BB spindle length vs chainline
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
BB spindle length vs chainline
Hello Forum, quick noob question: does spindle length matter as long as the chainline space is correct?
Stock BB needs replaced but spindle is asymmetrical with shorter side on drive (i know, i know!). Before realizing mine is asymmetrical + short side on drive, i just measured spindle and ordered. Come to find out the chain set sticks out too far messing up front shifting. I think I read most new BB are symmetrical. So im assuming as long as chainline is correct then spindle length isnt going to be a big deal breaker.
I had order bb-un300 68mm/122.5mm in 50mm chainline (the LL123).
Im looking at the 47.5mm chainline version now (the D-NL version). both 122.5 mm spindle.
Comparing these, the D-NL nds should be 2.5mm longer than the LL123?
Theres also a bb-un300 in 47.5mm chainline but 118mm spindle. So, either 122.5 or 118 should work as long as chainline is good?
Edit: chainline is in fact 47.5mm, busted out the caliper. Dang, I should have used that to begin with instead of a a ruler.
Stock BB needs replaced but spindle is asymmetrical with shorter side on drive (i know, i know!). Before realizing mine is asymmetrical + short side on drive, i just measured spindle and ordered. Come to find out the chain set sticks out too far messing up front shifting. I think I read most new BB are symmetrical. So im assuming as long as chainline is correct then spindle length isnt going to be a big deal breaker.
I had order bb-un300 68mm/122.5mm in 50mm chainline (the LL123).
Im looking at the 47.5mm chainline version now (the D-NL version). both 122.5 mm spindle.
Comparing these, the D-NL nds should be 2.5mm longer than the LL123?
Theres also a bb-un300 in 47.5mm chainline but 118mm spindle. So, either 122.5 or 118 should work as long as chainline is good?
Edit: chainline is in fact 47.5mm, busted out the caliper. Dang, I should have used that to begin with instead of a a ruler.
Last edited by mattch; 01-29-23 at 10:24 AM. Reason: new info
#2
post cholecystectomy
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 12,918
Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5287 Post(s)
Liked 3,809 Times
in
2,647 Posts
On square taper spindles, the length of the BB and the particular crankset you are using will determine where your chain line is. So if you or someone changed the crankset to something else, then your BB spindle length might need to change. For spindles that had offsets, then you have to figure out what length over all you need to make that chain line if you have to get a symmetrical replacement.
I don't think this is any issue for ISIS, Octalink or other newer BB's. Cranksets for them are more standardized where the chainwheels are than were the square taper cranksets and bb's that were before international commerce got into making localized conventions of each bicycle manufacturing country undesirable.
I don't think this is any issue for ISIS, Octalink or other newer BB's. Cranksets for them are more standardized where the chainwheels are than were the square taper cranksets and bb's that were before international commerce got into making localized conventions of each bicycle manufacturing country undesirable.
Last edited by Iride01; 01-29-23 at 10:47 AM.
Likes For Iride01:
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,167
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3210 Post(s)
Liked 667 Times
in
444 Posts
Manufacturers design a crank with a particular chainline and a particular spindle for a particular BB width. Whatever the dimensions (including the spindle taper) that were used in that design is what you should use every time. The manufacturer has no allegiance to any previous rule for spindle dimensions.
Standard 1970s cranks had the hole for the spindle starting as far right as the outside edge of the inner chainring. As manufacturers attempted to make the cranks lower profile and decrease the weight of the steel spindle, they moved that spindle hole toward the left and shortened the spindle accordingly. Each crank design is different.
Standard 1970s cranks had the hole for the spindle starting as far right as the outside edge of the inner chainring. As manufacturers attempted to make the cranks lower profile and decrease the weight of the steel spindle, they moved that spindle hole toward the left and shortened the spindle accordingly. Each crank design is different.
#4
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 9,840
Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2452 Post(s)
Liked 2,829 Times
in
1,728 Posts
Likes For KerryIrons:
#6
Senior Member
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,167
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3210 Post(s)
Liked 667 Times
in
444 Posts
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chainline.html
#8
post cholecystectomy
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 12,918
Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5287 Post(s)
Liked 3,809 Times
in
2,647 Posts
Chain line is really determined by the rear wheel of the bike and specifically where the middle of the cassette or freewheel stack is. Since that's been standardized to a few different dimensions for different types of bikes, then cranksets were standardized to match.
So if you have a 11 speed road bike, you are safer to just get a crank made for a 11 speed road bike. Though there is enough tolerance with chain line that you can get away with other cranksets. Just may not have ideal and perfect shifting through out the entire range of gears.
So if you have a 11 speed road bike, you are safer to just get a crank made for a 11 speed road bike. Though there is enough tolerance with chain line that you can get away with other cranksets. Just may not have ideal and perfect shifting through out the entire range of gears.