510 Posts
Originally Posted by francophile
This is the best answer, assuming OP plans to ride the bike far enough to wear out a chainring. I would modify to say "availability and cost of replacement chainrings" though. If there's a $50 crankset, but the chainrings cost $75 versus a $75 crankset with rings that cost $50 or the BCD is common enough to enable me to use a wide variety of rings, I'm going with the latter every time.

That said, I do like the look of that crankset.
Or they only come in tooth sizes that you don't want. I went through this recently trying to assemble a triple for a modernish build. I don't care for a compact double or rear clusters with pizza sized sprockets. That's just me. I ended up going back in time to the tried and true 110/74 BCD. In fact, the build is turning into a middle finger at the components companies for their never ending planned obsolescence.

Last edited by seypat; 02-03-21 at 09:15 AM.
seypat is offline  
Likes For seypat:
Old 02-03-21, 09:06 AM
  #15  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,515
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3241 Post(s)
Liked 2,512 Times in 1,510 Posts
Originally Posted by bark_eater
They could have at least revived an old standard and made some 30t chainrings.
Like the 86BCD that was popular for touring back in the day. You could run it as a compact double or a triple. Very versatile like the 110/74 BCD. But nooooo, they have to make something new that crosses over to nothing.

Now, get off my lawn!

Last edited by seypat; 02-03-21 at 04:59 PM.
seypat is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 10:31 AM
  #16  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
Like someone else mentioned, the most important factor here is the gearing.

there should be a sufficiently fast jump between the two ratios, no dead space in between, and a versatile granny gear useful for both climbing and flat terrain. You shouldn't feel like you have to always compensate by changing thenresr cassette ratio when changing between front chainrings.
Moisture is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 10:40 AM
  #17  
79pmooney
Senior Member
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,905

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4806 Post(s)
Liked 3,928 Times in 2,553 Posts
It's 90% marketing, With good design, you can optimize anything from 3 to 6 stars for any standard of stiffness and strength you want. There will be minor weight and aero trade-offs but not race winning or losing. The final and ultimate solution will not happen until software people can encrypt "bling" into the FEA code.
79pmooney is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 11:07 AM
  #18  
parkerposey
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Wow, this forum is the best thing since sliced bread! Thank you everyone for your input! I have to say that I agree with the latter posts, in that the gearing is the main deciding factor -- this is the reason for building this bike to begin with: 10%+ hills in my neck of the woods. Initially I chose this crankset because I couldn't find any cheaper options for 48/36, but have since found a few (Sugino is top contender for competition with this Dia-Compe Ene Ciclo, for me at the moment). Glad to hear that there aren't any horror stories of these differently-designed rings, or with 3-pin designs in general. That was my main fear and reason for posting.

So, beyond the gearing choices, it sounds like it's mostly an aesthetic difference. (Still grateful for any input anyone may want to share!)
parkerposey is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 11:14 AM
  #19  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
I think the difference in stiffness would be marginal unless you are a 240lb bodybuilder cranking out 500+w up a hill in a regular basis.
Moisture is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 11:50 AM
  #20  
nlerner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,158
Mentioned: 481 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3810 Post(s)
Liked 6,699 Times in 2,611 Posts
The Andel crank I mentioned above comes in 46/30t configuration if you want some serious climbing gears. I put one on my Rivendell Roadini.
nlerner is offline  
Old 02-03-21, 08:30 PM
  #21  
rando_couche
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked 170 Times in 111 Posts
Originally Posted by seypat
I don't know how much riding the OP is going to do, but my choice would come down to the availability of different chainrings.
Yep. 110 and 130mm 5-pin rings will be around after the cockroaches are gone. Availability of 3-pin rings is sketchy at best, even when the cranks are in production.
rando_couche is offline  

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



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.