Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30

    Race Face Turbine standard

    Hello,
    anyone knows if RF Turbine square is made following ISO or JIS standard?
    I need to replace my bottom bracket and I would like to make the right choice.
    Thanks.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grandsalmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    894
    I am sure it will be nice to get a consensus, but I'm virt-certain it's JIS.

    (Been running the Turbine since talking RF in sending me one in '94, and still in service. 6 more on bikes, 4 beauties in the bin waiting.)


    .

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by grandsalmon View Post
    I am sure it will be nice to get a consensus, but I'm virt-certain it's JIS.

    (Been running the Turbine since talking RF in sending me one in '94, and still in service. 6 more on bikes, 4 beauties in the bin waiting.)


    .
    In that case, it's a bit weird why they made JIS cranks, while their Taperlock BB is made following ISO rules.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iamkeith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    467
    Just adding to the concensus: I too have several of the 90's Turbines in service and a couple more hoarded for future use, and use JIS. I'm not familiar with the "taperlock" system, and will now research it because you've gotten my curiosity up...
    We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]

  5. #5
    Mtn Biker Machinist
    Reputation: 1 cog frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    898
    Maybe I'm a dummy, but is there more than one standard for square taper? I thought all square taper cranks and bottom brackets had the same 2 degree taper standard.

    I only started riding in '93 so I am bit wet behind the ears.

    I did have a RaceFace Taperlock BB and it worked fine with all the square taper cranks I put on it. I am pretty sure Taperlock is just a fancy name RaceFace gave their BB's and Cranks.

    frog

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 cog frog View Post
    Maybe I'm a dummy, but is there more than one standard for square taper? I thought all square taper cranks and bottom brackets had the same 2 degree taper standard.

    I only started riding in '93 so I am bit wet behind the ears.

    I did have a RaceFace Taperlock BB and it worked fine with all the square taper cranks I put on it. I am pretty sure Taperlock is just a fancy name RaceFace gave their BB's and Cranks.

    frog
    Well, Taperlock is the name of the model. As you can see here http://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/...2_itemId=21982 the spindle is made following ISO standard. I need to buy a new BB and a wrong interaction between ISO BB and a JIS crank could result in changing my chainline, which is perfect nowadays, and also the low Q-factor Im ridding now. Sheldon Brown says that there could be a 4.5mm changing in each crank side, using a standard or the another one.

  7. #7
    Ovaries on the Outside
    Reputation: umarth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,359
    Ah, this would be so much more interesting for me if the non drive side crank didn't just round out on me... Anywho, had a un71 bb that worked fine for many, many years.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Lucky guy, my UN72 worn out only 2 years after buy it with no more than 10.000km.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iamkeith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    467
    A quick seacrh of the web seems to indicate that there's quite a bit of disagreement as to whether the Taperlock was actually ISO or JIS anyway. Since JIS is easier to find and most people seem to agree that the chainline is the only real negative to mis-matching, you could just adjust the spindle length as required when you buy.

    This might help: On a 103mm symetrical JIS spindle, the middle ring of a Turbine sits at a 46mm chainline. You can do the math to adjust from there. (Take the difference between 46mm and the chainline you wish to achieve, double it, and add to 103mm)

    If you want some ability to fine-tune, just get a Phil bb. It has cups like the Taperlock that will allow you to adjust the chainline 5mm either way.

    (It turns out I also have a Taperlock bb in service but, unless someone REALLY needs me to, I'd rather not pull it apart to see if it is in fact a ISO taper [assuming I can even spot the difference] and what the spindle length-to-chainline relationship is.)
    We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by iamkeith View Post
    A quick seacrh of the web seems to indicate that there's quite a bit of disagreement as to whether the Taperlock was actually ISO or JIS anyway. Since JIS is easier to find and most people seem to agree that the chainline is the only real negative to mis-matching, you could just adjust the spindle length as required when you buy.

    This might help: On a 103mm symetrical JIS spindle, the middle ring of a Turbine sits at a 46mm chainline. You can do the math to adjust from there. (Take the difference between 46mm and the chainline you wish to achieve, double it, and add to 103mm)

    If you want some ability to fine-tune, just get a Phil bb. It has cups like the Taperlock that will allow you to adjust the chainline 5mm either way.

