Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    -arschloch-
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    869

    Profile cranks + Banshee Scirocco = :(

    i was just given a set of profile cranks with a 150 mm axle. i tried to install them on my banshee scirocco, but sadly the crank-arms contact the chain-stays. at first i thought it was a spacer issue, but the chainstays are wider than the distance between the inside of the crank arms!

    am i doing something very wrong or do i really need the 175 mm axle / spindle?

    the 175 mm wide axle is gonna result in an off-the-chart Q-factor, no?

    further question: are all 19 mm spindles / axles the same? i read here on mtbr that fsa spindles fit profile cranks, but does anyone know about odyssey & co?
    To air is human, to dig is divine.

  2. #2
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,718
    Quote Originally Posted by chuffer
    i was just given a set of profile cranks with a 150 mm axle. i tried to install them on my banshee scirocco, but sadly the crank-arms contact the chain-stays. at first i thought it was a spacer issue, but the chainstays are wider than the distance between the inside of the crank arms!

    am i doing something very wrong or do i really need the 175 mm axle / spindle?

    the 175 mm wide axle is gonna result in an off-the-chart Q-factor, no?

    further question: are all 19 mm spindles / axles the same? i read here on mtbr that fsa spindles fit profile cranks, but does anyone know about odyssey & co?
    How long are they? 175mm?

  3. #3
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,719
    all 19 mm/48 spline spindles fit
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  4. #4
    kung food
    Reputation: jace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    250
    The standard profile bmx spindle is far too short for most any mountain bike application, barring an older frame with very narrow stays. I run a 6" ti spindle, and have about 50-60% insertion in the arms. shouldn't affect your q-factor much as the pedals themselves don't really sit out any father than with standard cranks.

  5. #5
    -arschloch-
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    869
    @ padre: 170 mm crank-arm length.

    @ shiggy: aaah. good to know. thanks!!

    @ jace: 50% insertion is enough?

    i dont understand the mechanics behind profile crank/axle. how do the arms stay tight enough on the axel. bullseye and the new shimano use straight splines and a clamp on the non-drive crank-arm to keep everything tight. are the profile splines tapered? what keeps the crank-arm to axle interface from developing rotational play.
    Last edited by chuffer; 07-21-2005 at 01:28 PM.
    To air is human, to dig is divine.

  6. #6
    kung food
    Reputation: jace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    250
    I've never had any reason to believe 50% wasn't adequate insertion on my SS. I've seen riders (who are much more abusive than I) run less. The spline interface relies on lots of teeth and tight tolerances. with the bolts adequately cranked, play just isn't possible. heck, I failed to loctite one of my crank bolts when I began running profiles and lost a bolt 5 miles into a ride. failed to notice until the arm came right off . slid it back on, pedalled deliberately, keeping pressure towards the bb, and was able to ride out just fine (albeit slowly.)

  7. #7
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,719
    Quote Originally Posted by chuffer
    @ padre: 170 mm crank-arm length.

    @ shiggy: aaah. good to know. thanks!!

    @ jace: 50% insertion is enough?

    i dont understand the mechanics behind profile crank/axle. how do the arms stay tight enough on the axel. bullseye and the new shimano use straight splines and a clamp on the non-drive crank-arm to keep everything tight. are the profile splines tapered? what keeps the crank-arm to axle interface from developing rotational play.
    50% insertion is fine though I like more if I can get it. I use the longer spindles. I have never been bother by a wide Q-factor.

    The 48-spline spindles are straight cut. No taper. The spindle/crank bolt holds the arm on. Works fine and has for more than 25 years.

    The biggest issue is the width fine adjustment for the BB shell - there is none. It can side load the bearings very easily causing binding and premature bearing failure. Do yourself a favor and get FSA cups with the adjustable left side cup.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

Similar Threads

  1. Mountain Bike Spring Rate Calculator V5.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-16-2013, 08:46 PM
  2. Mountain Bike Spring Rate Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 06:34 PM
  3. Mountain Bike Gear Ratio Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 10:57 AM
  4. Mountain Bike Spring Rate Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Canadian Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 10:28 AM
  5. Mountain Bike Gear Ratio Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Canadian Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 10:27 AM

Posting Permissions

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