| |
Main
Date: 15 Sep 2007 10:25:31
From: Cychlo-path
Subject: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently 33:16 but
as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal clearance
on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are wishboned/kicked in (or
whatever the term is).
So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a 42 tooth
(biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right in
saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit more proud
of the shell?
What other (or real) factors are there?
Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts, should this
factor in your thoughts.
Thanks
|
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 00:40:07
From: Cychlo-path
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
Thanks both.
"Cychlo-path" <keironk@mail.com > wrote in message
news:vqOGi.65080$1G1.51413@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
> Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
>
> I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently 33:16 but
> as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal clearance
> on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are wishboned/kicked in
(or
> whatever the term is).
>
> So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a 42
tooth
> (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
>
> Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right in
> saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit more
proud
> of the shell?
>
> What other (or real) factors are there?
>
> Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts, should
this
> factor in your thoughts.
>
> Thanks
>
>
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 08:30:21
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
On Sep 15, 4:07 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com > wrote:
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1189860111.399105.288310@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 2:28 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
> > > <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:1189856929.015315.80140@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > On Sep 15, 12:25 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
>
> > > > > I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently
> 33:16
> > > but
> > > > > as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> > > > > 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal
> > > clearance
> > > > > on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are
> wishboned/kicked in
> > > (or
> > > > > whatever the term is).
>
> > > > > So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a
> 42
> > > tooth
> > > > > (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
>
> > > > > Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right
> in
> > > > > saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit
> more
> > > proud
> > > > > of the shell?
>
> > > > > What other (or real) factors are there?
>
> > > > > Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts,
> should
> > > this
> > > > > factor in your thoughts.
>
> > > > > Thanks
>
> > > > Are you using a a SS hub, or just spacers on a reular cassette hub?
> > > > With spacers you can monkey with the chainline easier and move it
> > > > outward and then put your 42 at say the middle position, assuming
> > > > you're not using a SS crank.
>
> > > > Joseph
>
> > > No, i've appropriated a regular cassette along with a good number of 3mm
> and
> > > 1mm spacers so no problem at the backend other than that which Lou
> mentions.
> > > I'm using a SS crank currently (very similar in design to those which
> come
> > > with shimano's nexus gear hub) but for the 42 ring i was going to use
> > > SS/track chainring bolts and an appropriate crank. So now i'm confused,
> what
> > > exactly do you mean?? I suppose this was largely my initial question, if
> > > using the latter chainring setup how do i ensure a good chainline 'up
> > > front', i.e. ensure the ring is in the middle or outer position?
>
> > If you are using a regular MTB tripple crank, the middle position will
> > probably be the easiest one to get it all to work with for a 42x16 or
> > 18. That way you don't have clearance issues from the 42 being too
> > close to the chainstay, nor do you have clearance problems with a big
> > 16 or 18 being too close to the chainstay if you used the outer
> > chainring position.
>
> > Joseph
>
> True enough but i was hoping to just have one chain ring up front.
> Presumably then it's a case of matching the bb spindle length with the shape
> of the stays; pot luck + trial and error?
You can still only have one. Use SS bolts or file down the regular
ones.
As for using a SS crank, I'd check Sheldon's chainline specs and
measure what you've got to work it out.
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 05:41:51
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
On Sep 15, 2:28 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com > wrote:
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1189856929.015315.80140@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 12:25 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
> > > Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
>
> > > I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently 33:16
> but
> > > as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> > > 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal
> clearance
> > > on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are wishboned/kicked in
> (or
> > > whatever the term is).
>
> > > So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a 42
> tooth
> > > (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
>
> > > Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right in
> > > saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit more
> proud
> > > of the shell?
>
> > > What other (or real) factors are there?
>
> > > Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts, should
> this
> > > factor in your thoughts.
>
> > > Thanks
>
> > Are you using a a SS hub, or just spacers on a reular cassette hub?
> > With spacers you can monkey with the chainline easier and move it
> > outward and then put your 42 at say the middle position, assuming
> > you're not using a SS crank.
