A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 12th 03, 10:08 PM
Rocketman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks

I recently realized that I have quite a bit invested in 7- and 8-speed
drivetrains on 7 of my 12 bikes. I have a need for a gearing range that is
not provided by the latest standard crank offerings, so converting to newer
cranks is not a viable option. What I need, and what most everybody needs
IMO, are 110/74mm cranks, since they provide an appropriate range of
chainring sizes for just about every practical use of a bicycle with
standard-sized wheels. The availability of 7-speed 11-34T cassettes makes
the 110/74mm standard even more attractive, as it offers both a much lower
granny gear and a higher top gear than was available in years past. We can
thank the burgeoning low-end bike market for prolonging the existence of the
very sensible 7-speed drivetrains for the foreseeable future, though 8-speed
shifters and cassettes appear to be drying up very quickly. Get those
8-speed components while you can!

Virtually every hybrid and MTB made in the past 8 years or so has either
104/64mm 4-arm cranks, or 94/58mm 5-arm cranks. Road bikes, naturally, have
130/74mm triples or 130mm doubles. All of these bikes could benefit from
110mm cranks, or 110/74 triples, since 99% of them are ridden on the street
in non-racing applications. Gearing on many hybrids are too low, while
gearing on many road bikes are too high. The 110/74 cranks are just right.
The wide chainring size range for 110mm cranks would give optimal selection
of gearing for virtually every practical application. Only true racing
bikes benefit from the larger 130mm and 135mm BCD cranks, and even then it
only saves a few grams. I have a 62T x 110mm chainring, for instance. In
years past, plenty of road bikes came equipped with 110mm cranks. Wouldn't
it be nice to just have one standard, instead of five?

There are many arguments in favor of the 110mm/74mm triple crankset
standard, and few compelling arguments against it. I've decided to swim
upstream and begin stockpiling a supply of chainrings and crankarms to
support this dwindling crank standard for my fleet of bikes. Sources for
110mm cranks and rings are drying up, though perhaps not as quickly as we
might have thought. Everybody thought that 9/10 speed cranks/rings/chains
would dominate and that 7/8-speed stuff would dry up overnight. It hasn't
quite happened that way; but still, now is a good time to stock up. I
wouldn't bet on the 110/74 cranks and rings to be available forever. I
think once the current overstocks are gone, that's probably the last of it
for a while (until we regain our senses).

-Barry





Ads
  #2  
Old November 13th 03, 01:15 AM
Mike S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks


"Rocketman" wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s01...
I recently realized that I have quite a bit invested in 7- and 8-speed
drivetrains on 7 of my 12 bikes. I have a need for a gearing range that is
not provided by the latest standard crank offerings, so converting to

newer
cranks is not a viable option. What I need, and what most everybody needs
IMO, are 110/74mm cranks, since they provide an appropriate range of
chainring sizes for just about every practical use of a bicycle with
standard-sized wheels. The availability of 7-speed 11-34T cassettes makes
the 110/74mm standard even more attractive, as it offers both a much lower
granny gear and a higher top gear than was available in years past. We can
thank the burgeoning low-end bike market for prolonging the existence of

the
very sensible 7-speed drivetrains for the foreseeable future, though

8-speed
shifters and cassettes appear to be drying up very quickly. Get those
8-speed components while you can!

Virtually every hybrid and MTB made in the past 8 years or so has either
104/64mm 4-arm cranks, or 94/58mm 5-arm cranks. Road bikes, naturally,

have
130/74mm triples or 130mm doubles. All of these bikes could benefit from
110mm cranks, or 110/74 triples, since 99% of them are ridden on the

street
in non-racing applications. Gearing on many hybrids are too low, while
gearing on many road bikes are too high. The 110/74 cranks are just

right.
The wide chainring size range for 110mm cranks would give optimal

selection
of gearing for virtually every practical application. Only true racing
bikes benefit from the larger 130mm and 135mm BCD cranks, and even then it
only saves a few grams. I have a 62T x 110mm chainring, for instance. In
years past, plenty of road bikes came equipped with 110mm cranks. Wouldn't
it be nice to just have one standard, instead of five?

