Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    399

    Q-Factor for Dummies

    I see the Cannondale CAAD Fat claims to have the best/narrowest Q-Factor in the fat bike market. With a 198 rear hub & 120 bottom bracket, I don't see how this would be possible. Can someone explain this to me in simpleton language, say... compared to a Pug?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    831
    Same q-factor as a Pug or any other 170 frame. They sculpt the chainstays to allow the arms to clear, then run them with a single ring flipped outward for tire clearance.

  3. #3
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Clobber View Post
    I see the Cannondale CAAD Fat claims to have the best/narrowest Q-Factor in the fat bike market. With a 198 rear hub & 120 bottom bracket, I don't see how this would be possible. Can someone explain this to me in simpleton language, say... compared to a Pug?
    Q factor is going to be a factor of spindle length, but also with the specific crank arms used (as well as pedal spindles).

    The Hollowgram crank arms probably just have a narrower Q for the arms than most others.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,001
    so what is the Q-factor on the Cannondale?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    399
    198 single & 204 double I believe

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    113
    I think that Cannondale´s claim is that, for bikes able to fit up to 5¨ tires, they offer the narrowest q-factor, which is true as far as I can tell. For example, the Farley has big clearance and takes the Next Sl 170mm crankset, but that crankset´s q-factor is around 202mm.

    In the case of the Pugsley, you can have a narrower q-factor than Cannondale´s Hollowgram cranks, such as when using the Sram xx1 170mm cranks (195mm q-factor, which do not fit the Farley), or a Phil BB and Eno cranks. However, the Pugsley does not fit 5¨ tires. I hope that helps.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Estuche View Post
    I think that Cannondale´s claim is that, for bikes able to fit up to 5¨ tires, they offer the narrowest q-factor, which is true as far as I can tell. For example, the Farley has big clearance and takes the Next Sl 170mm crankset, but that crankset´s q-factor is around 202mm.

    In the case of the Pugsley, you can have a narrower q-factor than Cannondale´s Hollowgram cranks, such as when using the Sram xx1 170mm cranks (195mm q-factor, which do not fit the Farley), or a Phil BB and Eno cranks. However, the Pugsley does not fit 5¨ tires. I hope that helps.
    Great info. Thanks for posting it up.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Clobber View Post
    198 single & 204 double I believe
    I did not look on their website but it's interesting that they have different Q-factors for single vs double chainring. They must be doing something similar to Raceface with the single ring and no spider.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Johanneson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger Pride View Post
    I did not look on their website but it's interesting that they have different Q-factors for single vs double chainring. They must be doing something similar to Raceface with the single ring and no spider.
    With a single ring they have the C/S clearance to use the short spindle. With a double there is not enough C/S clearance and they use the longer spindle. Spiders and rings don't have anything to do with Q. There are a few bikes out there that have room for " 5" " tires while utilizing 190 r hub spacing in conjunction with a narrow "170" spindle on order to get a narrow Q.

Similar Threads

  1. Lefty build for dummies...
    By geffr999 in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 09-07-2014, 06:54 AM
  2. 10 speed for dummies...
    By freeriderB in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-24-2013, 01:06 PM
  3. Forks for dummies
    By cpfitness in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-26-2012, 08:54 PM
  4. Chainring Dummies
    By smudge in forum Frame Building
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-22-2012, 12:54 PM
  5. Lake Tahoe for Dummies
    By Mithrandir in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-23-2011, 01:41 PM

Members who have read this thread: 5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •