Looking for braze on front derailleur that will handle 44T big ring.
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Looking for braze on front derailleur that will handle 44T big ring.
I have a old road frame with a newly installed 44T big ring double crank. My old front derailleur was designed to work with a 53T big ring and I cannot move it low enough on the braze on to get close to the new 44T chain ring. I thought a clamp on might work but the seat tube flairs out below the braze on. Does anyone know of a braze on FD that works with a 44T ring?
#2
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,777
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3582 Post(s)
Liked 3,395 Times
in
1,929 Posts
If the problem is that the derailleur mount is too high for your preferred chainring, perhaps something like this might work:
https://www.wickwerks.com/products/fit-link-adapter/
https://www.wickwerks.com/products/fit-link-adapter/
Likes For JohnDThompson:
#3
Senior Member
I have a old road frame with a newly installed 44T big ring double crank. My old front derailleur was designed to work with a 53T big ring and I cannot move it low enough on the braze on to get close to the new 44T chain ring. I thought a clamp on might work but the seat tube flairs out below the braze on. Does anyone know of a braze on FD that works with a 44T ring?
1. Make/model of existing FD.
2. Make/model of existing front shifter (road and mountain indexed front shifters reputedly have different pull ratios). From your description, I'd guess you have a road FD and shifter - but we don't know at this point.
3. Make/model of frame and/or bike.
4. Distance from bottom bracket center to center of braze-on mount hole/slot.
Pictures would also help immensely.
The last dimension is needed because a FD will almost always need to be raised/lowered from its existing position to use a different largest chainring. Given that dimension, it might be possible for someone here to calculate how low your FD needs to be to use a 44T chainring (no guarantee on that). Since you have a braze on fitting, depending on its configuration and type that will limit how low you can lower a given braze-on FD (this is one place where a picture would be especially helpful).
I'm probably missing something. But remote diagnosis needs all the info it can get.
#4
Senior Member
If the problem is that the derailleur mount is too high for your preferred chainring, perhaps something like this might work:
https://www.wickwerks.com/products/fit-link-adapter/
https://www.wickwerks.com/products/fit-link-adapter/
Likes For Hondo6:
#5
Junior Member
IRD SubC or Shimano CX are for smaller chainrings and might work with the current braze on mount. With the drop mount for sure.
Is the rear derailleur cable over or under the BB? Many "full sized" FD will foul the cable if it is on top. Creative mods to the cage are always possible.
Is the rear derailleur cable over or under the BB? Many "full sized" FD will foul the cable if it is on top. Creative mods to the cage are always possible.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,056
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: 4195 Post(s)
Liked 3,837 Times
in
2,295 Posts
One issue with ft ders that are intended for 50+ T rings and used with much smaller rings is that the cage's lower edges have a fairly large curvature, to best match up with the larger ring's circumference. hen used with smaller rings the ring to cage gap grows significantly as you go from the cage ft tip to the cage tail. This is why I run MtB based ft ders on most of my bikes (that have 44 or 46T large rings).
Unfortunately the imaged adaptor will further locate the cage from the smaller ring's tooth tips allowing for more chain flex and thus likely resulting in more sluggish shifting.
One more cost to having a bike with a brazed on ft der Andy (who has only built a few frames with braze on ft der mounts and those were when working dor another builder, many many years ago)
Unfortunately the imaged adaptor will further locate the cage from the smaller ring's tooth tips allowing for more chain flex and thus likely resulting in more sluggish shifting.
One more cost to having a bike with a brazed on ft der Andy (who has only built a few frames with braze on ft der mounts and those were when working dor another builder, many many years ago)
__________________
AndrewRStewart
AndrewRStewart
#7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
More info would be helpful, and is probably necessary.
1. Make/model of existing FD.
2. Make/model of existing front shifter (road and mountain indexed front shifters reputedly have different pull ratios). From your description, I'd guess you have a road FD and shifter - but we don't know at this point.
3. Make/model of frame and/or bike.
4. Distance from bottom bracket center to center of braze-on mount hole/slot.
Pictures would also help immensely.
The last dimension is needed because a FD will almost always need to be raised/lowered from its existing position to use a different largest chainring. Given that dimension, it might be possible for someone here to calculate how low your FD needs to be to use a 44T chainring (no guarantee on that). Since you have a braze on fitting, depending on its configuration and type that will limit how low you can lower a given braze-on FD (this is one place where a picture would be especially helpful).
I'm probably missing something. But remote diagnosis needs all the info it can get.
1. Make/model of existing FD.
2. Make/model of existing front shifter (road and mountain indexed front shifters reputedly have different pull ratios). From your description, I'd guess you have a road FD and shifter - but we don't know at this point.
3. Make/model of frame and/or bike.
4. Distance from bottom bracket center to center of braze-on mount hole/slot.
Pictures would also help immensely.