There are many arguments in favor of the 110mm/74mm triple crankset
standard, and few compelling arguments against it. I've decided to swim
upstream and begin stockpiling a supply of chainrings and crankarms to
support this dwindling crank standard for my fleet of bikes. Sources for
110mm cranks and rings are drying up, though perhaps not as quickly as we
might have thought. Everybody thought that 9/10 speed cranks/rings/chains
would dominate and that 7/8-speed stuff would dry up overnight. It hasn't
quite happened that way; but still, now is a good time to stock up. I
wouldn't bet on the 110/74 cranks and rings to be available forever. I
think once the current overstocks are gone, that's probably the last of it
for a while (until we regain our senses).

-Barry


Uhhh, Barry, you DO realize that there are a few manufacturers (like FSA aka
Tyler Hamilton's sponsor) that are making brand new 110mm cranksets and
rings, right?

Contrary to (a slightly misinformed) popular opinion, 110 rings aren't going
anywhere.

If you want to stock up, feel free, but you don't need to.

Mike


  #3  
Old November 13th 03, 02:49 AM
David L. Johnson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:08:40 +0000, Rocketman wrote:

newer cranks is not a viable option. What I need, and what most everybody
needs IMO, are 110/74mm cranks,


Well, it seems that 110/74 is on the rise, after Hamilton used on in the
Tour. There is a _lot_ of old and new stock in 110/74 size, so you need
not worry. As to whether or not this is the universal need, I might
quibble. I have found that, for me, 94/56 is somewhat better. I can use
a 12-23 cassette with my 46/30 chainrings and get all the range of a
triple with a double -- OK, except the big gears that I do not use. I can
also hang a teeny granny on and do loaded touring. Works for me better
than 110, since in that size the smallest middle ring is a 34.

since they provide an appropriate range of
chainring sizes for just about every practical use of a bicycle with
standard-sized wheels. The availability of 7-speed 11-34T cassettes makes
the 110/74mm standard even more attractive, as it offers both a much lower
granny gear and a higher top gear than was available in years past.


No matter what size rings you use, you will have
large duplication with that 11-34. You can do as well with a tighter
cassette if you use smaller middle and granny rings.

thank the burgeoning low-end bike market for prolonging the existence of
the very sensible 7-speed drivetrains for the foreseeable future, though
8-speed shifters and cassettes appear to be drying up very quickly. Get
those 8-speed components while you can!


I'm not sure why 7-speed is more sensible than 8, or even 9. Considering
that you cannot still get a better chain with 7-speed, more like the
chains of old that Jobst talks about, there is little advantage. 9-speed
stuff is dirt cheap, and lasts as long as any other. Why not?

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig... You
_`\(,_ | soon find out the pig likes it!
(_)/ (_) |


  #4  
Old November 13th 03, 03:27 AM
A Muzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks

Rocketman wrote:

I recently realized that I have quite a bit invested in 7- and 8-speed
drivetrains on 7 of my 12 bikes. I have a need for a gearing range that is
not provided by the latest standard crank offerings, so converting to newer
cranks is not a viable option. What I need, and what most everybody needs
IMO, are 110/74mm cranks, since they provide an appropriate range of
chainring sizes for just about every practical use of a bicycle with
standard-sized wheels. The availability of 7-speed 11-34T cassettes makes
the 110/74mm standard even more attractive, as it offers both a much lower
granny gear and a higher top gear than was available in years past. We can
thank the burgeoning low-end bike market for prolonging the existence of the
very sensible 7-speed drivetrains for the foreseeable future, though 8-speed
shifters and cassettes appear to be drying up very quickly. Get those
8-speed components while you can!

Virtually every hybrid and MTB made in the past 8 years or so has either
104/64mm 4-arm cranks, or 94/58mm 5-arm cranks. Road bikes, naturally, have
130/74mm triples or 130mm doubles. All of these bikes could benefit from
110mm cranks, or 110/74 triples, since 99% of them are ridden on the street
in non-racing applications. Gearing on many hybrids are too low, while
gearing on many road bikes are too high. The 110/74 cranks are just right.
The wide chainring size range for 110mm cranks would give optimal selection
of gearing for virtually every practical application. Only true racing
bikes benefit from the larger 130mm and 135mm BCD cranks, and even then it
only saves a few grams. I have a 62T x 110mm chainring, for instance. In
years past, plenty of road bikes came equipped with 110mm cranks. Wouldn't
it be nice to just have one standard, instead of five?

