Replace Shimano 600EX crank set replacement

On 3/29/21 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 3:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 12:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 10:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 11:00 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 12:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/28/2021 2:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 4:29 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 maart 2021 om 23:41:04 UTC+1 schreef
Joerg:
On 3/18/21 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
My chain rings are through again but replacements have
become expensive.
It's now much cheaper to buy a simple crank set of
another brand.
Preferably steel because aluminum wears so fast.
What I
have is:

Shimano 600EX, 52/42T, bottom bracket is 116mm JIS
taper.

What I'd like to replace it with is this Vuelta Corsa
set:

https://smile.amazon.com/Vuelta-8150...dp/B0081UV2NU/






Only 50T which is kind of ok but the 32T lower will
move
me up hills
much better. Getting old, and all that sort of thing.
However, says it's
for 110mm BB and I wonder if my chain line would go
out
of whack. I'll
ask on Amazon as well but usually there aren't good
answers that way.

My shifters are simple friction levers and the
front DR
cage looks tall
enough to handle the 50/32 step.

Do you guys think this would work?

Long story short, I ordered the 53/39T Version with
130mm
BCD - junk.
The cheap bolts were overtorqued and two of the Allen
inserts stripped.
Plus they didn't send Vuelta Corsa but some no-name
that
was quite
scuffed up. Goes back for a refund :-(
--
Regards, Joerg

That what I would expect from a 36 dollar
crankset....junk.


I have seen good ones in that range. What is cheap
were the
chain rings which are then steel. However, that's
right up
my alley because I am after durability and not a weight
weenie.

Thing is, what they sent were not Vuelta Corsa. Now
I'll be
looking for steel chain rings with 130mm BCD because my
cranks set itself is still good.


Given your riding conditions, style and comments here, $36
for two steel rings is a really good value to you. Recycle
the arms and you're still way ahead.

*nb* Steel rings are frequently thinner than aluminum
rings with a milled recess. This is shown mostly by the
chainring bolts being damaged from overtorque while the
rings still rattle. Check that and add a spacer under the
nut side as needed.


Darn, I already did the return thing. Mainly because I
could
not get two of the bolts out. They were overtorqued and
then
the hex pattern stripped out of the cheapo material. Could
have somehow drilled them out I guess. This also gave me
the
feeling that the steel rings are inferior material as well
and would wear off quickly.



Where wear is critical (high torque rider, excessive
dirt, high mileage etc) ...


That sounds like me :-)


 ... steel rings are an improvement. Notice that many
cranks come with pretty milled and pinned aluminum outers
but steel inners.


So far I haven't found much 130mm BCD stuff in steel. If I
really can't maybe I order that set again and then drill
out the bolts to scavenge the chain rings. It's probably
not very good steel but better than nothing.


P.S.: Aluminum chain rings have another major downside. They
cannot be turned around for a 2nd life because then the hole
recesses are on the wrong side.


Maybe, maybe not. I think you'll find most modern steel chainrings are
offset and also ramped for shifting.


These ones weren't offset but they were ramped. Shifting never bothered
me so I also turned individual sprockets in the cassette around, after
dremeling off part of the wider spline. On the 2h ride into Sacramento
that probably made me 500 milliseconds late :-)

On the road bike I don't shift much until I get back near home with some
steep climbs.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 1:39:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 3:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 12:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 10:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 11:00 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 12:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/28/2021 2:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 4:29 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 maart 2021 om 23:41:04 UTC+1 schreef
Joerg:
On 3/18/21 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
My chain rings are through again but replacements have
become expensive.
It's now much cheaper to buy a simple crank set of
another brand.
Preferably steel because aluminum wears so fast.
What I
have is:

Shimano 600EX, 52/42T, bottom bracket is 116mm JIS
taper.

What I'd like to replace it with is this Vuelta Corsa
set:

https://smile.amazon.com/Vuelta-8150...dp/B0081UV2NU/






Only 50T which is kind of ok but the 32T lower will
move
me up hills
much better. Getting old, and all that sort of thing.
However, says it's
for 110mm BB and I wonder if my chain line would go
out
of whack. I'll
ask on Amazon as well but usually there aren't good
answers that way.

My shifters are simple friction levers and the
front DR
cage looks tall
enough to handle the 50/32 step.

