Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Old frame/modern equipment, new upgrade - constraints and questions

Notices
Road Cycling ďIt is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.Ē -- Ernest Hemingway

Old frame/modern equipment, new upgrade - constraints and questions

Old 06-13-21, 04:32 PM
  #1  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Old frame/modern equipment, new upgrade - constraints and questions

Hi all,
I mounted a vintage Ď80s frame with modern Shimano equipment, it was a first experiment that eventually worked rather fine considering the first main constraint I didnít want to bypass, i.e. the 126 rear dropout spacing, and the second constraint of needing low gear ratios for uphills. Equipment included : 7 speed freewheel with 7s Altus rear derailleur, no name TY501 (rather heavy) triple crankset for 6/7/8 speed, Sora triple front derailleur, 3x7 Tourney shifters/brakes. I had an issue with brakes that I discussed here in a separate thread and was solved.

While the frame is built with light Columbus tubes, the final bike weight came in not so light at 11,7kg. Of course the chosen equipment was not in the high range, thus Iím now thinking of what can be upgraded to decrease weight and if possible improve responsiveness and power transmission. On many items thereís not much to do (dropbar, seat post, wheels, saddle, brakes). Maybe on stem and pedals thereís some weight to gain. So the first most logical items to replace seem to be the crankset and bottom bracket, i.e. upgrading for the lighter/better quality compact Shimano 105 crankset with 34/50 chainrings and hollowtech bottom bracket (Italian threading), which are however built for 11 speeds.

A few questions for this project:
- could it work?
- to avoid compatibility issues, I suppose I also need the Shimano 105 2x11 front derailleur (for which a braze-on adapter clamp is required, given the old frame) and the 105 2x11 left shifter/lever? Are these compatible with 7-speeds on the rear?
- given I must stick to the 7s freewheel and I cannot change the rear derailleur and right shifter/lever, how to connect front and rear? i.e. what chain should I use, a 7s chain to fit the rear sprocket or a 11s to fit the crankset/front derailleur? Or maybe an intermediate 9s chain? I read on chain width, but still cannot figure out where compatibility issues may come from in this configuration.
- to your experience, would the gain in weight/performance be worth the effort and the cost?
-is there any other compatibility issue that should be taken into account?

Well that makes a lot of questions, sorry ;-)

Many thanks in advance.
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-13-21, 04:52 PM
  #2  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 12,789

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5595 Post(s)
Liked 2,796 Times in 1,622 Posts
Places to drop weight-
- tires
- wheelset
- crankset
- shifters
- cassette
- chain
- bars
- saddle
- seatpost

I don't know why you would take the time and expense to half upgrade the bike. Either move it to 2x11 or keep it as is.
2x7 with front modern 105 shifting and rear Tourney shiting?...why?
mstateglfr is offline  
Likes For mstateglfr:
Old 06-13-21, 05:22 PM
  #3  
Kimmo 
bike whisperer
 
Kimmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,343

Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1279 Post(s)
Liked 501 Times in 361 Posts
Either just spread the frame (totally no big deal with steel, complete mystery why you'd want to keep 126), or... There's a way to get 11s in 126, but just spread the damn frame already.
Kimmo is offline  
Likes For Kimmo:
Old 06-14-21, 02:02 AM
  #4  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Thanks, well a few reasons I see for not wanting to spread : although it’s a common operation, altering dropout spacing always puts some stress on the frame and I prefer to stay safe, especially for a nice Atala frame like this; moreover, the frame size is small, 51cm, and so stays are shorter than average, spreading would add increased stress on them and on the bridge; last, it’s more an economic issue, having started with this configuration (as mentioned, this was a first experiment and didn’t know where I was landing) replacing everything would be too expensive, just the rear wheel has been taylor made to fit the 126 spacing. So I agree, spreading the frame would solve many issues, but for now I’d rather avoiding this option.
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-14-21, 07:09 AM
  #5  
Kimmo 
bike whisperer
 
Kimmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,343

Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1279 Post(s)
Liked 501 Times in 361 Posts
If you change your mind about spreading the frame, and you should, it's a measly 2mm each side, you can just put thicker locknuts on your current wheel as an upgrade path to 8/9/10. You only need a tiny bit of axle in the dropout, just enough to locate it.
Kimmo is offline  
Likes For Kimmo:
Old 06-14-21, 07:59 AM
  #6  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Kimmo View Post
If you change your mind about spreading the frame, and you should, it's a measly 2mm each side, you can just put thicker locknuts on your current wheel as an upgrade path to 8/9/10. You only need a tiny bit of axle in the dropout, just enough to locate it.
Thanks, could be an idea if cannot find a valid alternative with the current setup, but current wheel needs a threaded freewheel, so not sure about max speeds available.
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-14-21, 09:33 AM
  #7  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 12,789

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5595 Post(s)
Liked 2,796 Times in 1,622 Posts
Originally Posted by JackJohn View Post
Thanks, could be an idea if cannot find a valid alternative with the current setup, but current wheel needs a threaded freewheel, so not sure about max speeds available.
Your current wheelset uses a freewheel?

The way I read your plan to drop weight, its a mess and all over the place. Tires, wheels, then crank. Change those to drop some weight. Then if you want to do more, buy a full group.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 06-14-21, 09:55 AM
  #8  
Iride01
Hits [ENTER] b4 thinking
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 7,646

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '91 Schwinn Paramount '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3002 Post(s)
Liked 1,594 Times in 1,162 Posts
I built up my 1991 Paramount from fork and frame with Shimano 105 5800 quite awhile back. It's great. But the bike still weighs about what it did when it would have been new with whatever group they were putting on them then. Tad less than 23 pounds (10.4kg). I was about to do the same for my Raleigh Competition, but realized that it would still weigh pretty much the same as it does now. So I went out and bought a new Tarmac and have absolutely no regrets except that I cycled too long dreaming of the glory days of steel.

If your frame and fork together weigh 6.5 lbs (2.9 kg) or more then it's just too heavy to hope to get down to any light weight. You really need to be down in the 3.5 lbs (1.6 kg) or less if lightness is a goal.

Shimano 105 is quite a bit heavier weight than Ultegra or DuraAce. If you can, just go to a shop with them on display and ask to pick some up. You can feel it just in your hands that Ultegra is much ligher.

Wheels too will offset some weight, but like Ultegra or DuraAce, you'll pay dearly for the little weight you leave behind.
Iride01 is online now  
Old 06-14-21, 03:01 PM
  #9  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01 View Post
I built up my 1991 Paramount from fork and frame with Shimano 105 5800 quite awhile back. It's great. But the bike still weighs about what it did when it would have been new with whatever group they were putting on them then. Tad less than 23 pounds (10.4kg). I was about to do the same for my Raleigh Competition, but realized that it would still weigh pretty much the same as it does now. So I went out and bought a new Tarmac and have absolutely no regrets except that I cycled too long dreaming of the glory days of steel.

If your frame and fork together weigh 6.5 lbs (2.9 kg) or more then it's just too heavy to hope to get down to any light weight. You really need to be down in the 3.5 lbs (1.6 kg) or less if lightness is a goal.

Shimano 105 is quite a bit heavier weight than Ultegra or DuraAce. If you can, just go to a shop with them on display and ask to pick some up. You can feel it just in your hands that Ultegra is much ligher.

Wheels too will offset some weight, but like Ultegra or DuraAce, you'll pay dearly for the little weight you leave behind.
Thanks Iride01, frame and fork weigh exactly 2,9kg. Checking the different specs, I think I can take something around 700-800 grams away through 105 crank/bb and a new stem. So yes, not a big gain in terms of weight but what about improvements in stiffness and responsiveness? I chose this group as it seemed a good price/quality product, agree that Ulegra and DA are lighter. New wheels are not an option for now given 126 spacing and the price already paid for them.

From these constraints the idea of a partial upgrade on the front. Is it that crazy? What about the chain question?
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-14-21, 04:18 PM
  #10  
Kimmo 
bike whisperer
 
Kimmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,343

Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1279 Post(s)
Liked 501 Times in 361 Posts
Originally Posted by JackJohn View Post
New wheels are not an option for now given 126 spacing and the price already paid for them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_c...ones_principle
Kimmo is offline  
Old 06-14-21, 04:39 PM
  #11  
Iride01
Hits [ENTER] b4 thinking
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 7,646

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '91 Schwinn Paramount '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3002 Post(s)
Liked 1,594 Times in 1,162 Posts
The 1.7 pounds (800 grams) you get isn't going to be much bang for the money spent. You might get a better shifting groupset than whatever is currently on it. But that's about it.