The last dimension is needed because a FD will almost always need to be raised/lowered from its existing position to use a different largest chainring. Given that dimension, it might be possible for someone here to calculate how low your FD needs to be to use a 44T chainring (no guarantee on that). Since you have a braze on fitting, depending on its configuration and type that will limit how low you can lower a given braze-on FD (this is one place where a picture would be especially helpful).
I'm probably missing something. But remote diagnosis needs all the info it can get.
2. Front shifter will be a friction bar end
3. Frame is 1990 schwinn paramount OS
4. ~149mm
#8
Junior Member
Thread Starter
IRD SubC or Shimano CX are for smaller chainrings and might work with the current braze on mount. With the drop mount for sure.
Is the rear derailleur cable over or under the BB? Many "full sized" FD will foul the cable if it is on top. Creative mods to the cage are always possible.
Is the rear derailleur cable over or under the BB? Many "full sized" FD will foul the cable if it is on top. Creative mods to the cage are always possible.
#9
aka: Dr. Cannondale
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,725
Mentioned: 234 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2152 Post(s)
Liked 3,401 Times
in
1,203 Posts
This may sound like a strange idea, but it looks like you are using a triple as a compact double, essentially running only the middle and granny chainrings. If so, then using the same kind of FD as you would use on a triple (not sure if that is what is pictured, not a Campagnolo expert) should result in the same kind of shifting quality. In other words, just like shifting from the middle ring to the granny. Not an optimal solution, but wouldn’t this work?
__________________
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
Likes For rccardr:
#10
Senior Member
That photo's pretty telling. If the large chainring in that photo is 44T, I'd guess you're going to need a "dropper bolt" of the type about which JohnDThompson posted photos and links above to use that FD (and possibly to use any braze-on FD) with a 44T largest chainring on that frame. In the photo that FD is at the lower limit of the braze-on frame fitting and still appears too high.
I couldn't easily find the relevant specs re: min largest chainring size supported for your Campagnolo FD, so I'm guessing that may also be a potential problem. (The specs are probably out there, but I'm not at all familiar with Campagnolo equipment or where to find their specs; that's probably why I couldn't find them.) As Andrew R Stewart noted above, you may run into problems with that FD if you're using it with a much smaller chainring than it was originally designed to support.
Friction shifting for the front means you don't need to worry about indexing incompatibility for the FD and shifters. There are many FDs out there that work with smaller front chainrings in the 44T range, mostly MTB FDs. But as noted above, I'd guess that for most of those that are dual- or bottom-pull you'll also need the dropper bolt.
The suggestion by rccardr to use a triple FD (Campagnolo made a few) would IMO also work. In that scenario you could also install the outer chainring, set it up as a triple with a 44T middle chainring, and only use the largest chainring on level ground if at all. Aesthetically it would be the nicest solution IMO. But that scenario (triple FD, triple chainring) might well require a different BB or spindle length to get the proper chainline.
Your bike, so your call. Best of luck.
I couldn't easily find the relevant specs re: min largest chainring size supported for your Campagnolo FD, so I'm guessing that may also be a potential problem. (The specs are probably out there, but I'm not at all familiar with Campagnolo equipment or where to find their specs; that's probably why I couldn't find them.) As Andrew R Stewart noted above, you may run into problems with that FD if you're using it with a much smaller chainring than it was originally designed to support.
Friction shifting for the front means you don't need to worry about indexing incompatibility for the FD and shifters. There are many FDs out there that work with smaller front chainrings in the 44T range, mostly MTB FDs. But as noted above, I'd guess that for most of those that are dual- or bottom-pull you'll also need the dropper bolt.
The suggestion by rccardr to use a triple FD (Campagnolo made a few) would IMO also work. In that scenario you could also install the outer chainring, set it up as a triple with a 44T middle chainring, and only use the largest chainring on level ground if at all. Aesthetically it would be the nicest solution IMO. But that scenario (triple FD, triple chainring) might well require a different BB or spindle length to get the proper chainline.
Your bike, so your call. Best of luck.
Last edited by Hondo6; 11-22-22 at 06:18 AM. Reason: clarification
#11
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,777
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3582 Post(s)
Liked 3,395 Times
in
1,929 Posts
Unfortunately the imaged adaptor will further locate the cage from the smaller ring's tooth tips allowing for more chain flex and thus likely resulting in more sluggish shifting.
