1981 Trek Bottom Bracket Cartridge Conversion-
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times
in
66 Posts
1981 Trek Bottom Bracket Cartridge Conversion-
Hi Folks
Looking for a little help and giving a shot someone here might know...
The bike is a 1981 Trek with SR(Sakae)double chainring crank and a 5 speed freewheel in the back.
I’m thinking of changing from a traditional cup/cone type bottom bracket to a cartridge type bottom bracket.
I've cleaned the spindle (tapered)/bearings many times in the past but unfortunately, never took note of the numbers stamped on the spindle or measured it when I had it apart.
Before I disassemble to measure, has anyone made this conversion on their early Trek with SR double chainring crank and know the spindle length?
This would be my first conversion of this type so any information and/or warnings will be appreciated.
Thanks
Looking for a little help and giving a shot someone here might know...
The bike is a 1981 Trek with SR(Sakae)double chainring crank and a 5 speed freewheel in the back.
I’m thinking of changing from a traditional cup/cone type bottom bracket to a cartridge type bottom bracket.
I've cleaned the spindle (tapered)/bearings many times in the past but unfortunately, never took note of the numbers stamped on the spindle or measured it when I had it apart.
Before I disassemble to measure, has anyone made this conversion on their early Trek with SR double chainring crank and know the spindle length?
This would be my first conversion of this type so any information and/or warnings will be appreciated.
Thanks
#2
I'm good to go!
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,989
Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020
Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6193 Post(s)
Liked 4,810 Times
in
3,318 Posts
Mainly just make certain you know what the BB shell on that bike is. If you go with a two piece Shimano crank, you'll probably have the least issues. ISIS or Octalink cartridge BB's will be the next thing I'd recommend. And any thing square taper I'd run away from.
Square taper BB's length depends on the crankset you put on it. ISIS and Octalink are more standardized about where the chain rings set on them. 2 piece Shimano cranksets even more so.
Shimano tends to do a lot of black cranksets though. But occasionally they'll produce some silver cranksets for a short time.
Square taper BB's length depends on the crankset you put on it. ISIS and Octalink are more standardized about where the chain rings set on them. 2 piece Shimano cranksets even more so.
Shimano tends to do a lot of black cranksets though. But occasionally they'll produce some silver cranksets for a short time.
Last edited by Iride01; 02-07-23 at 04:14 PM.
Likes For Iride01:
#3
Senior Member
Mainly just make certain you know what the BB shell on that bike is. If you go with a two piece Shimano crank, you'll probably have the least issues. ISIS or Octalink cartridge BB's will be the next thing I'd recommend. And any thing square taper I'd run away from.
Square taper BB's length depends on the crankset you put on it. ISIS and Octalink are more standardized about where the chain rings set on them. 2 piece Shimano cranksets even more so.
Shimano tends to do a lot of black cranksets though. But occasionally they'll produce some silver cranksets for a short time.
Square taper BB's length depends on the crankset you put on it. ISIS and Octalink are more standardized about where the chain rings set on them. 2 piece Shimano cranksets even more so.
Shimano tends to do a lot of black cranksets though. But occasionally they'll produce some silver cranksets for a short time.
An '81 - and all, as far as I know - Trek should be English thread. Pull your cranks, measure the spindle, buy a BB that length. Solved!
Likes For Joe Remi:
#4
Senior Member
I should add: Don't do this unless you really need a new bottom bracket. That fixed cup has been in there for 42 years and may not want to budge; cup-and-cone brackets are generally smoother than cartridge type and will last for dang near ever with new bearings and a repack now and then.
#5
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times
in
66 Posts
Thanks both Iride01 & Joe Remi. The bike bottom bracket shell is English 1.370 x 24 tpi and the width is 68 so I think I have that information.
Did want to stay with my original existing SR crank, which fits the original (and current) square taper BB spindle....trying to avoid the domino effect.
I was being lazy ....didn't want to pull off the crank to get the spindle measurement and hoping someone else here would know that dimension.
The existing BB still seems to be fine. Just thought I might try a cartridge version the next time I think about cleaning it. If that cup is going to misbehave, I'll have second thoughts about even attempting this project.
Did want to stay with my original existing SR crank, which fits the original (and current) square taper BB spindle....trying to avoid the domino effect.
I was being lazy ....didn't want to pull off the crank to get the spindle measurement and hoping someone else here would know that dimension.
The existing BB still seems to be fine. Just thought I might try a cartridge version the next time I think about cleaning it. If that cup is going to misbehave, I'll have second thoughts about even attempting this project.
Last edited by Bruce27; 02-07-23 at 05:03 PM.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,086
Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Mongoose Tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder, Stewart 650B ATB
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4206 Post(s)
Liked 3,867 Times
in
2,313 Posts
Back in the early 1980s the loose ball BBs often had an axle that wasn't symmetrical, the drive side had more length WRT the bike's centerline. If your Trek has this and if you only measure the overall axle length and if you purchase a current cartridge BB unit with that same dimension listed there's a very good chance that the drive side crank won't sit the same distance from that centerline. Most current BBs are a symmetrical type.
Instead measure the drive side amount, from the frame's centerline to the axle end and just double this to come up with a symmetrically designed unit that will produce the same chainline as the OEM BB had. If you were to take the current BB axle out of the shell you could measure the axle's two ends and see if my belief is correct and what the amount of difference is. Then add that difference to the overall axle length for the replacement's size.
As usual, Sheldon Brown's website should have a good tutorial about this. Andy
If when you do remove the old parts and if they are in good condition consider just relubing and reusing them. Andy
Instead measure the drive side amount, from the frame's centerline to the axle end and just double this to come up with a symmetrically designed unit that will produce the same chainline as the OEM BB had. If you were to take the current BB axle out of the shell you could measure the axle's two ends and see if my belief is correct and what the amount of difference is. Then add that difference to the overall axle length for the replacement's size.
As usual, Sheldon Brown's website should have a good tutorial about this. Andy
If when you do remove the old parts and if they are in good condition consider just relubing and reusing them. Andy
__________________
AndrewRStewart
AndrewRStewart
Likes For Andrew R Stewart:
#7
Senior Member
Yes and it gets even murkier because a lot of Shimano square taper cartridges are asymmetrical, too. My very vague recollection on this is the 110 and 113 are the same length on the drive side. So good luck out there!
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,064
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4408 Post(s)
Liked 1,561 Times
in
1,024 Posts
Go to the crankset category here:
https://velobase.com/ListComponents.aspx?Category=115
If you can visually identify the SR crank you have, there may be spindle information posted. It is usually correct.
You can also take the dust caps and fxing bolts off the crank arms and use a caliper to measure from the bb shell to the crank and from the crank in to the spindle end, then subtract. That will give you all the numbers you need to estimate overall length and any offset. SR cranks should all be JIS taper.
https://velobase.com/ListComponents.aspx?Category=115
If you can visually identify the SR crank you have, there may be spindle information posted. It is usually correct.
You can also take the dust caps and fxing bolts off the crank arms and use a caliper to measure from the bb shell to the crank and from the crank in to the spindle end, then subtract. That will give you all the numbers you need to estimate overall length and any offset. SR cranks should all be JIS taper.
#9
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times
in
66 Posts
Thank you @Andrew R Stewart @Kontact & @Joe Remi again.
The crank is an SR SAX-5RG. Unfortunately I didn't see the spindle length in velobase for that crank. I'm 99% sure the existing spindle has an extended length on the drive side, ...so current is asymmetrical.
From what I understand so far... even if I confirm that my current asymmetrical spindle is 113mm, I would need a BB cartridge (symmetrical) that's 118mm or more to keep the existing chainline. Surely don't want to be chewing up my chainstay.
I'll try measuring again. Thank you all, and if someone stumbles across this thread and has already gone through this exercise...please chime in.
The crank is an SR SAX-5RG. Unfortunately I didn't see the spindle length in velobase for that crank. I'm 99% sure the existing spindle has an extended length on the drive side, ...so current is asymmetrical.
From what I understand so far... even if I confirm that my current asymmetrical spindle is 113mm, I would need a BB cartridge (symmetrical) that's 118mm or more to keep the existing chainline. Surely don't want to be chewing up my chainstay.
I'll try measuring again. Thank you all, and if someone stumbles across this thread and has already gone through this exercise...please chime in.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,490
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1083 Post(s)
Liked 687 Times
in
441 Posts
I've put cartridge BBs on 4 of my vintage Treks, all of them Shimano UN55 which unfortunately are no longer made. I always changed the crankset at the same time which meant a different spindle length, but you'll need the same as you have now. What BB are you going to buy?
#11
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times
in
66 Posts
I was able to find this old SR catalog online and I think mine is the Super Apex. It looks like it could be the Double 68 D-3P 119mm.
Last edited by Bruce27; 02-08-23 at 10:17 AM.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,490
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1083 Post(s)
Liked 687 Times
in
441 Posts
UN55 is discontinued but you can still find them if you look hard enough. The replacement Shimano is a UN300 which isn't as robust, but is cheap and good enough for most people. I used one of those on my wife's Rockhopper and it's fine.
Likes For Jeff Neese:
#14
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times
in
66 Posts
Like others have mentioned, I really need to try and measure this out.
BTW.... I also see spacers mentioned in the instructions. Did your UN55 come with spacers?
#15
Really Old Senior Member
Maybe look at this document. You'll need to go to page 10 or so to get past cottered spindles.
https://law.resource.org/pub/in/bis/....1131.2006.pdf
https://law.resource.org/pub/in/bis/....1131.2006.pdf
Likes For Bill Kapaun:
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,490
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1083 Post(s)
Liked 687 Times
in
441 Posts
Thanks Jeff Neese . I see that UN300 comes with a lot of symmetrical spindle length options. Two being 122.5mm and 127.5mm. So if I'm thinking this through correctly and my current asymmetrical spindle is 119mm, the 122.5mm or 127.5mm might work?
Like others have mentioned, I really need to try and measure this out.
BTW.... I also see spacers mentioned in the instructions. Did your UN55 come with spacers?
Like others have mentioned, I really need to try and measure this out.
BTW.... I also see spacers mentioned in the instructions. Did your UN55 come with spacers?
Likes For Jeff Neese:
#17
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times
in
66 Posts
To All The Above......
Thank you for all the information you've shared in this thread. Not sure when (or if) I'm going to proceed, but you've been a tremendous benefit in helping me understand the project if I decide give it a go.
Thank you again.....
Thank you for all the information you've shared in this thread. Not sure when (or if) I'm going to proceed, but you've been a tremendous benefit in helping me understand the project if I decide give it a go.
Thank you again.....
Likes For Bruce27:
#18
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,515
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: 2747 Post(s)
Liked 3,396 Times
in
2,056 Posts
Tange LN bottom brackets are a good substitute for a UN55
Likes For dedhed:
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Right where I'm supposed to be
Posts: 1,634
Bikes: Franklin Frames Custom, Rivendell Bombadil
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked 209 Times
in
127 Posts
I agree with Joe here, if it's not broken, and it's not, don't go fixing a problem that isn't there. Who says a cartridge is any better, or will last longer, or will be easier to maintain and such ? Point being, they aren't without their flaws or gotchas. Plus, while tapers are supposed to be standard, hah hah ... the joke is on everyone because these standards may be precise on paper, in practice they are not. I remember I had to use a cartridge with a Sugino AT whose spindle pitted and they were no longer made. I had to use a cartridge, a UN72, and of course the DS length wasn't the same, neither was how far the spindle sat in the tapers, it was further in. It was still usable, but notable. I eventually sold the bike('83 Stumpjumper) but kept the crank and BB, but never used them since.
Just saying, replacing older specifically made parts with generic fitted ones is a can of worms. Yum yum !
Besides, asking for advice is dangerous, we all love to spend someone else's money and have them do things we'd never want to do ourselves. I don't know whether to laugh or cry about that ..... seems they're kinda the same.
Just saying, replacing older specifically made parts with generic fitted ones is a can of worms. Yum yum !
Besides, asking for advice is dangerous, we all love to spend someone else's money and have them do things we'd never want to do ourselves. I don't know whether to laugh or cry about that ..... seems they're kinda the same.
#21
Senior Member
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: 1858 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times
in
506 Posts
I've had four Treks of this era and worked on several belonging to friends, and all have been 68 mm shell width, English threading, JIS square taper except for the Italian designs, and spindle length as required by the chainset. In these frames I've installed Japanese chainsets, Campagnolo. some odder Italians like Ofmega/Avocets, and French TA 5-pin and Stronglights. In the Shimano and Campagnolo cases I've done installations with cup/ball/spindle and cartridge BBs. It's all a matter of correct mechanical fitting. For the spindle length it's a matter of controlling the chainline by selecting the spindle length on the drive side, and if desired to balance the offset by selecting the non-drive side spindle length.
This took me a while to sort out and learn, but the set of parameters are not all just a crap shoot. Unrecommended choices might work but not as easily as what Shimano, TA, and Campy recommended the mechanic should do.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,064
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4408 Post(s)
Liked 1,561 Times
in
1,024 Posts
The trick with the early Treks was that a high end Japanese crankset like Superbe would be a Campy spindle taper, other Japanese would be JIS and the Ofmegas they often used were a third very different taper. Without getting the spindle taper right the spindle length isn't useful. That's why going back to the crank manufacturer specs are always the best bet.