Why do you think it'll be stiffer? Are you thinking in the BB because you will be going from cup, cone and spindle to something like a Hollowtech II that puts the bearing further out? I'm not good enough nor powerful enough to feel that. Are you?

And if you don't have the frame spaced to 130 mm, I think you are going to have to do some trial and error to make a 11 speed hub and cassette fit in there without the stays rubbing the chain or cog. So any wheel bought for that will be a big loss whether a budget friendly wheel or a light wheel. Frames can be cold set and 126 to 130 isn't much. Might even have enough spring in the stays, but that's still a risk if you buy all the stuff and find out it won't work.

You can probably buy a better new bike for not much more money. It might not have the 105 group on it. But in many other ways it may be a better bike.

But if you are sentimental about the bike and money isn't an issue... You can at least have a bike that will shift with the best of them today, though you will eventually find out that constantly going up small hills for longs distances the much lighter new bike will have been a better use of money. At least that's what I found out from my experience.
Iride01 is online now  
Old 06-14-21, 05:46 PM
  #12  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
thanks, well Iím still wondering if theyíre a sunk cost or not
Originally Posted by Iride01 View Post
The 1.7 pounds (800 grams) you get isn't going to be much bang for the money spent. You might get a better shifting groupset than whatever is currently on it. But that's about it.

Why do you think it'll be stiffer? Are you thinking in the BB because you will be going from cup, cone and spindle to something like a Hollowtech II that puts the bearing further out? I'm not good enough nor powerful enough to feel that. Are you?

And if you don't have the frame spaced to 130 mm, I think you are going to have to do some trial and error to make a 11 speed hub and cassette fit in there without the stays rubbing the chain or cog. So any wheel bought for that will be a big loss whether a budget friendly wheel or a light wheel. Frames can be cold set and 126 to 130 isn't much. Might even have enough spring in the stays, but that's still a risk if you buy all the stuff and find out it won't work.

You can probably buy a better new bike for not much more money. It might not have the 105 group on it. But in many other ways it may be a better bike.

But if you are sentimental about the bike and money isn't an issue... You can at least have a bike that will shift with the best of them today, though you will eventually find out that constantly going up small hills for longs distances the much lighter new bike will have been a better use of money. At least that's what I found out from my experience.
Youíre right, not much of a gain on weight. On performance yes thatís what I was thinking about stiffness but was not sure about the ultimate outcome should the crank/bb be updated.

In any case, besides being a good road bike, as suggested above this is also a ę sentimental Ľ bike, riding it is pleasant and if upgrading as I thought is too much of a hassle for so little improvement Iíll pass. Iíll keep in mind the cold setting for a possible broader upgrade some day. And use my carbon Cannondale for the longer rides.

Thank you guys.
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 06:58 AM
  #13  
SJX426 
Senior Member
 
SJX426's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 7,933

Bikes: '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '90 De Rosa Professional, '91 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1041 Post(s)
Liked 708 Times in 442 Posts
@JackJohn - Your stays are shorter than average as it still has to accommodate the average wheel and tire. They may be shorter with racing geometry but still in the racing geometry average.
I am surprised you didn't post in C&V. I have a 60cm 84 Trek 760 with all Superbe Pro (indexed) and it is under 21lbs. Yes it is a 7 speed freewheel with 126 spacing. Don't now what the frame and fork weigh.
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
SJX426 is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 07:45 AM
  #14  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by SJX426 View Post
@JackJohn - Your stays are shorter than average as it still has to accommodate the average wheel and tire. They may be shorter with racing geometry but still in the racing geometry average.
I am surprised you didn't post in C&V. I have a 60cm 84 Trek 760 with all Superbe Pro (indexed) and it is under 21lbs. Yes it is a 7 speed freewheel with 126 spacing. Don't now what the frame and fork weigh.
Thanks, stays measure 405mm, geometry is indeed a racing one. Didnít post in c&v because of the modern equipment, could have done it.
21lbs with 60cm steel frame and Ď80s-90s equipment? Wow, thatís light ! What is missing?