One more cost to having a bike with a brazed on ft der Andy (who has only built a few frames with braze on ft der mounts and those were when working dor another builder, many many years ago)
One more cost to having a bike with a brazed on ft der Andy (who has only built a few frames with braze on ft der mounts and those were when working dor another builder, many many years ago)
#12
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,499
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 3,388 Times
in
2,051 Posts
Is there room to fit a clamp on adapter below it?
https://problemsolversbike.com/produ..._clamps_-_6321
https://problemsolversbike.com/produ..._clamps_-_6321
#13
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Is there room to fit a clamp on adapter below it?
https://problemsolversbike.com/produ..._clamps_-_6321
https://problemsolversbike.com/produ..._clamps_-_6321
Unfortunately the paramount OS flairs the seat tube below the mount so a clamp is not going to be useable. On the bright side, a hard standing climb will not cause a ghost shift with this frame.
#14
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,105
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1782 Post(s)
Liked 1,621 Times
in
927 Posts
I've never been a fan of E-type derailleurs. But this may be a case where one could work.
Something like this:
https://m.pinkbike.com/product/shima...nt-Derailleur/
Something like this:
https://m.pinkbike.com/product/shima...nt-Derailleur/
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
#15
Junior Member
Thread Starter
I've never been a fan of E-type derailleurs. But this may be a case where one could work.
Something like this:
https://m.pinkbike.com/product/shima...nt-Derailleur/
Something like this:
https://m.pinkbike.com/product/shima...nt-Derailleur/
#17
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,105
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1782 Post(s)
Liked 1,621 Times
in
927 Posts
The E-type simply mounts between the bottom bracket and the frame. The e-type bracket is the same 2.5mm thickness as a spacer that a standard 73mm bottom bracket would use to fit a 68mm frame.
As to whether or not the derailleur is top pull/bottom pull or otherwise, I suppose it is up to the derailleur mounted to the bracket.
In my one & only experience with an e-type I had to figure out an effective stop for the cable housing because the bracket itself was flimsy. I would bank on a solution requiring full length housing all the way to the derailleur.
Here is my solution after remachining a new bracket from much stiffer 7075-T6 aluminum:
20190216_112708 by Richard Mozzarella, on Flickr
The derailleur was either top or bottom pull. But the frame had provisions for neither. In any case, as mentioned, the mounting bracket was too flimsy for my taste. So made my own, I drilled a hole suitable for an M5 bolt, then used a Travel Agent as a cable housing stop & the pulley to change the cable direction. It worked wonderfully.
Last edited by base2; 11-23-22 at 12:20 AM.
Likes For base2:
#18
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Thanks for all the information people, I learned of several new ways of making this work. You guys know a lot of stuff. Not sure what I'm going to do here but I'm on a money diet now through the holiday season so it looks like this upgrade wont happen until january.
#19
Senior Member
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: 1607 Post(s)
Liked 2,214 Times
in
1,103 Posts
@kommisar - Check this out https://www.bikeforums.net/21534486-post40.html
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
#20
Junior Member
Thread Starter
@kommisar - Check this out https://www.bikeforums.net/21534486-post40.html
Last edited by kommisar; 11-24-22 at 07:04 AM.
Likes For kommisar:
#21
Senior Member
How about a Campy compact front derailleur. They're designed to work with 50/34 chainrings.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: NW Oregon
Posts: 2,975
Bikes: !982 Trek 930R Custom, Diamondback ascent with SERIOUS updates, Fuji Team Pro CF and a '09 Comencal Meta 5.5
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1299 Post(s)
Liked 739 Times
in
534 Posts
Last edited by maddog34; 11-24-22 at 12:24 AM.
#23
Senior Member
Ah I think I get what people were talking about up thread now. I am using a 32t inner and 44t middle chainring on a triple crank. These are approximately the size of a campy road triple (30t inner, 42t middle, 52t outer) so in theory a campy triple should work. Sometimes it takes me a while to see the obvious.
As I noted above, this solution also has the aesthetic advantage that you can install an outer chainring if you want and just never use it (or use it only on flats). There would be a small weight penalty, though (weight of large chainring and any necessary spacers). Your call.
I'll defer to our more experienced commenters regarding whether or not you'd need a different spindle length if you were installing the outer chainring for cosmetic purposes only and never used it. I think you would if you were planning to actually use it and wanted the bike to shift nicely, but that may be necessary anyway if you're using a triple crankset. (If it's a triple crank, you may already have the correct spindle length - or not, if it was installed later; dunno.) I'm not a Campagnolo user so I have zero practical knowledge of how sensitive their shifting is to chainline variance.
#24
aka: Dr. Cannondale
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,725
Mentioned: 234 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2152 Post(s)
Liked 3,401 Times
in
1,203 Posts
Only a triple sized spindle will give the OP sufficient clearance for the granny.
A shorter double sized spindle would not permit the granny to clear the chainstay.
The granny is already there and has clearance, ergo he is currently using a triple spindle.
A shorter double sized spindle would not permit the granny to clear the chainstay.
The granny is already there and has clearance, ergo he is currently using a triple spindle.
__________________
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...
Hard at work in the Secret Underground Laboratory...