Do you guys think this would work?

Long story short, I ordered the 53/39T Version with
130mm
BCD - junk.
The cheap bolts were overtorqued and two of the Allen
inserts stripped.
Plus they didn't send Vuelta Corsa but some no-name
that
was quite
scuffed up. Goes back for a refund :-(
--
Regards, Joerg

That what I would expect from a 36 dollar
crankset....junk.


I have seen good ones in that range. What is cheap
were the
chain rings which are then steel. However, that's
right up
my alley because I am after durability and not a weight
weenie.

Thing is, what they sent were not Vuelta Corsa. Now
I'll be
looking for steel chain rings with 130mm BCD because my
cranks set itself is still good.


Given your riding conditions, style and comments here, $36
for two steel rings is a really good value to you. Recycle
the arms and you're still way ahead.

*nb* Steel rings are frequently thinner than aluminum
rings with a milled recess. This is shown mostly by the
chainring bolts being damaged from overtorque while the
rings still rattle. Check that and add a spacer under the
nut side as needed.


Darn, I already did the return thing. Mainly because I
could
not get two of the bolts out. They were overtorqued and
then
the hex pattern stripped out of the cheapo material. Could
have somehow drilled them out I guess. This also gave me
the
feeling that the steel rings are inferior material as well
and would wear off quickly.



Where wear is critical (high torque rider, excessive
dirt, high mileage etc) ...


That sounds like me :-)


 ... steel rings are an improvement. Notice that many
cranks come with pretty milled and pinned aluminum outers
but steel inners.


So far I haven't found much 130mm BCD stuff in steel. If I
really can't maybe I order that set again and then drill
out the bolts to scavenge the chain rings. It's probably
not very good steel but better than nothing.


P.S.: Aluminum chain rings have another major downside. They
cannot be turned around for a 2nd life because then the hole
recesses are on the wrong side.


Maybe, maybe not. I think you'll find most modern steel chainrings are
offset and also ramped for shifting.

These ones weren't offset but they were ramped. Shifting never bothered
me so I also turned individual sprockets in the cassette around, after
dremeling off part of the wider spline. On the 2h ride into Sacramento
that probably made me 500 milliseconds late :-)

On the road bike I don't shift much until I get back near home with some
steep climbs.

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for steel rings. Aluminum rings have had remarkable advancement in shifting and THAT is where most excessive wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain itself. Thinking that the FSA rings would wear out I bought an extra set and after 4 years and a change in FSA standard chain arms, they have never been needed.

On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 1:39:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 3:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 12:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 10:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 11:00 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 12:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/28/2021 2:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 4:29 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 maart 2021 om 23:41:04 UTC+1 schreef
Joerg:
On 3/18/21 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
My chain rings are through again but replacements have
become expensive.
It's now much cheaper to buy a simple crank set of
another brand.
Preferably steel because aluminum wears so fast.
What I
have is:

Shimano 600EX, 52/42T, bottom bracket is 116mm JIS
taper.

What I'd like to replace it with is this Vuelta Corsa
set:

https://smile.amazon.com/Vuelta-8150...dp/B0081UV2NU/






Only 50T which is kind of ok but the 32T lower will
move
me up hills
much better. Getting old, and all that sort of thing.
However, says it's
for 110mm BB and I wonder if my chain line would go
out
of whack. I'll
ask on Amazon as well but usually there aren't good
answers that way.

My shifters are simple friction levers and the
front DR
cage looks tall
enough to handle the 50/32 step.

Do you guys think this would work?

Long story short, I ordered the 53/39T Version with
130mm
BCD - junk.
The cheap bolts were overtorqued and two of the Allen
inserts stripped.
Plus they didn't send Vuelta Corsa but some no-name
that
was quite
scuffed up. Goes back for a refund :-(
--
Regards, Joerg

That what I would expect from a 36 dollar
crankset....junk.


I have seen good ones in that range. What is cheap
were the
chain rings which are then steel. However, that's
right up
my alley because I am after durability and not a weight
weenie.

Thing is, what they sent were not Vuelta Corsa. Now
I'll be
looking for steel chain rings with 130mm BCD because my
cranks set itself is still good.


