BB spindles with longer non-drive side
01-28-23, 01:00 PM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
BB spindles with longer non-drive side
Hello,
Recently I went to restore my old road bike which dates from the middle 90's. By life circumstances I almost never drove any bike in the last 20 years, since I suffered an accident - I was mostly fine after that but it cooled me off from biking - I did occasionally drive something in between, perhaps a couple of times a yer, but I never cared to restore that bike.
Anyhow, since I see that all or almost all of the standards from back then were pretty much changed to something new (and mostly worse than the old, well proven standard), I decided to stock up some NOS or new but still available quality spare parts in sufficient quantities to last me to the end of my biking path - I reckon it's still easier to do it now than in the future when it likely gets yet harder to find such.
I bought a few NOS and newer BB's (four-sided spindle) from what I could get of the higher quality ones - not all of them are the same spindle length. what I noticed is that a few of them have a longer non-drive side (spindle lengths on those are 110 and 113) of the spindle than the drive side, and...call me stupid, but I don't understand the reasoning behind this. It seems logical to me that either the drive side is longer (to account for various cranks and required chainline), or the sides are somehow simmetrical. Bot what the heck do you get with the longer non-drive side?? Is there a reasoning behind?
Speaking of which, since I use Italian threads, I have a question: what happens if I would reverse sides of the whole BB when installing it? Since Italian which I use has both right-sided thread cups, it's possible to do this. But is there some downside to this if I do it, from the BB construction perspective?
Please give me your thoughts.
Recently I went to restore my old road bike which dates from the middle 90's. By life circumstances I almost never drove any bike in the last 20 years, since I suffered an accident - I was mostly fine after that but it cooled me off from biking - I did occasionally drive something in between, perhaps a couple of times a yer, but I never cared to restore that bike.
Anyhow, since I see that all or almost all of the standards from back then were pretty much changed to something new (and mostly worse than the old, well proven standard), I decided to stock up some NOS or new but still available quality spare parts in sufficient quantities to last me to the end of my biking path - I reckon it's still easier to do it now than in the future when it likely gets yet harder to find such.
I bought a few NOS and newer BB's (four-sided spindle) from what I could get of the higher quality ones - not all of them are the same spindle length. what I noticed is that a few of them have a longer non-drive side (spindle lengths on those are 110 and 113) of the spindle than the drive side, and...call me stupid, but I don't understand the reasoning behind this. It seems logical to me that either the drive side is longer (to account for various cranks and required chainline), or the sides are somehow simmetrical. Bot what the heck do you get with the longer non-drive side?? Is there a reasoning behind?
Speaking of which, since I use Italian threads, I have a question: what happens if I would reverse sides of the whole BB when installing it? Since Italian which I use has both right-sided thread cups, it's possible to do this. But is there some downside to this if I do it, from the BB construction perspective?
Please give me your thoughts.
01-28-23, 01:13 PM
#2
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,764
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2430 Post(s)
Liked 3,098 Times
in
1,953 Posts
Hello,
Recently I went to restore my old road bike which dates from the middle 90's. By life circumstances I almost never drove any bike in the last 20 years, since I suffered an accident - I was mostly fine after that but it cooled me off from biking - I did occasionally drive something in between, perhaps a couple of times a yer, but I never cared to restore that bike.
Anyhow, since I see that all or almost all of the standards from back then were pretty much changed to something new (and mostly worse than the old, well proven standard), I decided to stock up some NOS or new but still available quality spare parts in sufficient quantities to last me to the end of my biking path - I reckon it's still easier to do it now than in the future when it likely gets yet harder to find such.
I bought a few NOS and newer BB's (four-sided spindle) from what I could get of the higher quality ones - not all of them are the same spindle length. what I noticed is that a few of them have a longer non-drive side (spindle lengths on those are 110 and 113) of the spindle than the drive side, and...call me stupid, but I don't understand the reasoning behind this. It seems logical to me that either the drive side is longer (to account for various cranks and required chainline), or the sides are somehow simmetrical. Bot what the heck do you get with the longer non-drive side?? Is there a reasoning behind?
