Planning the new Ritchey breakaway tandem build
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Well, looks like this is going to be more complicated than I thought.
I was going to convert the FSA Gossamer triple crank to a 50/34 double. But turns out no one makes a 34 tooth chainring with a 74 BCD! So now I'm stumped. Maybe I'll have to do a 48/32, or I don't know what. It's really not straightforward, a tandem drivetrain...
I was going to convert the FSA Gossamer triple crank to a 50/34 double. But turns out no one makes a 34 tooth chainring with a 74 BCD! So now I'm stumped. Maybe I'll have to do a 48/32, or I don't know what. It's really not straightforward, a tandem drivetrain...
#27
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Does anyone know if it’s possible to replace the FSA Gossamer stoker crank with a regular, non-tandem Gossamer double crank on the drive side? Or is the spindle not long enough?
That’d be cheaper and simpler than the other options I’m looking at.
That’d be cheaper and simpler than the other options I’m looking at.
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,992
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2494 Post(s)
Liked 738 Times
in
522 Posts
Well, looks like this is going to be more complicated than I thought.
I was going to convert the FSA Gossamer triple crank to a 50/34 double. But turns out no one makes a 34 tooth chainring with a 74 BCD! So now I'm stumped. Maybe I'll have to do a 48/32, or I don't know what. It's really not straightforward, a tandem drivetrain...
I was going to convert the FSA Gossamer triple crank to a 50/34 double. But turns out no one makes a 34 tooth chainring with a 74 BCD! So now I'm stumped. Maybe I'll have to do a 48/32, or I don't know what. It's really not straightforward, a tandem drivetrain...
Last edited by Leisesturm; 11-29-21 at 09:23 PM.
#29
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
I am not at all sure but I don't see why an FSA Gossamer road double crank could not replace the triple. The axle should be shorter because it is a double, but it should still fit a standard BSA 68 BB. You should have less chainlink issue with the double than with the triple run as a double.
Our new tandem (which I'm still building up) will have 46/30 and 11 speed 10-42 with GRX di2 shifting. We have not ridden it yet but plenty of people have used GRX with a 42 tooth cassette, with a RoadLink DM. 46x10 is a bigger gear than 48x11, and in our area (New England) we are often spun out (>30 mph) on our current tandem. Low gear with this setup is 19 gear inch which we use often and goes a little under 3 mph.
I went with Light Bicycle WR 45 rims laced to 32 hole DT 240 hubs. Not the cheapest wheelset for sure and they have not stood the test of time, but I seriously doubt they are not strong enough.
I had a set of TRP Hy/RD brakes on a gravel bike and would never recommend them for a tandem. I know others have used them with success and it sounds like it really matters what levers you are using. The main issue I had was not power but getting that power without the lever bottoming out. It just so happens I had Rival levers. I don't understand the resistance to hydraulic brakes in the tandem world. But that is another thread!
Our new tandem (which I'm still building up) will have 46/30 and 11 speed 10-42 with GRX di2 shifting. We have not ridden it yet but plenty of people have used GRX with a 42 tooth cassette, with a RoadLink DM. 46x10 is a bigger gear than 48x11, and in our area (New England) we are often spun out (>30 mph) on our current tandem. Low gear with this setup is 19 gear inch which we use often and goes a little under 3 mph.
I went with Light Bicycle WR 45 rims laced to 32 hole DT 240 hubs. Not the cheapest wheelset for sure and they have not stood the test of time, but I seriously doubt they are not strong enough.
I had a set of TRP Hy/RD brakes on a gravel bike and would never recommend them for a tandem. I know others have used them with success and it sounds like it really matters what levers you are using. The main issue I had was not power but getting that power without the lever bottoming out. It just so happens I had Rival levers. I don't understand the resistance to hydraulic brakes in the tandem world. But that is another thread!
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Fargo ND
Posts: 898
Bikes: Time Scylon, Lynskey R350, Ritchey Breakaway, Ritchey Double Switchback, Lynskey Ridgeline, ICAN Fatbike
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 463 Post(s)
Liked 546 Times
in
306 Posts
I have mine setup as a flat bar bike partly so I can easily remove the brakes from the bike and pack them in leak resistant plastic bags when we fly. With a drop bar setup you would have to leave the levers/master cylinder on the bars and find a bag big enough to hold both the brakes and the bars, or get very fast at taping the bars.
#31
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
BTW - the new FSA Gossamer Road Double has many chainring size options, including 48/32 and 46/30. Since you have the FSA tandem set already, why not give FSA a shot at answering your question and let us know the answer!
#32
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Just heard back from FSA, and sadly it won't work. The tandem cranks and regular cranks use a different spindle. Ack.
So, I decided to go ahead and do a 48/32 double with a 11-32 cassette. Considering the FSA triple comes with a 30t small ring (traditional tandem gearing), I don't think 32t is outrageous. If we ever travel somewhere really hilly (we live in the prairie) I'll pop on an 11-40 with a roadlink. 48-11 still gets us to 31.5mph pedaling at 90rpm.