Given your riding conditions, style and comments here, $36
for two steel rings is a really good value to you. Recycle
the arms and you're still way ahead.

*nb* Steel rings are frequently thinner than aluminum
rings with a milled recess. This is shown mostly by the
chainring bolts being damaged from overtorque while the
rings still rattle. Check that and add a spacer under the
nut side as needed.


Darn, I already did the return thing. Mainly because I
could
not get two of the bolts out. They were overtorqued and
then
the hex pattern stripped out of the cheapo material. Could
have somehow drilled them out I guess. This also gave me
the
feeling that the steel rings are inferior material as well
and would wear off quickly.



Where wear is critical (high torque rider, excessive
dirt, high mileage etc) ...


That sounds like me :-)


 ... steel rings are an improvement. Notice that many
cranks come with pretty milled and pinned aluminum outers
but steel inners.


So far I haven't found much 130mm BCD stuff in steel. If I
really can't maybe I order that set again and then drill
out the bolts to scavenge the chain rings. It's probably
not very good steel but better than nothing.


P.S.: Aluminum chain rings have another major downside. They
cannot be turned around for a 2nd life because then the hole
recesses are on the wrong side.


Maybe, maybe not. I think you'll find most modern steel chainrings are
offset and also ramped for shifting.

These ones weren't offset but they were ramped. Shifting never bothered
me so I also turned individual sprockets in the cassette around, after
dremeling off part of the wider spline. On the 2h ride into Sacramento
that probably made me 500 milliseconds late :-)

On the road bike I don't shift much until I get back near home with some
steep climbs.

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for steel rings. Aluminum rings have had remarkable advancement in shifting and THAT is where most excessive wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain itself. Thinking that the FSA rings would wear out I bought an extra set and after 4 years and a change in FSA standard chain arms, they have never been needed.


I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and now rings for the
600EX set seems to have become unobtanium unless I pay an obscene price.
I really do not care about shifting speed. I don't use the road bike on
dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting. Weight never
mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around 6000mi/year and because
of rampant theft used old beater road bikes, cheap department store
bikes, for all commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now) for
touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the beater bikes
lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a very cheap variety.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 3/31/2021 1:00 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 1:39:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 3:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 12:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 10:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 11:00 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 12:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/28/2021 2:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 4:29 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 maart 2021 om 23:41:04 UTC+1 schreef
Joerg:
On 3/18/21 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
My chain rings are through again but replacements have
become expensive.
It's now much cheaper to buy a simple crank set of
another brand.
Preferably steel because aluminum wears so fast.
What I
have is:

Shimano 600EX, 52/42T, bottom bracket is 116mm JIS
taper.

What I'd like to replace it with is this Vuelta Corsa
set:

https://smile.amazon.com/Vuelta-8150...dp/B0081UV2NU/







Only 50T which is kind of ok but the 32T lower will
move
me up hills
much better. Getting old, and all that sort of thing.
However, says it's
for 110mm BB and I wonder if my chain line would go
out
of whack. I'll
ask on Amazon as well but usually there aren't good
answers that way.

My shifters are simple friction levers and the
front DR
cage looks tall
enough to handle the 50/32 step.

Do you guys think this would work?

Long story short, I ordered the 53/39T Version with
130mm
BCD - junk.
The cheap bolts were overtorqued and two of the Allen
inserts stripped.
Plus they didn't send Vuelta Corsa but some no-name
that
was quite
scuffed up. Goes back for a refund :-(
--
Regards, Joerg

That what I would expect from a 36 dollar
crankset....junk.


I have seen good ones in that range. What is cheap
were the
chain rings which are then steel. However, that's
right up
my alley because I am after durability and not a weight
weenie.

Thing is, what they sent were not Vuelta Corsa. Now
I'll be
looking for steel chain rings with 130mm BCD because my
cranks set itself is still good.


Given your riding conditions, style and comments here, $36
for two steel rings is a really good value to you. Recycle
the arms and you're still way ahead.

*nb* Steel rings are frequently thinner than aluminum
rings with a milled recess. This is shown mostly by the
chainring bolts being damaged from overtorque while the
rings still rattle. Check that and add a spacer under the
nut side as needed.


Darn, I already did the return thing. Mainly because I
could
not get two of the bolts out. They were overtorqued and
then
the hex pattern stripped out of the cheapo material. Could
have somehow drilled them out I guess. This also gave me
the
feeling that the steel rings are inferior material as well
and would wear off quickly.



Where wear is critical (high torque rider, excessive
dirt, high mileage etc) ...


That sounds like me :-)


 ... steel rings are an improvement. Notice that many
cranks come with pretty milled and pinned aluminum outers
but steel inners.


So far I haven't found much 130mm BCD stuff in steel. If I
really can't maybe I order that set again and then drill
out the bolts to scavenge the chain rings. It's probably
not very good steel but better than nothing.


P.S.: Aluminum chain rings have another major downside. They
cannot be turned around for a 2nd life because then the hole
recesses are on the wrong side.


Maybe, maybe not. I think you'll find most modern steel chainrings are
offset and also ramped for shifting.

These ones weren't offset but they were ramped. Shifting never bothered
me so I also turned individual sprockets in the cassette around, after
dremeling off part of the wider spline. On the 2h ride into Sacramento
that probably made me 500 milliseconds late :-)

On the road bike I don't shift much until I get back near home with some
steep climbs.

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for steel rings.
Aluminum rings have had remarkable advancement in shifting and THAT is
where most excessive wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an
aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain itself. Thinking
that the FSA rings would wear out I bought an extra set and after 4
years and a change in FSA standard chain arms, they have never been
needed.


I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and now rings for the
600EX set seems to have become unobtanium unless I pay an obscene price.
I really do not care about shifting speed. I don't use the road bike on
dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting. Weight never
mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around 6000mi/year and because
of rampant theft used old beater road bikes, cheap department store
bikes, for all commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now) for
touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the beater bikes
lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a very cheap variety.

Yes, there's really no doubt that steel chainrings wear longer than
aluminum ones (Tom notwithstanding). That's one reason why the smallest
MTB rings are/were available in steel, even for high-end cranks. Got
one - Campagnolo even! - for my tandem granny gear (26T). Beyond those,
though, good luck finding well-made steel rings that fit a quality crankset.

Mark J.

On 3/31/21 1:16 PM, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2021 1:00 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

[...]

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for steel rings.
Aluminum rings have had remarkable advancement in shifting and THAT
is where most excessive wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give"
in an aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain itself.
Thinking that the FSA rings would wear out I bought an extra set and
after 4 years and a change in FSA standard chain arms, they have
never been needed.


I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and now rings for
the 600EX set seems to have become unobtanium unless I pay an obscene
price. I really do not care about shifting speed. I don't use the road
bike on dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting. Weight
never mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around 6000mi/year and because
of rampant theft used old beater road bikes, cheap department store
bikes, for all commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now)
for touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the beater
bikes lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a very cheap variety.

Yes, there's really no doubt that steel chainrings wear longer than
aluminum ones (Tom notwithstanding).Â* That's one reason why the smallest
MTB rings are/were available in steel, even for high-end cranks.Â* Got
one - Campagnolo even! - for my tandem granny gear (26T).Â* Beyond those,
though, good luck finding well-made steel rings that fit a quality
crankset.


The ones I just sent back measured out ok, would have fit. However,
after seeing the shoddy workmanship of the crankset I was not convinced
of the "well-made" part.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 3/31/2021 5:28 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 1:16 PM, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2021 1:00 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

[...]

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for
steel rings. Aluminum rings have had remarkable
advancement in shifting and THAT is where most excessive
wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an
aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain
itself. Thinking that the FSA rings would wear out I
bought an extra set and after 4 years and a change in
FSA standard chain arms, they have never been needed.


I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and
now rings for the 600EX set seems to have become
unobtanium unless I pay an obscene price. I really do not
care about shifting speed. I don't use the road bike on
dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting.
Weight never mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around
6000mi/year and because of rampant theft used old beater
road bikes, cheap department store bikes, for all
commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now) for
touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the
beater bikes lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a
very cheap variety.

Yes, there's really no doubt that steel chainrings wear
longer than aluminum ones (Tom notwithstanding). That's
one reason why the smallest MTB rings are/were available
in steel, even for high-end cranks. Got one - Campagnolo
even! - for my tandem granny gear (26T). Beyond those,
though, good luck finding well-made steel rings that fit a
quality crankset.


