FYI: VO 107mm BB and Sugino XD2 crank incompatibility
550 views
Skip to first unread message
Thomas Lynn Skean
Jul 4, 2010, 10:43:42 PM7/4/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Hi!
I tried to mount a Sugino XD2 crank from RBW on a 107mm VO bottom
bracket and couldn't make it work. Mounting the crank onto the
spindle, before I had slid it on far enough to get the appropriate
torque on the crank bolt, the inner portion of the crank arm
interfered with the bottom bracket itself! At first when I was having
trouble turning the cranks I thought... hmmm, did I ruin a bearing or
something? But no, it was just that the crank arm was literally jammed
up against the bottom bracket itself. Just plain weird.
Anyway, I suspect both the VO bottom bracket and the XD2 crank I have
are perfectly fine normal examples of their kind. And I suspect the VO
BB is a fine product in general, as is the XD2 crank. They just didn't
work together for me.
The only other bottom bracket I had lying around was a 113mm Truvativ,
which turns just fine for now. When it shows age, I may replace it
with a larger VO. I wasn't really very close to the required torque on
the crank when it came in contact with the bottom bracket. It isn't
obvious that a 110mm VO bottom bracket would work. I suspect a 113mm
would, though.
Perhaps I should just get the 107mm from RBW. This would give me the
intended chainline. However, I'm going to eyeball carefully my current
set up. I haven't concerned myself with Q-factor up to this point;
longer spindles on a bottom bracket don't bother me as long as the
chainline is reasonable for how I ride. I need to give that more
thought. I may even go with a 118mm BB if the chainline is okay. At
that point, the crank arms might just slip right past the two-legged
Pletscher kickstand when its deployed. That basically turns the
kickstand into a work stand. (That and a couple of ceiling-mounted $3
bicycle hooks were the only stand I used to the build the bike up with
in the first place.)
Anyway... just in case anybody else tries the 107mm VO BB with an XD2
crank. I wouldn't expect it to work right out of the box.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
I tried to mount a Sugino XD2 crank from RBW on a 107mm VO bottom
bracket and couldn't make it work. Mounting the crank onto the
spindle, before I had slid it on far enough to get the appropriate
torque on the crank bolt, the inner portion of the crank arm
interfered with the bottom bracket itself! At first when I was having
trouble turning the cranks I thought... hmmm, did I ruin a bearing or
something? But no, it was just that the crank arm was literally jammed
up against the bottom bracket itself. Just plain weird.
Anyway, I suspect both the VO bottom bracket and the XD2 crank I have
are perfectly fine normal examples of their kind. And I suspect the VO
BB is a fine product in general, as is the XD2 crank. They just didn't
work together for me.
The only other bottom bracket I had lying around was a 113mm Truvativ,
which turns just fine for now. When it shows age, I may replace it
with a larger VO. I wasn't really very close to the required torque on
the crank when it came in contact with the bottom bracket. It isn't
obvious that a 110mm VO bottom bracket would work. I suspect a 113mm
would, though.
Perhaps I should just get the 107mm from RBW. This would give me the
intended chainline. However, I'm going to eyeball carefully my current
set up. I haven't concerned myself with Q-factor up to this point;
longer spindles on a bottom bracket don't bother me as long as the
chainline is reasonable for how I ride. I need to give that more
thought. I may even go with a 118mm BB if the chainline is okay. At
that point, the crank arms might just slip right past the two-legged
Pletscher kickstand when its deployed. That basically turns the
kickstand into a work stand. (That and a couple of ceiling-mounted $3
bicycle hooks were the only stand I used to the build the bike up with
in the first place.)
Anyway... just in case anybody else tries the 107mm VO BB with an XD2
crank. I wouldn't expect it to work right out of the box.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
Justin August
Jul 5, 2010, 1:04:40 AM7/5/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Did you check with VO and/or try other samples of either products? I
think it's premature to call them "incompatible" after only one test
case.
On Jul 4, 10:43 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net>
wrote:
think it's premature to call them "incompatible" after only one test
case.
On Jul 4, 10:43 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net>
wrote:
charlie
Jul 5, 2010, 2:31:04 AM7/5/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
That sounds kind of odd to me. I use a 107 BB with a Sugino and never
had crank arm interference. Actually I've used three different Sugino
triple cranks and one FSA square taper crank with the 107mm sized BB
and no problems at all. I'll bet that bottom bracket or the crank arm
is machined over sized slightly, making for a bad fit. A 107mm BB
spindle ought to be a 107mm regardless of brand.
On Jul 4, 7:43 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net>
wrote:
had crank arm interference. Actually I've used three different Sugino
triple cranks and one FSA square taper crank with the 107mm sized BB
and no problems at all. I'll bet that bottom bracket or the crank arm
is machined over sized slightly, making for a bad fit. A 107mm BB
spindle ought to be a 107mm regardless of brand.