btw, after all the above suggestions on wheels, I managed to try a new Campagnolo Scirocco rear wheel with a 11s cassette and surprise surprise, it fits with little effort, spring is enough not to force a definitive spreading. Quick weight calculations would point to a 1-1,1kg overall gain by replacing wheels, stem and crank/derailleurs/levers/chain group.
So in this new configuration, do you think there would be any significant perceived improvement in riding that would be worth the effort and cost? Or should I let go?
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 09:30 AM
  #15  
SJX426 
Senior Member
 
SJX426's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 7,933

Bikes: '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '90 De Rosa Professional, '91 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1041 Post(s)
Liked 708 Times in 442 Posts
@JackJohn - I would also check your RD hanger alignment to ensure good shifting performance.
As others have mentioned, Wheels make the most difference. Of course you should be open to the performance of having a racing geometry, Only you can determine the return on investment. For me, I like to ride on a racing geometry and have high responsiveness.

This is the 760
P1040454 on Flickr
P1040796 on Flickr

My current favorite, 1988 De Rosa Professional with all Record 10V, <22lbs. A lot of $$ invested in this one. Did I say it is my favorite?
P1040420 on Flickr
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
SJX426 is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 10:13 AM
  #16  
Iride01
Hits [ENTER] b4 thinking
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 7,646

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '91 Schwinn Paramount '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3002 Post(s)
Liked 1,594 Times in 1,162 Posts
A vintage De Rosa in some models were already a 20 pound bike back in the day. So like I said to the OP, you won't make it much lighter with out expensive components.

The red bike is a pretty bike though, don't get me wrong. I'd be envious if I were still in the steel bike game.
Iride01 is online now  
Old 06-15-21, 10:16 AM
  #17  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by SJX426 View Post
My current favorite, 1988 De Rosa Professional with all Record 10V, <22lbs. A lot of $$ invested in this one. Did I say it is my favorite?
P1040420 on Flickr
Thanks, ďoldĒ De Rosa bikes are among my favourite too: top quality build and incredibly handsome. Yours is really nice, congrats.
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 10:25 AM
  #18  
jadocs
Senior Member
 
jadocs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 2,192

Bikes: Ti, Mn Cr Ni Mo Nb, Al, C

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 941 Post(s)
Liked 519 Times in 345 Posts
Love me some vintage frames with modern components. I agree with all above, I would spread it. I have a vintage bike that I upgraded with modern components that comes in just under 20lbs with pedals and bottle cages.
jadocs is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 10:38 AM
  #19  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by jadocs View Post
Love me some vintage frames with modern components. I agree with all above, I would spread it. I have a vintage bike that I upgraded with modern components that comes in just under 20lbs with pedals and bottle cages.
thanks, what wheels and groupset did you use? By my calculations, with Campy Scirocco and Shimano 105 itís not getting under 10,5kg. Even allowing for a lighter full SLX Columbus frame it could barely go under 10kg, i.e. 22lbs. So maybe with even lighter wheels and as was mentioned earlier an Ultegra groupset?
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 10:45 AM
  #20  
jadocs
Senior Member
 
jadocs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 2,192

Bikes: Ti, Mn Cr Ni Mo Nb, Al, C

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 941 Post(s)
Liked 519 Times in 345 Posts
Wheels will make a big difference. I am using carbon wheels with Campagnolo Record 11 speed on a Columbus steel frame.
jadocs is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 11:38 AM
  #21  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 25,830
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14011 Post(s)
Liked 2,188 Times in 1,636 Posts
Upgrading to new components should be easy enough. As mentioned above, you should go all the way rather than some kind of kluge.

You will likely need some kind of an external bottom bracket, but there are many available.

I run 9-speed in my frame at 126mm (which means 10 speed should also work). I don't know about 11 speed. Tolerances are tight. I have a mighty small outer rear sprocket (fit tight), and an off-center rear rim.

As far as spacing the frame on a small frame, the distance from the dropout to the brake bridge will be approximately the same on all 700c frames. Likewise, the chainstay length will be approximately the same, and is more dependent on the frame design. Is the brake bridge narrower than on a larger frame? It may not make a big difference. Most people clamp the brake bridge during the respacing process.

You might be able to squeeze a 10 speed hub in your space (with the off-center/asymmetric rim). It will be very tight, and may depend a bit on the right rear dropout design.

You can mount an 11-34 cassette onto a 10-speed freehub. For smaller cassettes, it will require either modifying the inside of the cassette, or buying one that has been modified. Another option would be to use a 11-speed cassette, and drop 1 or 2 sprockets (effectively changing it to a 9 or 10 speed cassette). I don't know if a 11 to 9 will fit on a 7 speed freehub, but it will be close. Perhaps I could run a test. Maybe with the 34T inner sprocket.

Picking out a stable way to modify your cassette can be tricky. If you do choose to use a 7 speed freehub, then make sure you have the 11T groove in the end if you plan on using a 11T sprocket.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 11:46 AM
  #22  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 25,830
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14011 Post(s)
Liked 2,188 Times in 1,636 Posts
For wheels, if you are going to mess around with rear dropout spacing, non-standard cassettes, off-center/asymmetric rims, etc then you may find yourself building a custom rear wheel (and potentially a matching front).

Or finding a wheelset that can be modified to your needs depending on how you choose to modify them.

Of course, by respacing the rearend, you can choose any wheelset made in the last 20+ years, again, depending on whether you choose a rear cassette 11x34 (10s compatible), or something smaller.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 11:47 AM
  #23  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by jadocs View Post
Wheels will make a big difference. I am using carbon wheels with Campagnolo Record 11 speed on a Columbus steel frame.
I see, that makes sense thenÖ
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 12:00 PM
  #24  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK View Post
Upgrading to new components should be easy enough. As mentioned above, you should go all the way rather than some kind of kluge.

You will likely need some kind of an external bottom bracket, but there are many available.

I run 9-speed in my frame at 126mm (which means 10 speed should also work). I don't know about 11 speed. Tolerances are tight. I have a mighty small outer rear sprocket (fit tight), and an off-center rear rim.

As far as spacing the frame on a small frame, the distance from the dropout to the brake bridge will be approximately the same on all 700c frames. Likewise, the chainstay length will be approximately the same, and is more dependent on the frame design. Is the brake bridge narrower than on a larger frame? It may not make a big difference. Most people clamp the brake bridge during the respacing process.

You might be able to squeeze a 10 speed hub in your space (with the off-center/asymmetric rim). It will be very tight, and may depend a bit on the right rear dropout design.

You can mount an 11-34 cassette onto a 10-speed freehub. For smaller cassettes, it will require either modifying the inside of the cassette, or buying one that has been modified. Another option would be to use a 11-speed cassette, and drop 1 or 2 sprockets (effectively changing it to a 9 or 10 speed cassette). I don't know if a 11 to 9 will fit on a 7 speed freehub, but it will be close. Perhaps I could run a test. Maybe with the 34T inner sprocket.

Picking out a stable way to modify your cassette can be tricky. If you do choose to use a 7 speed freehub, then make sure you have the 11T groove in the end if you plan on using a 11T sprocket.
thanks for the tips, good idea about clamping the bridge to avoid surprises.
concerning the number of speeds, as mentioned above I was astonished when tried a Mavic Aksium with an 11s cassette and saw it fitted thanks to only a small effort with the hands on the stays. The 11t sprocket and the chain didnít seem to rub against the internal dropout. Of course I couldít run a proper test but at first sight it seemed ok.
JackJohn is offline  
Old 06-15-21, 12:02 PM
  #25  
JackJohn
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK View Post
For wheels, if you are going to mess around with rear dropout spacing, non-standard cassettes, off-center/asymmetric rims, etc then you may find yourself building a custom rear wheel (and potentially a matching front).

Or finding a wheelset that can be modified to your needs depending on how you choose to modify them.

Of course, by respacing the rearend, you can choose any wheelset made in the last 20+ years, again, depending on whether you choose a rear cassette 11x34 (10s compatible), or something smaller.
thanks!
JackJohn is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.