Speaking of which, since I use Italian threads, I have a question: what happens if I would reverse sides of the whole BB when installing it? Since Italian which I use has both right-sided thread cups, it's possible to do this. But is there some downside to this if I do it, from the BB construction perspective?
Please give me your thoughts.
Recently I went to restore my old road bike which dates from the middle 90's. By life circumstances I almost never drove any bike in the last 20 years, since I suffered an accident - I was mostly fine after that but it cooled me off from biking - I did occasionally drive something in between, perhaps a couple of times a yer, but I never cared to restore that bike.
Anyhow, since I see that all or almost all of the standards from back then were pretty much changed to something new (and mostly worse than the old, well proven standard), I decided to stock up some NOS or new but still available quality spare parts in sufficient quantities to last me to the end of my biking path - I reckon it's still easier to do it now than in the future when it likely gets yet harder to find such.
I bought a few NOS and newer BB's (four-sided spindle) from what I could get of the higher quality ones - not all of them are the same spindle length. what I noticed is that a few of them have a longer non-drive side (spindle lengths on those are 110 and 113) of the spindle than the drive side, and...call me stupid, but I don't understand the reasoning behind this. It seems logical to me that either the drive side is longer (to account for various cranks and required chainline), or the sides are somehow simmetrical. Bot what the heck do you get with the longer non-drive side?? Is there a reasoning behind?
Speaking of which, since I use Italian threads, I have a question: what happens if I would reverse sides of the whole BB when installing it? Since Italian which I use has both right-sided thread cups, it's possible to do this. But is there some downside to this if I do it, from the BB construction perspective?
Please give me your thoughts.
Also where the crank sits in relation to the centerline of the rear cogs is a consideration. In general you want the middle cog to line up with the center of the two chainrings up front.
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
Likes For jdawginsc:
01-28-23, 01:16 PM
#3
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,764
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2430 Post(s)
Liked 3,098 Times
in
1,953 Posts
What might help is to identify the crankset you have on it. If a bit newer, it is likely used to symmetrical spindles.
A great reference is https://velobase.com/ListComponents.aspx?Category=115
A great reference is https://velobase.com/ListComponents.aspx?Category=115
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
01-28-23, 02:45 PM
#4
Newbie
Thread Starter
Thanks.
The old crankset is Miche Team from the '90's. I think it's ISO, not JIS. Current BB is also Miche (not sure if it's Team or Primato).
However I recently bought Stronglight Impact Compact double crankset which is intented to replace the current crankset (the reason behind this is a smaller BCD 110, which enables me to go with smaller inner chainring while still staying with the double chainset). That one is JIS (for which it's somehow easier to get BB's for), and the BB's I collected are JIS too. That crankset is supposed to be copy of Sugino XD2 (and made by them, too).
For this one I found various information. Some say the correct spindle length for the Impact double is 107, some say it's 110 (I nevertheless bought one 113 BB because it's all I could get of Shimano BB-UN55 for which I found more than one praise on various forum).
All four of the BB's I purchased are relatively similar length on the drive side and mostly vary on the length of the non-drive side, which is interesting.
I'm sorry, I tried various ways to upload those pics or post URLs at least, but the forum won't let me post anything similar until I have made 10 posts.
The old crankset is Miche Team from the '90's. I think it's ISO, not JIS. Current BB is also Miche (not sure if it's Team or Primato).
However I recently bought Stronglight Impact Compact double crankset which is intented to replace the current crankset (the reason behind this is a smaller BCD 110, which enables me to go with smaller inner chainring while still staying with the double chainset). That one is JIS (for which it's somehow easier to get BB's for), and the BB's I collected are JIS too. That crankset is supposed to be copy of Sugino XD2 (and made by them, too).
For this one I found various information. Some say the correct spindle length for the Impact double is 107, some say it's 110 (I nevertheless bought one 113 BB because it's all I could get of Shimano BB-UN55 for which I found more than one praise on various forum).
All four of the BB's I purchased are relatively similar length on the drive side and mostly vary on the length of the non-drive side, which is interesting.
I'm sorry, I tried various ways to upload those pics or post URLs at least, but the forum won't let me post anything similar until I have made 10 posts.
01-28-23, 02:48 PM
#5
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,764
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2430 Post(s)
Liked 3,098 Times
in
1,953 Posts
Thanks.