On Jul 4, 7:43 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net>
wrote:
cyclofiend
Jul 5, 2010, 1:00:47 PM7/5/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Few questions on this one...
Does the VO BB have an asymmetrical spindle? Or are you sure that the
bb cartridge is correctly seated against the cup?
Are you talking about the "Grand Cru" or the "Threadless" version?
Have you measured the bb spindle to make sure it is as advertised?
- Jim
Does the VO BB have an asymmetrical spindle? Or are you sure that the
bb cartridge is correctly seated against the cup?
Are you talking about the "Grand Cru" or the "Threadless" version?
Have you measured the bb spindle to make sure it is as advertised?
- Jim
Garth
Jul 5, 2010, 9:05:20 AM7/5/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
JIS tapers can and do vary from brand to brand. Some of the tapers
fit in further than others. From my experience, they can vary as much
as 4mm total, or 2mm each side.
Couple of things.
1. Did you measure the actual length of the VO BB?
2. Did you try using a 2mm driveside spacer underneath the BB cup?
2. What's the chainline w/Truvative 113mm BB ?
fit in further than others. From my experience, they can vary as much
as 4mm total, or 2mm each side.
Couple of things.
1. Did you measure the actual length of the VO BB?
2. Did you try using a 2mm driveside spacer underneath the BB cup?
2. What's the chainline w/Truvative 113mm BB ?
Jeremy Till
Jul 5, 2010, 2:34:31 PM7/5/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Hm, i find that really odd as I run a VO *103mm* with an XD2 double to
get good chainlines with my dingle cog. The crank is *right* up
against the cup, but the machining around the taper hole on the crank
does its job and there's no interference. Is this one of the newer
XD2 with that machining? Is the crank new or used (i.e. is possible
that the tapers on it are blown out?)? Is it a double or a triple?
get good chainlines with my dingle cog. The crank is *right* up
against the cup, but the machining around the taper hole on the crank
does its job and there's no interference. Is this one of the newer
XD2 with that machining? Is the crank new or used (i.e. is possible
that the tapers on it are blown out?)? Is it a double or a triple?
Thomas Lynn Skean
Jul 6, 2010, 12:20:15 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Hmmm.... well, the crankset was purchased new from RBW within the last
year or so. It had been mounted once. I used a torque wrench and did
not exceed the maximum torque on written on the crank arm bolts. If
the tapers are blown out, it's amazingly easy to do. I'll find out
over time I guess (when my pedals start moving funny or something).
I don't know about any changes in machining on the XD2. Perhaps that's
the explanation; mine is at least 6 months old, maybe as much as a
year old.
What's the difference between a triple and a double XD2? Isn't the XD2
QuickBeam sold by RBW just a triple with the outer chainring replaced
by a chainguard? I've never seen an XD2 anywhere else; I guess I
always assumed it was either some other model re-named for RBW's
purposes or simply a specific variety of Sugino crank marketed through
RBW. Didn't know there was a triple/double distinction.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
> > Thomas Lynn Skean- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
year or so. It had been mounted once. I used a torque wrench and did
not exceed the maximum torque on written on the crank arm bolts. If
the tapers are blown out, it's amazingly easy to do. I'll find out
over time I guess (when my pedals start moving funny or something).
I don't know about any changes in machining on the XD2. Perhaps that's
the explanation; mine is at least 6 months old, maybe as much as a
year old.
What's the difference between a triple and a double XD2? Isn't the XD2
QuickBeam sold by RBW just a triple with the outer chainring replaced
by a chainguard? I've never seen an XD2 anywhere else; I guess I
always assumed it was either some other model re-named for RBW's
purposes or simply a specific variety of Sugino crank marketed through
RBW. Didn't know there was a triple/double distinction.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thomas Lynn Skean
Jul 6, 2010, 12:25:29 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Don't know about symmetrical vs. asymmetrical. I can measure it when I
get a chance. Wouldn't it be symmetrical unless otherwise indicated?
Perhaps you're suggesting it's out of alignment somehow?
As far as I know, the BB cartridge and the drive-side cup are one unit
on this BB; it was the drive-side crank arm that interfered with the
BB.
It's the Grand Cru, not the threadless.
No, I simply assumed it was a 107mm since that's what I ordered and
that's what the package said. In light of some having used a VO 103mm
BB with an XD2 crank, I'll measure it to see what size the spindle
actually is. I note that the inner chainring was not in contact with
the chainstay; so I'm guessing it was a 107mm minimum (as I have heard
elsewhere that a 107mm BB XD2 combination can lead to a tight
chainstay/chainring clearance).