>
> > Joseph
>
> No, i've appropriated a regular cassette along with a good number of 3mm and
> 1mm spacers so no problem at the backend other than that which Lou mentions.
> I'm using a SS crank currently (very similar in design to those which come
> with shimano's nexus gear hub) but for the 42 ring i was going to use
> SS/track chainring bolts and an appropriate crank. So now i'm confused, what
> exactly do you mean?? I suppose this was largely my initial question, if
> using the latter chainring setup how do i ensure a good chainline 'up
> front', i.e. ensure the ring is in the middle or outer position?
If you are using a regular MTB tripple crank, the middle position will
probably be the easiest one to get it all to work with for a 42x16 or
18. That way you don't have clearance issues from the 42 being too
close to the chainstay, nor do you have clearance problems with a big
16 or 18 being too close to the chainstay if you used the outer
chainring position.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 14:07:10
From: Cychlo-path
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1189860111.399105.288310@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 15, 2:28 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
> > <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1189856929.015315.80140@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 15, 12:25 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
> > > > Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
> >
> > > > I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently
33:16
> > but
> > > > as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> > > > 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal
> > clearance
> > > > on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are
wishboned/kicked in
> > (or
> > > > whatever the term is).
> >
> > > > So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a
42
> > tooth
> > > > (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
> >
> > > > Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right
in
> > > > saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit
more
> > proud
> > > > of the shell?
> >
> > > > What other (or real) factors are there?
> >
> > > > Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts,
should
> > this
> > > > factor in your thoughts.
> >
> > > > Thanks
> >
> > > Are you using a a SS hub, or just spacers on a reular cassette hub?
> > > With spacers you can monkey with the chainline easier and move it
> > > outward and then put your 42 at say the middle position, assuming
> > > you're not using a SS crank.
> >
> > > Joseph
> >
> > No, i've appropriated a regular cassette along with a good number of 3mm
and
> > 1mm spacers so no problem at the backend other than that which Lou
mentions.
> > I'm using a SS crank currently (very similar in design to those which
come
> > with shimano's nexus gear hub) but for the 42 ring i was going to use
> > SS/track chainring bolts and an appropriate crank. So now i'm confused,
what
> > exactly do you mean?? I suppose this was largely my initial question, if
> > using the latter chainring setup how do i ensure a good chainline 'up
> > front', i.e. ensure the ring is in the middle or outer position?
>
> If you are using a regular MTB tripple crank, the middle position will
> probably be the easiest one to get it all to work with for a 42x16 or
> 18. That way you don't have clearance issues from the 42 being too
> close to the chainstay, nor do you have clearance problems with a big
> 16 or 18 being too close to the chainstay if you used the outer
> chainring position.
>
> Joseph
>
True enough but i was hoping to just have one chain ring up front.
Presumably then it's a case of matching the bb spindle length with the shape
of the stays; pot luck + trial and error?
|
| | | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 16:22:28
From: Lou Holtman
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
Cychlo-path wrote:
> <joseph.santaniello@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1189860111.399105.288310@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 15, 2:28 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:1189856929.015315.80140@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sep 15, 12:25 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
>>>>> I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently
> 33:16
>>> but
>>>>> as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
>>>>> 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal
>>> clearance
>>>>> on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are
> wishboned/kicked in
>>> (or
>>>>> whatever the term is).
>>>>> So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a
> 42
>>> tooth
>>>>> (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
>>>>> Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right
> in
>>>>> saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit
> more
>>> proud
>>>>> of the shell?
>>>>> What other (or real) factors are there?
>>>>> Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts,
> should
>>> this
>>>>> factor in your thoughts.
>>>>> Thanks
>>>> Are you using a a SS hub, or just spacers on a reular cassette hub?
>>>> With spacers you can monkey with the chainline easier and move it
>>>> outward and then put your 42 at say the middle position, assuming
>>>> you're not using a SS crank.
>>>> Joseph
>>> No, i've appropriated a regular cassette along with a good number of 3mm
> and
>>> 1mm spacers so no problem at the backend other than that which Lou
> mentions.