The old crankset is Miche Team from the '90's. I think it's ISO, not JIS. Current BB is also Miche (not sure if it's Team or Primato).
However I recently bought Stronglight Impact Compact double crankset which is intented to replace the current crankset (the reason behind this is a smaller BCD 110, which enables me to go with smaller inner chainring while still staying with the double chainset). That one is JIS (for which it's somehow easier to get BB's for), and the BB's I collected are JIS too. That crankset is supposed to be copy of Sugino XD2 (and made by them, too).
For this one I found various information. Some say the correct spindle length for the Impact double is 107, some say it's 110 (I nevertheless bought one 113 BB because it's all I could get of Shimano BB-UN55 for which I found more than one praise on various forum).
All four of the BB's I purchased are relatively similar length on the drive side and mostly vary on the length of the non-drive side, which is interesting.
I'm sorry, I tried various ways to upload those pics or post URLs at least, but the forum won't let me post anything similar until I have made 10 posts.
The old crankset is Miche Team from the '90's. I think it's ISO, not JIS. Current BB is also Miche (not sure if it's Team or Primato).
However I recently bought Stronglight Impact Compact double crankset which is intented to replace the current crankset (the reason behind this is a smaller BCD 110, which enables me to go with smaller inner chainring while still staying with the double chainset). That one is JIS (for which it's somehow easier to get BB's for), and the BB's I collected are JIS too. That crankset is supposed to be copy of Sugino XD2 (and made by them, too).
For this one I found various information. Some say the correct spindle length for the Impact double is 107, some say it's 110 (I nevertheless bought one 113 BB because it's all I could get of Shimano BB-UN55 for which I found more than one praise on various forum).
All four of the BB's I purchased are relatively similar length on the drive side and mostly vary on the length of the non-drive side, which is interesting.
I'm sorry, I tried various ways to upload those pics or post URLs at least, but the forum won't let me post anything similar until I have made 10 posts.
Others might know how to give a pic assist.
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
Likes For jdawginsc:
01-28-23, 02:55 PM
#6
Newbie
Thread Starter
These are URLs in plaintext (preceeded by h t t p s : / /):
custom-junkies.com/media/image/product/4789/lg/400281_miche-team-2-2x9s-cranks-39-52t.webp
assets.probikeshop.fr/images/products2/50/22369/22369_15290465521794.jpg
custom-junkies.com/media/image/product/4789/lg/400281_miche-team-2-2x9s-cranks-39-52t.webp
assets.probikeshop.fr/images/products2/50/22369/22369_15290465521794.jpg
01-28-23, 02:56 PM
#7
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,764
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2430 Post(s)
Liked 3,098 Times
in
1,953 Posts
I’m assuming that the 107 is spec-ed for BSA threading which has a 68mm BB shell, whereas the 70mm Italian shell needs a bit longer spindle.
Whats the bike?
Whats the bike?
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
Likes For jdawginsc:
01-28-23, 03:11 PM
#8
Newbie
Thread Starter
Bike is Italian brand, Iride, not much known brand, I bought it second hand. It's even possible it is custom made since I've seen Iride frames sold (I even once made a custom bike made with Iride frame, however this is a coincidence). Groupset on it is mostly Miche, with Campagnolo derailleurs and Ergopower 8-speed brake/shifter levers.
I'm from Croatia, Italy is in the neighborhood so in the past much Italian stuff was easily available. At least it was so in the 90's and early 2000's, today it's different.
I'm from Croatia, Italy is in the neighborhood so in the past much Italian stuff was easily available. At least it was so in the 90's and early 2000's, today it's different.
01-28-23, 03:40 PM
#9
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,764
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2430 Post(s)
Liked 3,098 Times
in
1,953 Posts
Bike is Italian brand, Iride, not much known brand, I bought it second hand. It's even possible it is custom made since I've seen Iride frames sold (I even once made a custom bike made with Iride frame, however this is a coincidence). Groupset on it is mostly Miche, with Campagnolo derailleurs and Ergopower 8-speed brake/shifter levers.