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
get a chance. Wouldn't it be symmetrical unless otherwise indicated?
Perhaps you're suggesting it's out of alignment somehow?
As far as I know, the BB cartridge and the drive-side cup are one unit
on this BB; it was the drive-side crank arm that interfered with the
BB.
It's the Grand Cru, not the threadless.
No, I simply assumed it was a 107mm since that's what I ordered and
that's what the package said. In light of some having used a VO 103mm
BB with an XD2 crank, I'll measure it to see what size the spindle
actually is. I note that the inner chainring was not in contact with
the chainstay; so I'm guessing it was a 107mm minimum (as I have heard
elsewhere that a 107mm BB XD2 combination can lead to a tight
chainstay/chainring clearance).
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
Thomas Lynn Skean
Jul 6, 2010, 12:32:36 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Didn't measure it but will do so. Don't see how a spacer matters; a
spacer wouldn't change the position of the spindle relative to the
driveside face of the BB, would it? Don't know what the chainline is
on the Truvativ 113mm BB; that's too tricky to measure for me to get
it right.
I can certainly believe there are variations. Perhaps I am suffering
from those variations. Or perhaps I *do* have a flaky instance of one
(or both! what are the odds!) of these items.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
spacer wouldn't change the position of the spindle relative to the
driveside face of the BB, would it? Don't know what the chainline is
on the Truvativ 113mm BB; that's too tricky to measure for me to get
it right.
I can certainly believe there are variations. Perhaps I am suffering
from those variations. Or perhaps I *do* have a flaky instance of one
(or both! what are the odds!) of these items.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
Thomas Lynn Skean
Jul 6, 2010, 12:43:37 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
I can see your point. Though the fact is that *mine* are incompatible,
so I think the word is correctly used. I acknowledge that someone
might interpret that as meaning they are known to be uniformly
incompatible. But that's a reach without reading the thread, where I
definitely speak only of mine.
I haven't tried other samples of either. I can't say I intend to do so
(just as expensive for me as it would be for anybody reading this).
But if someone else is using a VO Grand Cru 107mm BB with an RBW-
purchased XD2 triple crankset, I'd love to hear about it of course.
Even better would be if someone were to purchase a VO Grand Cru 107mm
BB and XD2 crankset tomorrow and make them work. Either situation
would support the notion that one of my parts is not-quite-right.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
so I think the word is correctly used. I acknowledge that someone
might interpret that as meaning they are known to be uniformly
incompatible. But that's a reach without reading the thread, where I
definitely speak only of mine.
I haven't tried other samples of either. I can't say I intend to do so
(just as expensive for me as it would be for anybody reading this).
But if someone else is using a VO Grand Cru 107mm BB with an RBW-
purchased XD2 triple crankset, I'd love to hear about it of course.
Even better would be if someone were to purchase a VO Grand Cru 107mm
BB and XD2 crankset tomorrow and make them work. Either situation
would support the notion that one of my parts is not-quite-right.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
CycloFiend
Jul 6, 2010, 1:11:24 AM7/6/10
to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
on 7/5/10 9:25 PM, Thomas Lynn Skean at thomasl...@comcast.net wrote:
> Don't know about symmetrical vs. asymmetrical. I can measure it when I
> get a chance. Wouldn't it be symmetrical unless otherwise indicated?
> Perhaps you're suggesting it's out of alignment somehow?
Some of the Shimano ctg bb's were asymmetrical - longer to the driveside.
You can see it usually, but can confirm it with calipers. I didn't know if
maybe the VO bb was spec'd that way, and it somehow got reversed.
> As far as I know, the BB cartridge and the drive-side cup are one unit
> on this BB; it was the drive-side crank arm that interfered with the
> BB.
I'm pretty sure that those cartridges are press-fit into the "cup" on the
driveside. It's possible that the cartridge didn't seat properly, or
there's something wrong with the thickness of the "cup", which would move
everything towards the non-drive side.
>
> It's the Grand Cru, not the threadless.
>
> No, I simply assumed it was a 107mm since that's what I ordered and
> that's what the package said. In light of some having used a VO 103mm
> BB with an XD2 crank, I'll measure it to see what size the spindle
> actually is. I note that the inner chainring was not in contact with
> the chainstay; so I'm guessing it was a 107mm minimum (as I have heard
> elsewhere that a 107mm BB XD2 combination can lead to a tight
> chainstay/chainring clearance).
With that kind of result, I'd definitely measure the spindle for starters.
Wouldn't be the first time that a package was mismarked/mispacked.
Best of luck!