There are many arguments in favor of the 110mm/74mm triple crankset
standard, and few compelling arguments against it. I've decided to swim
upstream and begin stockpiling a supply of chainrings and crankarms to
support this dwindling crank standard for my fleet of bikes. Sources for
110mm cranks and rings are drying up, though perhaps not as quickly as we
might have thought. Everybody thought that 9/10 speed cranks/rings/chains
would dominate and that 7/8-speed stuff would dry up overnight. It hasn't
quite happened that way; but still, now is a good time to stock up. I
wouldn't bet on the 110/74 cranks and rings to be available forever. I
think once the current overstocks are gone, that's probably the last of it
for a while (until we regain our senses).




Uh, there are very nice 110/74 in current production.

We've never been without 110/74 cranks since the original
Sugino ATT in , what, 1978? Maybe your local shop doesn't
stock them, but that's hardly a crisis. Sugino is
represented by all the best distributors, who generally keep
useful sized rings as well. If your local guy cared, they
are just a phone call away.*

Sugino will stop making them when people stop buying them.

http://www.yellowjersey.org/cranx.html

(second from the bottom)

* a good part of my business is selling normal, common
cycling equipment that some little shop says "ain't
available". Sheldon's moreso.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

  #5  
Old November 13th 03, 03:36 AM
Matt O'Toole
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks


"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
...

I'm not sure why 7-speed is more sensible than 8, or even 9.


I wouldn't seek them out specifically, but all else being equal (including
price), I wouldn't forsake a 7sp bike in favor of a newer one. 7sp gear was
more sensible in many ways.

First, 7sp wheels are stronger, because of less dish. Second, while it isn't as
silky-smooth, 7sp gear shifted more solidly and reliably -- probably because of
stronger derailer springs, and more cable pull.

Considering
that you cannot still get a better chain with 7-speed, more like the
chains of old that Jobst talks about, there is little advantage.


I don't know what you mean by "better," unless you have a chrome fetish. Here's
a perfectly good 7sp chain:

http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?c...ype=&estoreid=

(please pardon the long URL)

9-speed
stuff is dirt cheap,


7sp stuff is dirt cheaper. You can get old cassettes and chainrings on sale for
$15. And the chainrings work -- they're not as fussy about lateral spacing,
etc. Some modern stuff, like my 8sp LX, won't work without the *exact*
replacement -- brand, model, and year.

But most of all, 7sp *bikes* are cheap.

and lasts as long as any other.


I disagree with that too. 7sp cogs were thicker. Without the shaped and
shortened teeth, chainrings lasted longer.

Matt O.


  #6  
Old November 13th 03, 03:48 AM
Matt O'Toole
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks


"A Muzi" wrote in message
...

Uh, there are very nice 110/74 in current production.

We've never been without 110/74 cranks since the original
Sugino ATT in , what, 1978? Maybe your local shop doesn't
stock them, but that's hardly a crisis. Sugino is
represented by all the best distributors, who generally keep
useful sized rings as well. If your local guy cared, they
are just a phone call away.*

Sugino will stop making them when people stop buying them.

http://www.yellowjersey.org/cranx.html

(second from the bottom)


That's a pretty darned good deal -- cheaper than 3 new chainrings (or even 2
chainrings) for a Shimano crank. I think I'll just get one of those next time.
Nice looking crank, too.

Can you order those with different chainrings for that price, or does it get a
lot more expensive if you go non-standard?

Matt O.


  #7  
Old November 13th 03, 04:01 AM
Eric S. Sande
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks

I don't know what you mean by "better," unless you have a chrome
fetish. Here's a perfectly good 7sp chain:


Almost anything SRAM/Sachs/Sedis makes or made will work with 7-speed,
and will be a far more pleasant user experience, IMHO.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
in.edu__________
  #8  
Old November 13th 03, 07:41 AM
A Muzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks

(OP)-snip the world is ending, not enough 110/74 cranks-
"A Muzi" wrote in message
...
Uh, there are very nice 110/74 in current production.

