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

50.4 BCD TA vs. VO



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 2nd 19, 03:15 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,174
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On Sunday, September 1, 2019 at 6:25:06 PM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, September 1, 2019 at 6:21:58 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 1, 2019 at 6:12:14 PM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116 R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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

The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.

Ads
  #12  
Old September 2nd 19, 03:39 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,595
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On 9/1/2019 9:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116 R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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


The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.


No, I'll point out that you're correct on one point. If the length of a
bottom bracket shaft (as you call it) is a bit less, then other things
being equal it will be a bit stiffer.

The deflection is proportional to the length. So if you moved from a 120
mm shaft to a 116 mm shaft, you'd increase the stiffness about 3%. With
laboratory equipment that was sensitive enough, you'd be able to detect
that.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #13  
Old September 2nd 19, 03:39 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 498
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 18:12:12 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116 R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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


The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.


By gorry Tommie! You hit the nail right on the head!

You whip out these hip width measurements like they are carved on
tablets of stone... and perhaps they are. Except that you neglect to
mention that hip width in males is noticible different than in
females. To the extent thjat a female's knee joints are closer
together then her hip joints while a male's knee joints are generally
speaking the same width.

But perhaps you are telling us that women don't ride bicycles? Or the
moon is made of blue chease?

--

Cheers,

John B.
  #14  
Old September 2nd 19, 04:19 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ralph Barone[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 380
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 18:12:12 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the
offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116
R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom
bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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


The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do
not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower
and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the
narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.


By gorry Tommie! You hit the nail right on the head!

You whip out these hip width measurements like they are carved on
tablets of stone... and perhaps they are. Except that you neglect to
mention that hip width in males is noticible different than in
females. To the extent thjat a female's knee joints are closer
together then her hip joints while a male's knee joints are generally
speaking the same width.

But perhaps you are telling us that women don't ride bicycles? Or the
moon is made of blue chease?

--

Cheers,

John B.


And, of course, the important measurement when discussing Q factor is how
far apart the ankles are when doing a similar exercise like walking or
running.

  #15  
Old September 2nd 19, 05:16 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 498
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 03:19:15 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 18:12:12 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the
offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116
R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom
bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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

The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do
not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower
and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the
narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.


By gorry Tommie! You hit the nail right on the head!

You whip out these hip width measurements like they are carved on
tablets of stone... and perhaps they are. Except that you neglect to
mention that hip width in males is noticible different than in
females. To the extent thjat a female's knee joints are closer
together then her hip joints while a male's knee joints are generally
speaking the same width.

But perhaps you are telling us that women don't ride bicycles? Or the
moon is made of blue chease?

--

Cheers,

John B.


And, of course, the important measurement when discussing Q factor is how
far apart the ankles are when doing a similar exercise like walking or
running.


I wouldn't argue except to say that over the years I've owned quite a
number of bicycles which undoubtedly had varying BB width... and I've
never been able to tell the difference. I've never jumped on a bike
and thought "Gee, those pedals are a long ways apart" or conversely,
"Gee those pedals are really close together".

For that matter, I see people running and their stride seems wider
with running shoes on than when barefoot.

As always, I may be wrong, but like many of the things that seem to be
of such major concern, I just can't believe that pedal width (within
reason) is THAT important.
--

Cheers,

John B.
  #16  
Old September 2nd 19, 05:54 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ralph Barone[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 380
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 03:19:15 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 18:12:12 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the
offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116
R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom
bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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

The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do
not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower
and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the
narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.

By gorry Tommie! You hit the nail right on the head!

You whip out these hip width measurements like they are carved on
tablets of stone... and perhaps they are. Except that you neglect to
mention that hip width in males is noticible different than in
females. To the extent thjat a female's knee joints are closer
together then her hip joints while a male's knee joints are generally
speaking the same width.

But perhaps you are telling us that women don't ride bicycles? Or the
moon is made of blue chease?

--

Cheers,

John B.


And, of course, the important measurement when discussing Q factor is how
far apart the ankles are when doing a similar exercise like walking or
running.


I wouldn't argue except to say that over the years I've owned quite a
number of bicycles which undoubtedly had varying BB width... and I've
never been able to tell the difference. I've never jumped on a bike
and thought "Gee, those pedals are a long ways apart" or conversely,
"Gee those pedals are really close together".

For that matter, I see people running and their stride seems wider
with running shoes on than when barefoot.

As always, I may be wrong, but like many of the things that seem to be
of such major concern, I just can't believe that pedal width (within
reason) is THAT important.
--

Cheers,

John B.


and that too...

I went for a bike fitting and the guy spaced my pedals OUT another couple
mm on each side, but he used ****ty spacers, so I removed them. I didn’t
recall it making a noticeable difference in either direction.