- J
--
Jim Edgar
Cyclo...@earthlink.net
franklyn
Jul 6, 2010, 1:44:06 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
I have similar experience with Thomas. I recently put a XD500 crankset
on my wife's Trek 620. The crank was previously mounted on a Shimano
UN54 107mm bottom bracket and worked fine. I tried 2 bottom brackets I
had in my parts bin--a 107mm IRD XB-75 bottom bracket and a 113mm VO
bottom bracket, on both occasions the inner side of the crankset
rubbed the teeth on the bottom bracket cups. The XD500 crankset has
been in service for probably 4 years now.
On the VO BB, it wasn't even close. On the IRD, it was extremely close
to being at maximum torque, so I simply reinstall it with just a hair
of gap between the crank arm and the teeth. I did measure the VO BB to
be of the right spindle length.
Franklyn
On Jul 5, 10:11 pm, CycloFiend <cyclofi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Cyclofi...@earthlink.net
on my wife's Trek 620. The crank was previously mounted on a Shimano
UN54 107mm bottom bracket and worked fine. I tried 2 bottom brackets I
had in my parts bin--a 107mm IRD XB-75 bottom bracket and a 113mm VO
bottom bracket, on both occasions the inner side of the crankset
rubbed the teeth on the bottom bracket cups. The XD500 crankset has
been in service for probably 4 years now.
On the VO BB, it wasn't even close. On the IRD, it was extremely close
to being at maximum torque, so I simply reinstall it with just a hair
of gap between the crank arm and the teeth. I did measure the VO BB to
be of the right spindle length.
Franklyn
On Jul 5, 10:11 pm, CycloFiend <cyclofi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
oldmangabe
Jul 6, 2010, 1:50:43 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
I am putting my money on it being the crank not being machined
properly. On the drive side, at the square taper interface, the
cranks should be turned down a bit so that one can run a short BB
spindle. This will allow the cranks to snug into the driveside bb
cup without binding the crank to the cup, or to the bearing. I've
seen maybe 3-4 Sugino cranksets, all of them being of the XD variety
(Sugino's basic 110 and 130 bcd crank design sold to various
importers) over the last couple of years not have this machining. It
basically causes the crank to bottom out on the driveside cup much too
soon, as the original poster has pointed out. If one uses a longer
spindle BB, then it does not happen, but when you are trying to get a
good chainline (singlespeed, multispeed) or a lower Q-factor, this can
happen with an improperly machined crank. It sounds like you should
contact Rivendell about getting a replacement crankset. Good luck.
Gabe
On Jul 4, 7:43 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net>
wrote:
properly. On the drive side, at the square taper interface, the
cranks should be turned down a bit so that one can run a short BB
spindle. This will allow the cranks to snug into the driveside bb
cup without binding the crank to the cup, or to the bearing. I've
seen maybe 3-4 Sugino cranksets, all of them being of the XD variety
(Sugino's basic 110 and 130 bcd crank design sold to various
importers) over the last couple of years not have this machining. It
basically causes the crank to bottom out on the driveside cup much too
soon, as the original poster has pointed out. If one uses a longer
spindle BB, then it does not happen, but when you are trying to get a
good chainline (singlespeed, multispeed) or a lower Q-factor, this can
happen with an improperly machined crank. It sounds like you should
contact Rivendell about getting a replacement crankset. Good luck.
Gabe
On Jul 4, 7:43 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <thomaslynnsk...@comcast.net>
wrote:
Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery
Jul 6, 2010, 8:05:43 AM7/6/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
This thread is kinda funny in light of another recent discussion re:
external bearing triples, during which one commentator expressed
reluctance to "fight" with various standards and incompatibilities of
external BBs. Never used a VO BB, except the French ones, but I've
used XD cranks hundreds of times with shimano, tange, truvativ, and
phil BBs. Never a problem like this. I'd suggest trying a different
bb.
external bearing triples, during which one commentator expressed
reluctance to "fight" with various standards and incompatibilities of
external BBs. Never used a VO BB, except the French ones, but I've
used XD cranks hundreds of times with shimano, tange, truvativ, and
phil BBs. Never a problem like this. I'd suggest trying a different
bb.
Thomas Lynn Skean
Jul 15, 2010, 11:34:20 AM7/15/10
to RBW Owners Bunch
Well, the measurements are in. The spindle is in fact 107mm and
appears to be symmetrical. So, I'm guessing the issue is with the
machining of my particular XD2.
This is okay as far as I'm concerned. I have no riding problems with
the Q-factor or chainline I have with the 113mm BB.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
On Jul 6, 7:05 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com>
wrote:
appears to be symmetrical. So, I'm guessing the issue is with the
machining of my particular XD2.
This is okay as far as I'm concerned. I have no riding problems with
the Q-factor or chainline I have with the 113mm BB.
Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
On Jul 6, 7:05 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com>
wrote:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages