Cyclocross Magazine

Cyclocross Community, Forums, Classifieds, Photos and Videos

Supposedly just out on market - c/w 36 / 46 rings - anyone know what bcd is for rings?

Views: 434

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

my guess is a proprietary campy bcd like the rest of the UT cranks...

135 BCD for normal cranks (39T minimum) or 110BCD for compact.
It would be unCampy-like if it was not proprietary or compatible with anything else. It's not even compatible with their existing Power-Torque bottom bracket.
Huh? Power torque is new for '11, and the CX cranks are Power-Torque.
What do you mean PT is new for '11, are you serious? And just like I said, the CX
Power-Torque is not compatible with the previous Power-Torque. Are you disputing that fact? Look at the 2011 product line PDF that came out the same day they announced the CX stuff and look at the compatibility chart. Regular PT and CX PT no worky together. 110 BCD sprockets are compatible across the line which tells me its Campy 110. You're vigorously defending this new CX "line" and I dont see any interest in it other than you and maybe two other people. If its a turd then call it what it is. I like Campy just as much anyone, but I cant support throwing an extra seal into an existing product and now all of the sudden Campys in the CX game.
I think you have got Power-Torque and Ultra-Torque mixed up.

VIdeo from Campagnolo showing assembly and disassembly of Power-Torque cranks and BB is here:
I don't understand that comment. I own UT cranks which I pictured, so how could I have them confused?
As easy as that crank-arm slid off in that video there must not be hardly any taper on that spline. Normally the crank-arm almost becomes fused to the spindle and are ridiculously hard to remove.
Because PT is new for 2011 and there is no 'previous' power-torque!

It has 'hardly any taper' like ISIS drive 'has hardly any taper'. They're both splined tapers and won't fall off on their own.

We can discuss taper angles and machine tapers if you like, but the taper angle is not the sole determinant of 'joint' strength, Jeff.
So the Athena and Centaur cranksets that were released previously are compatible with the CX Power Torque bottom bracket????
I think not sir. I never said anything about joint strength. I was talking about how some cranks with splined interfaces use the taper as the number one factor of holding the crank-arm on. The crank-bolt is basically there for looks and in the slight chance the crank-arm starts to loosen off the spline. I like this Campy system better as it appears as if the bolt is as much of a factor of holding on the spindle as the splines are which make removal a snap, but it also makes the bolt tension and thread-lock if it calls for integral as well.
So what else am I wrong about?
you lost me when you called me sir, Miss Jeff.

The previous centaur and athena cranskets were ULTRA torque Miss Jeff.

ULTRA does not equal POWER in the campy range.
The ones released THIS year BEFORE the CX stuff had even been mentioned were POWER TORQUE! WHY IS THAT SO HARD FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND????? Were not talking previous years apples to oranges. Power Torque cranks had been out almost a year before the CX PT was on the market and for the fifth time, THEY DON'T WORK TOGETHER MISS. Now go cook your life partner some breakfast and then apologize to me.
Campy returned my email question. They confirmed 110 bcd. That sounds good to me!!


Sold something in our classifieds? Find this site valuable?

Consider a donation to the cause. We're cheaper than eBay fees, and it helps us here at CXM keep the lights on!

Enter any amount below, and click on the cow for some good karma. Thanks!




© 2024   Created by Cyclocross Magazine.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service