I was also hoping to buy a bike power meter that fit between your pedal and
your crank (and which kicked your pedals out another 3/4” or so, and there
weren’t many complaints about the Q factor - only the bait and switch when
the company decided they couldn’t actually build the product.
  #17  
Old September 2nd 19, 06:11 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,000
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On 2/9/19 2:16 pm, John B. Slocomb wrote:


I wouldn't argue except to say that over the years I've owned quite a
number of bicycles which undoubtedly had varying BB width... and I've
never been able to tell the difference. I've never jumped on a bike
and thought "Gee, those pedals are a long ways apart" or conversely,
"Gee those pedals are really close together".


I think "Gee those pedals are a long way apart" when I ride my MTB.

It's another reason I don't like riding that bike, and why I bought a
gravel/touring bike that has a similar (if not the same) Q factor as my
road bike.

--
JS
  #18  
Old September 2nd 19, 06:21 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tim McNamara
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,864
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 17:41:14 -0700 (PDT), Chris Collins
wrote:
Thanks Tim...by email the said 116mm, I don't know where you got 118mm
(not doubting, just don't know).


The Velo Orange product website page.
  #19  
Old September 2nd 19, 06:24 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 498
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 04:54:32 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 03:19:15 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 18:12:12 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 7:49:45 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2019 9:07 PM, Don Gillies wrote:
If a vintage crank needs an offset on one side, you can just add the
offset to the other side and substitute a symmetric crankset, so a 116
R+5 bottom bracket can be substituted with a 121 symmetric bottom
bracket (120 or 122 would work fine.)

- Don Gillies
Palo Alto, CA, USA


Which makes your tread ( aka "Q") wider.
Deal breaker for some riders.

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

The iliac width is why the BB50 has become so common. People's legs do
not have to spread so wide and the length of the BB shaft is narrower
and consequently stiffer. Average hip breadth is 13" or 33 cm. So the
narrower the BB the more angularly correct a pedal spacing would be.

Time for Frank to tell us all that I don't know what I'm talking about.

By gorry Tommie! You hit the nail right on the head!

You whip out these hip width measurements like they are carved on
tablets of stone... and perhaps they are. Except that you neglect to
mention that hip width in males is noticible different than in
females. To the extent thjat a female's knee joints are closer
together then her hip joints while a male's knee joints are generally
speaking the same width.

But perhaps you are telling us that women don't ride bicycles? Or the
moon is made of blue chease?

--

Cheers,

John B.


And, of course, the important measurement when discussing Q factor is how
far apart the ankles are when doing a similar exercise like walking or
running.


I wouldn't argue except to say that over the years I've owned quite a
number of bicycles which undoubtedly had varying BB width... and I've
never been able to tell the difference. I've never jumped on a bike
and thought "Gee, those pedals are a long ways apart" or conversely,
"Gee those pedals are really close together".

For that matter, I see people running and their stride seems wider
with running shoes on than when barefoot.

As always, I may be wrong, but like many of the things that seem to be
of such major concern, I just can't believe that pedal width (within
reason) is THAT important.
--

Cheers,

John B.


and that too...

I went for a bike fitting and the guy spaced my pedals OUT another couple
mm on each side, but he used ****ty spacers, so I removed them. I didnt
recall it making a noticeable difference in either direction.


The world is a strange place. It used to be that bike magazines had
articles about how to fit a bike. You bought a bike and adjusted the
bike to fit using measurements in the magazine which were usually
common knowledge anyway. Then you rode the thing and maybe changed a
few adjustments to fit better - I've a fetish for seat position - and
then you just rode.

Now you buy a bike and take it to a "fitter" and pay to have the bike
fitted.The magazine cost 50 cents as I remember :-)


I was also hoping to buy a bike power meter that fit between your pedal and
your crank (and which kicked your pedals out another 3/4 or so, and there
werent many complaints about the Q factor - only the bait and switch when
the company decided they couldnt actually build the product.

--

Cheers,

John B.
  #20  
Old September 2nd 19, 06:46 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,490
Default 50.4 BCD TA vs. VO

On Monday, 2 September 2019 01:12:08 UTC-4, James wrote:
On 2/9/19 2:16 pm, John B. Slocomb wrote:


I wouldn't argue except to say that over the years I've owned quite a
number of bicycles which undoubtedly had varying BB width... and I've
never been able to tell the difference. I've never jumped on a bike
and thought "Gee, those pedals are a long ways apart" or conversely,
"Gee those pedals are really close together".


I think "Gee those pedals are a long way apart" when I ride my MTB.

It's another reason I don't like riding that bike, and why I bought a
gravel/touring bike that has a similar (if not the same) Q factor as my
road bike.

--
JS


I bought a bicycle for parts but took it for a 40 kilometers round trip ride and had terrible pain before even riding 20 kilometers. The pain was caused by a wider than normal for me Q-factor. I narrowed the Q-factor by quite a bit and the pain never came back. For me a wide Q-factor is very painful.. Others, their mileage and tolerance may vary.

Cheers
 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.