So, I decided to go ahead and do a 48/32 double with a 11-32 cassette. Considering the FSA triple comes with a 30t small ring (traditional tandem gearing), I don't think 32t is outrageous. If we ever travel somewhere really hilly (we live in the prairie) I'll pop on an 11-40 with a roadlink. 48-11 still gets us to 31.5mph pedaling at 90rpm.
#33
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
Just heard back from FSA, and sadly it won't work. The tandem cranks and regular cranks use a different spindle. Ack.
So, I decided to go ahead and do a 48/32 double with a 11-32 cassette. Considering the FSA triple comes with a 30t small ring (traditional tandem gearing), I don't think 32t is outrageous. If we ever travel somewhere really hilly (we live in the prairie) I'll pop on an 11-40 with a roadlink. 48-11 still gets us to 31.5mph pedaling at 90rpm.
So, I decided to go ahead and do a 48/32 double with a 11-32 cassette. Considering the FSA triple comes with a 30t small ring (traditional tandem gearing), I don't think 32t is outrageous. If we ever travel somewhere really hilly (we live in the prairie) I'll pop on an 11-40 with a roadlink. 48-11 still gets us to 31.5mph pedaling at 90rpm.
#34
Full Member
Well, looks like this is going to be more complicated than I thought.
I was going to convert the FSA Gossamer triple crank to a 50/34 double. But turns out no one makes a 34 tooth chainring with a 74 BCD! So now I'm stumped. Maybe I'll have to do a 48/32, or I don't know what. It's really not straightforward, a tandem drivetrain...
I was going to convert the FSA Gossamer triple crank to a 50/34 double. But turns out no one makes a 34 tooth chainring with a 74 BCD! So now I'm stumped. Maybe I'll have to do a 48/32, or I don't know what. It's really not straightforward, a tandem drivetrain...
We now run a 36/50 with an 11-42 and that puts us almost right at the lowest we had with the triple while we gave up a little on the high end. If you play with the combinations in a spread sheet you should be able to see if any combination would work for you.
#35
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
I tried putting the FSA Energy double from my gravel bike on the tandem I'm building up and the problem is that the tandem rear hub is 148 mm - the crank arms hit the chainstays. So that is going to be a problem if what you are switching out changes the axle. Some FSA cranks have the BB spindle on the drive side; their modular cranks have the spindle on the non drive side and then it should be possible to switch out the drive side.
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Update: Ritchey got one of these back in stock, and we snapped it up. First impressions are great. The paint is gorgeous! The Breakaway clamps took some fiddling with, but I bet that'll get easier with practice.
They forgot to include a cable guide under the stoker's BB, so I'm awaiting one of those so I can get the cables routed properly.
Currently halfway built (still need to get a MegaExo bottom bracket tool...):
They forgot to include a cable guide under the stoker's BB, so I'm awaiting one of those so I can get the cables routed properly.
Currently halfway built (still need to get a MegaExo bottom bracket tool...):
Likes For samkl:
#37
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
That frame looks nice!
I'm curious to know how the crank set up is working out. You said you are going with a 48/32 double - but which? You already found out from FSA that the standard road double will not work so what does?
I'm curious to know how the crank set up is working out. You said you are going with a 48/32 double - but which? You already found out from FSA that the standard road double will not work so what does?
#38
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Funny you should ask--this is exactly what's driving me crazy right now.
I got 48/32 chainrings to convert my FSA Gossamer tandem crankset from a triple to a double, putting the 48 in the middle position and the 32 in the small position.
But when I installed the new chainrings the spacing was clearly off: the chainrings were way too close to each other. If there was a chain on it, it would rub against the 48t chainring bolts. So I'm totally stumped. The new chainrings are 11-speed, and the old were 9 speed, but I don't see how that would create this problem.
I'm considering getting chainring spacers to fix it, but I'm very open to suggestions. Otherwise I might sell the FSA crankset and get a proper double, but I can't seem to find any tandem doubles except for ultra-expensive carbon ones.
#39
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
Did you get a new chain? If not, that could be the reason - although that only makes partial sense since 9 spd worked before and it's the same crank.
Your new setup has a much bigger jump in ring size between the inner and middle rings and with the chain rubbing on the 48, that sounds like a chainline problem. Moving the crank out (is possible) should help.
Curious to hear other thoughts.
Your new setup has a much bigger jump in ring size between the inner and middle rings and with the chain rubbing on the 48, that sounds like a chainline problem. Moving the crank out (is possible) should help.
Curious to hear other thoughts.
#40
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
Thinking about this again - did you use the original chainring bolts on the 48? There used to be 2 rings there and now there is 1, so you need shorter single ring bolts.
#41
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
The chainrings are just too close to each other, and I’m totally confused as to why.
#42
Full Member
Interesting thought, but i don’t think that’s it. I did use the original bolts. I tried single ring bolts too, but they were actually too short. The original bolts fit fine, and there was enough excess thread that they could still tighten.
The chainrings are just too close to each other, and I’m totally confused as to why.
The chainrings are just too close to each other, and I’m totally confused as to why.