    (It turns out I also have a Taperlock bb in service but, unless someone REALLY needs me to, I'd rather not pull it apart to see if it is in fact a ISO taper [assuming I can even spot the difference] and what the spindle length-to-chainline relationship is.)
    Well, as I replied to another member, RF Taperlock BB is ISO, as you can see here http://www.bike-components.de/bedien..._square-bb.pdf
    What you say it's interesting, because now I have a 107mm JIS spindle and my RF Turbine chainline is about 47.5 - 48mm, so it agrees.
    Tomorrow I'll do a test: To check how far goes into the spindle the Turbine cranks, and some Shimano Alivio cranks (they are JIS for sure). I'll comment here.

  11. #11
    TrinityRiverKerplunk
    Reputation: unicrown junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 cog frog View Post
    Maybe I'm a dummy, but is there more than one standard for square taper? I thought all square taper cranks and bottom brackets had the same 2 degree taper standard.

    I only started riding in '93 so I am bit wet behind the ears.

    I did have a RaceFace Taperlock BB and it worked fine with all the square taper cranks I put on it. I am pretty sure Taperlock is just a fancy name RaceFace gave their BB's and Cranks.

    frog

    There are at least two types of tapers out there, probably more. Fortunately though in this case the other taper is a Campy design, and I don't think the OP has any Euclid parts on their bike?!
    Good friction shifting is getting hard to find nowadays....

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grandsalmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by abelsfc View Post
    In that case, it's a bit weird why they made JIS cranks, while their Taperlock BB is made following ISO rules.
    Leave it to me, the one time (ha!) I put my supposed empirical-based suggestion forward and... no good. Sorry mate.

    I guess I've been lucky to hold onto quite a few taperlocks. All the Turbines in service are running on them, except one that is paired with a 103mm - i think JIS, on a road bike.

    (I have a world class and a GT titanium in the wings, think they're the same maker. I'll check their tapers v the Tlocks I have out.)

    I've been getting away w 107 and 110 taperlocks for all the applied to mtb's, and getting my very-nice chainline. In the past, I'm sure I have run them w un-72's i.e.
    And now I think about it, that was a time I had gone over to Sheldon's to suss some of this mix&match out. Also ran a Campy Euclid crank on a 72 for many years, never sure that was a fit, but it worked for a 'round the world.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Definitively I think they are ISO. Today I installed Alivio cranks (JIS) on a Shimano spindle (JIS), and the Shimano's go further into the spindle like 2-3mm in each side in comparison with RF Turbines, having a considerable more contact surface between spindle and crank. I think I'll look for an ISO bottom bracket to replace the actual one.

  14. #14
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,880
    Turbine installation instructions referencing the installation on a standard Shimano UN-52 BB .
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Race Face Turbine standard-rf-t-sq-1.gif  

    Race Face Turbine standard-rf-t-sq-2.gif  

    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  15. #15
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by abelsfc View Post
    Hello,
    anyone knows if RF Turbine square is made following ISO or JIS standard?
    I need to replace my bottom bracket and I would like to make the right choice.
    Thanks.
    RaceFace JIS

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by IZH-35M View Post
    RaceFace JIS
    If It were JIS, how do you explain that Alivio goes 2-3mm further into JIS spindle than RF Turbine?

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    OK, doubt solved. I asked to Race Face and their engineers answered me this:

    Race Face had their own standard that was between the two.
    Generally speaking, if you installed one of our cranks onto a Shimano (JIS) type spindle, it would stand-off further than if you installed it onto a Race Face spindle. This said, with the tolerances of the crank taper socket and the spindle end taper, the fit could easily overlap between ours and Shimano. There are other spindles out there that just wouldn’t work (either too big or too small) simply based on specs or tolerance control of the manufacturer. Also, if you apply grease to the spindle end or not, or how much torque you would apply, or how many times you had removed it and re-installed it also had a huge effect on the exact chainline.


    Hope this helps.

  18. #18
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,575
    I was gonna say JIS but they didn't use an asymetrical spindle like shimano did, so in that respect, they followed the ISO norm of equal length spindle ends (measuring from bearing outwards). So the chainlines don't match up the same way. That's why raceface BBs employed double adjustable cups... so you could shift the spindle to adjust the chainline. If you just installed one like you would a shimano BB, and installed a shimano crank onto it, the chainline was going to be off.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  19. #19
    artistic...
    Reputation: colker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,449
    They have their own standard... what a great idea.

Posting Permissions

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