pepstepper

I'm seriously coveting a cyclotourist crankset, but I'm trying to figure out if it will work on a frame I have with 135mm rear spacing. Chainline & chainring clearances obviously significant factors, but in estimating the appropriate bb spindle length, and anticipating possible chainstay clearance problems, I'm wondering if anybody could tell me how far inward of the bb spindle end the inner face of the crank arm typically lies. Q factor (the outer face of the crank) wouldn't bother me much, I'm more concerned about getting safely clear of those wider stays, without a ridiculous chainline.

Thanks.

steelbikeguy

The T.A. Cyclotouriste always appealed to me too. I've recently put a set of the SunXCD Cyclotourise clone cranks on one of my bikes, and was a bit surprised at how wide the Q factor was. If you can't find a real T.A., this isn't a bad option, and I feel would certainly provide plenty of clearance at the chainstays.


Steve in Peoria

3speedslow

Welcome to BF! You covet the right item.

Aubergine 

The TA cranks have no different clearance issues than any other crank. Why would it? It is just a matter of getting the right bottom bracket width.

JohnDThompson 

Here are measurements of the various TA spindles, from the TA catalog:

Metacortex

There were also 2nd versions of the TA 344, 373 and 374 spindles with a 2mm longer non-drive side, which resulted in a 2mm longer overall length without changing the chainline:

Charles Wahl

I believe that the Stronglight/T.A. spindle ends were closer to JIS taper than to what is now ISO, in case you're thinking of getting a cartridge BB. Those are available in a lot of widths. As suggested previously, if anybody's chainrings are going to clear your chainstays and give you a good chainline with your cassette, there's no reason that a T.A. can't be made to as well.

gaucho777 

Using a 116.5mm, 2-chainwheel TA spindle, I get a total clearance of 86.2mm between the inside ends of 170mm cranks arms.

FWIW, I measured using a digital caliper from the inside of the drive-side arm at the back of the pedal spindle to the seat tube, plus the diameter of the seat tube, plus the distance from seat tube to inside of non-ds arm: 29.26mm + 28.05mm (metric tubing) + 28.89mm = 86.20mm. There might be slight variation due to how far the crank arms are pressed onto the spindle combined measurement error.

JaccoW

Just bought one of these on French eBay for €40 + shipping.
Just look for "pedalier" + "ta" or "ancien" and plenty will pop up for affordable prices.

pepstepper

Thanks to all of you for the very helpful info. I’ve taken the plunge buying a very clean looking set off eBay. I’ll figure out exact spindle length when it arrives - am anticipating some fudging to make it all work. In any any case I can’t imagine a more handsome, affordable crankset that will work as a sub compact for the touring/gravel workhorse I’m cooking up.

Aubergine 

Good choice! I love those cranks and use them on most of my old bikes. This is on a Peugeot AO-8.

Road Fan

Wow, that is a climbing machine!

Road Fan

You can measure the distance across the chainstays on your bike with 135 rear spacing and for a more standard road bike designed for 126 to 130 mm. For all of them first measure 17 cm back from the BB axis, and mark that with a piece of tape. At that distance, measure the across chainstay distance for both bikes.

It's a reasonable assumption (lots of experience on this forum and others) that those TA cranks with proper BB spindles and cups will clear the TA crankarm ends with at least 5 mm free space on each side, and it should be equal both sides. If the 135 mm bike has perhaps another 6 mm width, I think you probably have no problem.

This checking worked for me even with a road frame designed to clear 650b 42 mm tires, and achieving proper chainline for a 130 mm rear hub (same chainline as for a 120 mm or 126 mm, BTW).