>>> I'm using a SS crank currently (very similar in design to those which
> come
>>> with shimano's nexus gear hub) but for the 42 ring i was going to use
>>> SS/track chainring bolts and an appropriate crank. So now i'm confused,
> what
>>> exactly do you mean?? I suppose this was largely my initial question, if
>>> using the latter chainring setup how do i ensure a good chainline 'up
>>> front', i.e. ensure the ring is in the middle or outer position?
>> If you are using a regular MTB tripple crank, the middle position will
>> probably be the easiest one to get it all to work with for a 42x16 or
>> 18. That way you don't have clearance issues from the 42 being too
>> close to the chainstay, nor do you have clearance problems with a big
>> 16 or 18 being too close to the chainstay if you used the outer
>> chainring position.
>>
>> Joseph
>>
>
> True enough but i was hoping to just have one chain ring up front.
> Presumably then it's a case of matching the bb spindle length with the shape
> of the stays; pot luck + trial and error?
>
>
You can cheat a little putting a 1 mm (?) spacer between the BB and BB
shell.
Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 04:48:49
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
On Sep 15, 12:25 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com > wrote:
> Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
>
> I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently 33:16 but
> as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal clearance
> on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are wishboned/kicked in (or
> whatever the term is).
>
> So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a 42 tooth
> (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
>
> Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right in
> saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit more proud
> of the shell?
>
> What other (or real) factors are there?
>
> Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts, should this
> factor in your thoughts.
>
> Thanks
Are you using a a SS hub, or just spacers on a reular cassette hub?
With spacers you can monkey with the chainline easier and move it
outward and then put your 42 at say the middle position, assuming
you're not using a SS crank.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 12:28:12
From: Cychlo-path
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1189856929.015315.80140@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 15, 12:25 pm, "Cychlo-path" <keir...@mail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
> >
> > I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently 33:16
but
> > as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> > 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal
clearance
> > on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are wishboned/kicked in
(or
> > whatever the term is).
> >
> > So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a 42
tooth
> > (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
> >
> > Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right in
> > saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit more
proud
> > of the shell?
> >
> > What other (or real) factors are there?
> >
> > Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts, should
this
> > factor in your thoughts.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> Are you using a a SS hub, or just spacers on a reular cassette hub?
> With spacers you can monkey with the chainline easier and move it
> outward and then put your 42 at say the middle position, assuming
> you're not using a SS crank.
>
> Joseph
>
No, i've appropriated a regular cassette along with a good number of 3mm and
1mm spacers so no problem at the backend other than that which Lou mentions.
I'm using a SS crank currently (very similar in design to those which come
with shimano's nexus gear hub) but for the 42 ring i was going to use
SS/track chainring bolts and an appropriate crank. So now i'm confused, what
exactly do you mean?? I suppose this was largely my initial question, if
using the latter chainring setup how do i ensure a good chainline 'up
front', i.e. ensure the ring is in the middle or outer position?
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 12:55:50
From: Lou Holtman
Subject: Re: SS chainring clearance / bb?
|
Cychlo-path wrote:
> Sorry if this seems simplistic but.....
>
> I've converted my mtb to SS, just for fun really. It's currently 33:16 but
> as i'm using it on flat road for the most part I'm looking in to
> 42:16/42:18. Currently the 33 tooth chainring has ultra minimal clearance
> on the chain stays probably due to the fact they are wishboned/kicked in (or
> whatever the term is).
>
> So the obvious question; how do i ensure chainstay clearance with a 42 tooth
> (biopace ring - so irregular diameter too)??
>
> Is it just a case of bottom bracket spindle length? If so am I right in
> saying that a longer spindle always makes any given chainset sit more proud
> of the shell?
I had the same problem (44T ring). Yes you need a longer spindle, but
the problem is/can be that if you want a perfect chainline the cog has
to move to the outside too. With larger cogs, in my case larger then
17T, the chain can rub against the vertical chainstay (correct term?).
It all depends on the frame though. Try and error ;-).
>
> What other (or real) factors are there?
>
> Also, i intend to use the narrower single speed chainring bolts, should this
> factor in your thoughts.
I dont think so.
Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)
|
|