The ones I just sent back measured out ok, would have fit.
However, after seeing the shoddy workmanship of the crankset
I was not convinced of the "well-made" part.


Modern chainrings have several teeth shorter than the
others, often some twisted teeth, slots or ramps on the
inside face below the teeth, and various anomalies carefully
designed to improve shift with modern flat-face chain.

A modern steel ring especially looks as if it had been
bashed with something less smooth than a hammer. This is not
a bug, it's a feature.

You're not alone if you mistook that feature. Back long ago
when we sold actual bicycles (2019), this was a common
complaint from riders who got home and had a close look or,
even worse, husband of customer who felt we'd taken
advantage by installing a used crank on a new bike.

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

On 3/31/21 5:34 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/31/2021 5:28 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 1:16 PM, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2021 1:00 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

[...]

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for
steel rings. Aluminum rings have had remarkable
advancement in shifting and THAT is where most excessive
wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an
aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain
itself. Thinking that the FSA rings would wear out I
bought an extra set and after 4 years and a change in
FSA standard chain arms, they have never been needed.


I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and
now rings for the 600EX set seems to have become
unobtanium unless I pay an obscene price. I really do not
care about shifting speed. I don't use the road bike on
dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting.
Weight never mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around
6000mi/year and because of rampant theft used old beater
road bikes, cheap department store bikes, for all
commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now) for
touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the
beater bikes lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a
very cheap variety.

Yes, there's really no doubt that steel chainrings wear
longer than aluminum ones (Tom notwithstanding).ÂÂ* That's
one reason why the smallest MTB rings are/were available
in steel, even for high-end cranks.ÂÂ* Got one - Campagnolo
even! - for my tandem granny gear (26T).ÂÂ* Beyond those,
though, good luck finding well-made steel rings that fit a
quality crankset.


The ones I just sent back measured out ok, would have fit.
However, after seeing the shoddy workmanship of the crankset
I was not convinced of the "well-made" part.


Modern chainrings have several teeth shorter than the others, often some
twisted teeth, slots or ramps on the inside face below the teeth, and
various anomalies carefully designed to improve shift with modern
flat-face chain.

A modern steel ring especially looks as if it had been bashed with
something less smooth than a hammer. This is not a bug, it's a feature.

You're not alone if you mistook that feature. Back long ago when we sold
actual bicycles (2019), this was a common complaint from riders who got
home and had a close look or, even worse, husband of customer who felt
we'd taken advantage by installing a used crank on a new bike.


No, I didn't mistake that feature, I know about it. It was just that the
paint on the chain rings was sloppy and they felt a bit soft. They also
had rather rough spots where the chain never touches. Not was I am used
to from MTB.

We didn't have any of those fancy "shifting aids" in the 80's and I was
still able to shift gears :-)

One the cassette I sometimes turn around gears for a 2nd life, after
grinding the wider spline with a Dremel. I've never noticed shifting
issues. Well, it ain't the Tour de France and maybe I arrived in
Sacramento two seconds later than if I had forked over the $50 for a new
cassette instead.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Thursday, April 1, 2021 at 12:07:48 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
Well, it ain't the Tour de France and maybe I arrived in
Sacramento two seconds later than if I had forked over the $50 for a new
cassette instead.
--
Regards, Joerg

2 seconds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you know how much time that is????????????
Why, Tom could have easily, with time to spare, written a Pulitzer prize winning book, or two. And earned the Nobel peace prize. And maybe the Nobel Physics prize too. He must already own the Nobel Economics prize since he speaks so knowingly about business matters. I doubt he would use the two seconds to cure global warming since he is a Trumper and does not believe that exists. You know, like the Covid-19 doesn't exist either according to the Don. Not sure he would use those two seconds to feed and clothe and house all the poor and homeless people in America. Trumpers are against helping the poor and needy. Only the rich and wealthy should be helped with tax cuts and government contracts.

On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 1:00:32 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 1:39:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 3:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 12:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 10:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 11:00 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 12:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/28/2021 2:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 4:29 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 maart 2021 om 23:41:04 UTC+1 schreef
Joerg:
On 3/18/21 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
My chain rings are through again but replacements have
become expensive.
It's now much cheaper to buy a simple crank set of
another brand.
Preferably steel because aluminum wears so fast.
What I
have is:

Shimano 600EX, 52/42T, bottom bracket is 116mm JIS
taper.

What I'd like to replace it with is this Vuelta Corsa
set:

https://smile.amazon.com/Vuelta-8150...dp/B0081UV2NU/






Only 50T which is kind of ok but the 32T lower will
move
me up hills
much better. Getting old, and all that sort of thing.
However, says it's
for 110mm BB and I wonder if my chain line would go
out
of whack. I'll
ask on Amazon as well but usually there aren't good
answers that way.

My shifters are simple friction levers and the
front DR
cage looks tall
enough to handle the 50/32 step.

Do you guys think this would work?

Long story short, I ordered the 53/39T Version with
130mm
BCD - junk.
The cheap bolts were overtorqued and two of the Allen
inserts stripped.
Plus they didn't send Vuelta Corsa but some no-name
that
was quite
scuffed up. Goes back for a refund :-(
--
Regards, Joerg

That what I would expect from a 36 dollar
crankset....junk.


I have seen good ones in that range. What is cheap
were the
chain rings which are then steel. However, that's
right up
my alley because I am after durability and not a weight
weenie.

Thing is, what they sent were not Vuelta Corsa. Now
I'll be
looking for steel chain rings with 130mm BCD because my
cranks set itself is still good.


Given your riding conditions, style and comments here, $36
for two steel rings is a really good value to you. Recycle
the arms and you're still way ahead.

*nb* Steel rings are frequently thinner than aluminum
rings with a milled recess. This is shown mostly by the
chainring bolts being damaged from overtorque while the
rings still rattle. Check that and add a spacer under the
nut side as needed.


Darn, I already did the return thing. Mainly because I
could
not get two of the bolts out. They were overtorqued and
then
the hex pattern stripped out of the cheapo material. Could
have somehow drilled them out I guess. This also gave me
the
feeling that the steel rings are inferior material as well
and would wear off quickly.



Where wear is critical (high torque rider, excessive
dirt, high mileage etc) ...


That sounds like me :-)


 ... steel rings are an improvement. Notice that many
cranks come with pretty milled and pinned aluminum outers
but steel inners.


So far I haven't found much 130mm BCD stuff in steel. If I
really can't maybe I order that set again and then drill
out the bolts to scavenge the chain rings. It's probably
not very good steel but better than nothing.


P.S.: Aluminum chain rings have another major downside. They
cannot be turned around for a 2nd life because then the hole
recesses are on the wrong side.


Maybe, maybe not. I think you'll find most modern steel chainrings are
offset and also ramped for shifting.

These ones weren't offset but they were ramped. Shifting never bothered
me so I also turned individual sprockets in the cassette around, after
dremeling off part of the wider spline. On the 2h ride into Sacramento
that probably made me 500 milliseconds late :-)

On the road bike I don't shift much until I get back near home with some
steep climbs.

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for steel rings. Aluminum rings have had remarkable advancement in shifting and THAT is where most excessive wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain itself. Thinking that the FSA rings would wear out I bought an extra set and after 4 years and a change in FSA standard chain arms, they have never been needed.
I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and now rings for the
600EX set seems to have become unobtanium unless I pay an obscene price.
I really do not care about shifting speed. I don't use the road bike on
dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting. Weight never
mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around 6000mi/year and because
of rampant theft used old beater road bikes, cheap department store
bikes, for all commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now) for
touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the beater bikes
lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a very cheap variety.
--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
If I recall, you can get 130 mm rings from FSA for a more than reasonable price.

On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 1:16:14 PM UTC-7, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2021 1:00 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/31/21 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 1:39:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 3:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 12:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/29/21 10:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/29/2021 11:00 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 12:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/28/2021 2:13 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 3/28/21 4:29 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 maart 2021 om 23:41:04 UTC+1 schreef
Joerg:
On 3/18/21 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
My chain rings are through again but replacements have
become expensive.
It's now much cheaper to buy a simple crank set of
another brand.
Preferably steel because aluminum wears so fast.
What I
have is:

Shimano 600EX, 52/42T, bottom bracket is 116mm JIS
taper.