I'm from Croatia, Italy is in the neighborhood so in the past much Italian stuff was easily available. At least it was so in the 90's and early 2000's, today it's different.
I'm from Croatia, Italy is in the neighborhood so in the past much Italian stuff was easily available. At least it was so in the 90's and early 2000's, today it's different.
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
Likes For jdawginsc:
01-28-23, 04:05 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,358
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2475 Post(s)
Liked 2,947 Times
in
1,673 Posts
I'm not sure that anyone addressed your question about the spindles that are longer on the non-drive side. My guess is that those spindles showed up when the right-side crank began to be designed to have more material close to the bottom bracket cup rather than leaving the spindle/crank contact area farther out on the spindle.
Perhaps the designers thought that it was unnecessary to add material to the left crank/spindle interface.
If so, I don't think I follow their reasoning, since the right crank transfers the force from the right foot directly to the chain, whereas all of the pedaling force from the left foot has to go through the spindle and then the right crank's spider before it transfers to the chain.
Perhaps the designers thought that it was unnecessary to add material to the left crank/spindle interface.
If so, I don't think I follow their reasoning, since the right crank transfers the force from the right foot directly to the chain, whereas all of the pedaling force from the left foot has to go through the spindle and then the right crank's spider before it transfers to the chain.
Likes For Trakhak:
01-28-23, 08:02 PM
#12
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,764
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2430 Post(s)
Liked 3,098 Times
in
1,953 Posts
Left and right markings...
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
Likes For jdawginsc:
01-29-23, 04:41 AM
#13
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,493
Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2740 Post(s)
Liked 3,385 Times
in
2,048 Posts
Cartridge.
01-29-23, 02:37 PM
#14
Newbie
Thread Starter
Aside of (not always present) left-right markings, the drive side has a different cup - it's the one which is screwed in first until it bottoms out, thanks to its wider end, while the non-drive side cup is the one which fits into the shell completely.
I took a look at the Stronglight crankset and what I see is a different geometry of the drive and the non-drive crank. Left crank is deeper and the spindle fits in deeper too, so the designed geometry being the reason why the spindle on the non-drive side has to be longer. Now, why it's designed that way, beats me. Possibly there is a technical consideration, but possibly it's just being designed this way to be different from the other cranksets (while it is reckoned it still won't hurt a secure fit).
Anyhow since various BB's of the same length have a different distribution of the drive and the non-drive side spindle lengths, it kind of implies that all those BBs are designed for specific cranksets (in respect to geometry of the left and the right crank separately), and that there's no guarantee there will be a good fit with the crankset, regardless of spindle of correct length being used...
I took a look at the Stronglight crankset and what I see is a different geometry of the drive and the non-drive crank. Left crank is deeper and the spindle fits in deeper too, so the designed geometry being the reason why the spindle on the non-drive side has to be longer. Now, why it's designed that way, beats me. Possibly there is a technical consideration, but possibly it's just being designed this way to be different from the other cranksets (while it is reckoned it still won't hurt a secure fit).
Anyhow since various BB's of the same length have a different distribution of the drive and the non-drive side spindle lengths, it kind of implies that all those BBs are designed for specific cranksets (in respect to geometry of the left and the right crank separately), and that there's no guarantee there will be a good fit with the crankset, regardless of spindle of correct length being used...
Last edited by zedda; 01-29-23 at 02:49 PM.
01-30-23, 07:08 AM
#15
Newbie
Thread Starter
Speaking of square tapered BB's, I've another dilemma (well this is possibly worth of a separate thread): did anyone have experience with using ISO cranks on JIS taper?
I still have with me the older, Gipiemme Crono Sprint 100 CC cranks, as visible on this link:
h ttp s: // velobase.com/ViewComponent.aspx?ID=E7EF5F1B-E1C1-469F-8768-91356DED694D&Enum=115&AbsPos=148
Although limited with a high BCD (144), still pretty nice cranks.
I still have with me the older, Gipiemme Crono Sprint 100 CC cranks, as visible on this link:
h ttp s: // velobase.com/ViewComponent.aspx?ID=E7EF5F1B-E1C1-469F-8768-91356DED694D&Enum=115&AbsPos=148
Although limited with a high BCD (144), still pretty nice cranks.