-snip-
http://www.yellowjersey.org/cranx.html

-snip


Matt O'Toole wrote:
That's a pretty darned good deal -- cheaper than 3 new chainrings (or even 2
chainrings) for a Shimano crank. I think I'll just get one of those next time.
Nice looking crank, too.

Can you order those with different chainrings for that price, or does it get a
lot more expensive if you go non-standard?



As you might imagine, we have _lots_ of extra rings from
these so we do not really need any more 26, 36 or 48 rings.
Some, but not full, credit.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

  #9  
Old November 13th 03, 08:22 AM
gwhite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks



Rocketman wrote:

There are many arguments in favor of the 110mm/74mm triple crankset
standard, and few compelling arguments against it.


I am not aware of *any* compelling arguments against it.

I've decided to swim
upstream and begin stockpiling a supply of chainrings and crankarms to
support this dwindling crank standard for my fleet of bikes.


Guess what happens when you and others do this? That is right -- it sends a
message to the supply side of the market to _keep making them_. Good for you.
You bought the right stuff.

Sources for 110mm cranks and rings are
drying up, though perhaps not as quickly as we
might have thought.


The marketplace for them may have contracted and squeezed out all but a few
vendors. But that is okay as long as there is enough business for the few that
remain to continue manufacturing them. I don't see the supply going away
completely. Anyone that knows anything about bikes knows that the 110 is the
sweet spot given current wheel dimensions and average rider strength, and there
is a huge installed base of 110's. If anything, I think it may cycle back, and
apparently it *is*.
  #10  
Old November 13th 03, 08:36 AM
gwhite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks



Matt O'Toole wrote:

"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
...

I'm not sure why 7-speed is more sensible than 8, or even 9.


I wouldn't seek them out specifically, but all else being equal (including
price), I wouldn't forsake a 7sp bike in favor of a newer one. 7sp gear was
more sensible in many ways.

First, 7sp wheels are stronger, because of less dish. Second, while it isn't as
silky-smooth, 7sp gear shifted more solidly and reliably -- probably because of
stronger derailer springs, and more cable pull.

Considering
that you cannot still get a better chain with 7-speed, more like the
chains of old that Jobst talks about, there is little advantage.


I don't know what you mean by "better," unless you have a chrome fetish.



He's talking about sleeved bushing chains rather than the current sleeveless.

Here's
a perfectly good 7sp chain:

http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?c...ype=&estoreid=


Well yeah, it is fine -- I always buy the cheapest chains. But I think cheapo
sleeveless needs to get down in the $5-$6 range when it comes to lifetime
comparison cost with sleeved (of course it is hard to compare _current_ prices
since sleeved does not exist anymore).

9-speed
stuff is dirt cheap,


7sp stuff is dirt cheaper. You can get old cassettes and chainrings on sale for
$15. And the chainrings work -- they're not as fussy about lateral spacing,
etc. Some modern stuff, like my 8sp LX, won't work without the *exact*
replacement -- brand, model, and year.


My 8 & 9 stuff is not at all fussy. I have a 53x33 crank with a 9sp -- it works
pretty good.

But most of all, 7sp *bikes* are cheap.


Reason enough.

and lasts as long as any other.


I disagree with that too. 7sp cogs were thicker.


Not to my knowledge. 7sp & 8sp are both 1.8 mm, and the 8sp has one more cog to
share that wear. If you pop a 16 into the 12-21 7sp to make an 8sp, that extra
cog will definitely share the wear since it is in the fat of the range. The 9sp
cogs are 1.78 mm, not enough to really care about. And there are _two_ more
cogs to share the wear. Uniglide was really the long wear cog. It was the same
1.8mm, but it could be reversed.

Without the shaped and
shortened teeth, chainrings lasted longer.

Matt O.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stockpiling 110mm/74mm chainrings and cranks Rocketman General 15 November 13th 03 08:32 PM
rotor cranks andy Techniques 66 November 5th 03 04:23 PM
Campy triple cranks: Veloce vs. Centaur? trent gregory hill Techniques 2 October 18th 03 12:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.