#43
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 171
Bikes: Merlin Road, Rivendell Road, Arvon custom tandme, Hi-Light G-7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times
in
10 Posts
But when I installed the new chainrings the spacing was clearly off: the chainrings were way too close to each other. If there was a chain on it, it would rub against the 48t chainring bolts. So I'm totally stumped. The new chainrings are 11-speed, and the old were 9 speed, but I don't see how that would create this problem.
But when I installed the new chainrings the spacing was clearly off: the chainrings were way too close to each other. If there was a chain on it, it would rub against the 48t chainring bolts. So I'm totally stumped. The new chainrings are 11-speed, and the old were 9 speed, but I don't see how that would create this problem.
Likes For scycheng:
#44
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
After much delay, we just got back from our first trip… and first ride on the new bike!
I couldn’t figure out the chainring issue so I had to swap out the Ultegra drivetrain for a 3x9 with bar-end shifters.
Overall impressions: we like it a lot. Compared to our old Burley, it’s much quieter, the drivetrain works much better, and my stoker says it’s much more comfortable (probably the eeSilk seatpost). For me it’s a little more comfortable too. It’s also stiffer—noticeable when climbing out of the saddle. I think it’s 10lbs lighter too. Overall we love it.
It feels very sturdy, which is unexpected because the breakaway clamps seem so insubstantial in your hand.
The most noticeable thing to me is the handling. The steering is so sluggish that I thought the headset was too tight! But no, I triple checked it. It just has very high trail. I’m sure I’ll get used to it but it’s pretty weird.
The disc brakes are interesting. They work great on flat surfaces, but the lack of a drum brake made descending a short, twisty, steep mountain a little sketchy. I didn’t ride the brakes but when we got to the bottom, I poured water on the 203mm rotors and it sizzled like a hot frying pan.
Overall we’re looking forward to many adventurous miles on it!
I couldn’t figure out the chainring issue so I had to swap out the Ultegra drivetrain for a 3x9 with bar-end shifters.
Overall impressions: we like it a lot. Compared to our old Burley, it’s much quieter, the drivetrain works much better, and my stoker says it’s much more comfortable (probably the eeSilk seatpost). For me it’s a little more comfortable too. It’s also stiffer—noticeable when climbing out of the saddle. I think it’s 10lbs lighter too. Overall we love it.
It feels very sturdy, which is unexpected because the breakaway clamps seem so insubstantial in your hand.
The most noticeable thing to me is the handling. The steering is so sluggish that I thought the headset was too tight! But no, I triple checked it. It just has very high trail. I’m sure I’ll get used to it but it’s pretty weird.
The disc brakes are interesting. They work great on flat surfaces, but the lack of a drum brake made descending a short, twisty, steep mountain a little sketchy. I didn’t ride the brakes but when we got to the bottom, I poured water on the 203mm rotors and it sizzled like a hot frying pan.
Overall we’re looking forward to many adventurous miles on it!
Last edited by samkl; 04-15-22 at 09:36 AM.
#45
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 196
Bikes: 1984 homemade 531SL road bike; 1988 Ritchey TimberComp; 1997 Nashbar tandem; 1998 Kona Explosif; Specialized Epic, Scott CR1 Pro; Salsa Beargrease; Curtlo custom Tandem, Curtlo custom S3 steel gravel bike.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 49 Times
in
37 Posts
The most noticeable thing to me is the handling. The steering is so sluggish that I thought the headset was too tight! But no, I triple checked it. It just has very high trail. I’m sure I’ll get used to it but it’s pretty weird.
The disc brakes are interesting. They work great on flat surfaces, but the lack of a drum brake made descending a short, twisty, steep mountain a little sketchy. I didn’t ride the brakes but when we got to the bottom, I poured water on the 203mm rotors and it sizzled like a hot frying pan.
And don't throw water on your hot rotors! They'll warp.
#46
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Hm, interesting. Whatever it was, it was definitely noticeable, but I’m sure I’ll get used to it.
#47
Full Member
A bit off topic but interesting story: my wife/stoker and I drove our tandem from our home in the south sf bay to the coast to ride one of our favorite routes near Pescadero, CA. Driving back home up steep narrow Alpine road, we came upon a tall couple riding a sky blue tandem at a fast pace uphill. When we could pass safely, I glanced over and saw that it was Tom Ritchey and his wife, with big smiles on their faces. I go "that’s Tom Ritchey!", and my wife says "who’s Tom Ritchey?" They seemed to have no problem with how the bike was handling ☺️
Likes For reburns:
#48
Tandem Mountain Climber
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 4,104
Bikes: Calfee Tandem, Litespeed Gravel, SuperSix Evo HM, Larry vs. Harry Bullitt (e-cargo)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
1 Post
I really wanted to build one of these for travel. But the fact they only come in one size was deal-breaker. Sweet bike!
#49
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 518
Bikes: 2004 Trek 520, resto-modded 1987 Cannondale SR400, rando-modded 1976 AD Vent Noir; 2019 Wabi Classic; 1989? Burley Duet
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked 93 Times
in
51 Posts
Thanks. We really like it. Quite a bargain too with the couplers and the cases included.