What I'd like to replace it with is this Vuelta Corsa
set:

https://smile.amazon.com/Vuelta-8150...dp/B0081UV2NU/







Only 50T which is kind of ok but the 32T lower will
move
me up hills
much better. Getting old, and all that sort of thing.
However, says it's
for 110mm BB and I wonder if my chain line would go
out
of whack. I'll
ask on Amazon as well but usually there aren't good
answers that way.

My shifters are simple friction levers and the
front DR
cage looks tall
enough to handle the 50/32 step.

Do you guys think this would work?

Long story short, I ordered the 53/39T Version with
130mm
BCD - junk.
The cheap bolts were overtorqued and two of the Allen
inserts stripped.
Plus they didn't send Vuelta Corsa but some no-name
that
was quite
scuffed up. Goes back for a refund :-(
--
Regards, Joerg

That what I would expect from a 36 dollar
crankset....junk.


I have seen good ones in that range. What is cheap
were the
chain rings which are then steel. However, that's
right up
my alley because I am after durability and not a weight
weenie.

Thing is, what they sent were not Vuelta Corsa. Now
I'll be
looking for steel chain rings with 130mm BCD because my
cranks set itself is still good.


Given your riding conditions, style and comments here, $36
for two steel rings is a really good value to you. Recycle
the arms and you're still way ahead.

*nb* Steel rings are frequently thinner than aluminum
rings with a milled recess. This is shown mostly by the
chainring bolts being damaged from overtorque while the
rings still rattle. Check that and add a spacer under the
nut side as needed.


Darn, I already did the return thing. Mainly because I
could
not get two of the bolts out. They were overtorqued and
then
the hex pattern stripped out of the cheapo material. Could
have somehow drilled them out I guess. This also gave me
the
feeling that the steel rings are inferior material as well
and would wear off quickly.



Where wear is critical (high torque rider, excessive
dirt, high mileage etc) ...


That sounds like me :-)


 ... steel rings are an improvement. Notice that many
cranks come with pretty milled and pinned aluminum outers
but steel inners.


So far I haven't found much 130mm BCD stuff in steel. If I
really can't maybe I order that set again and then drill
out the bolts to scavenge the chain rings. It's probably
not very good steel but better than nothing.


P.S.: Aluminum chain rings have another major downside. They
cannot be turned around for a 2nd life because then the hole
recesses are on the wrong side.


Maybe, maybe not. I think you'll find most modern steel chainrings are
offset and also ramped for shifting.

These ones weren't offset but they were ramped. Shifting never bothered
me so I also turned individual sprockets in the cassette around, after
dremeling off part of the wider spline. On the 2h ride into Sacramento
that probably made me 500 milliseconds late :-)

On the road bike I don't shift much until I get back near home with some
steep climbs.

Joerge, I think that you're making a mistake looking for steel rings.
Aluminum rings have had remarkable advancement in shifting and THAT is
where most excessive wear occurs in the rings. The slight "give" in an
aluminum ring actually reduces the wear on the chain itself. Thinking
that the FSA rings would wear out I bought an extra set and after 4
years and a change in FSA standard chain arms, they have never been
needed.


I wore through several aluminum rings from Shimano and now rings for the
600EX set seems to have become unobtanium unless I pay an obscene price..
I really do not care about shifting speed. I don't use the road bike on
dirt/gravel roads much anymore so not much shifting. Weight never
mattered to me either. My only concern is wear.

During my time at the university I rode around 6000mi/year and because
of rampant theft used old beater road bikes, cheap department store
bikes, for all commuting and the good bike (the one I still use now) for
touring, fitness and fun rides. The steel rings on the beater bikes
lasted a _lot_ more miles despite being of a very cheap variety.

Yes, there's really no doubt that steel chainrings wear longer than
aluminum ones (Tom notwithstanding). That's one reason why the smallest
MTB rings are/were available in steel, even for high-end cranks. Got
one - Campagnolo even! - for my tandem granny gear (26T). Beyond those,
though, good luck finding well-made steel rings that fit a quality crankset.

Mark J.
I had a Campy Record triple and I still have the aluminum 26 ring around here someplace. Now what is it about these high end steel Campy rings?