hubs/cranks and stuff

'Here' (http://www.unicycle.co.nz/images/shop/OnzaTensileCranks.jpg)'s a
picture of the Onza tensile cranks from UDC NZ.


--
mawesome

MrBoogiejuice wrote:
I walked into B&Q at lunchtime and some old guy dressed in orange asked
me if I wanted decking. Fortunately, I got the first punch in and that
was the end of that.



'Team Insania!' (http://www.team-insania.com)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
mawesome's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11724
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

iridemymuni wrote:
ISIS set out a set of tolerences which they allow, both are within the
tolerences. That's just how it is.



Did you actually measure this or do you just guess? The only
measurement that I heard of was that the Koxx hub is slightly out of
the specs.

Would be good to settle this once and for all. Unfortunately neither
Koxx, KH or most unicycling resellers did anything to clarify the
situation.


--
Niko

-the harder you try, the dumber you look.-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Niko's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10976
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

Niko wrote:
Would be good to settle this once and for all. Unfortunately neither
Koxx, KH or most unicycling resellers did anything to clarify the
situation.



What would you like retailers to say? Roland has been very clear (ok in
German) on the forum about the Koxx hub being outside tolerance.

I personally have not notified the forum about the tolerance
discrepancies with the Koxx hub. What we did do was issue a gentle
warning of none compatibility on our site. Being outside tolerance
does not make it any weaker (or stronger), it just causes problems for
retrofitting cranks.

It should not be the retailers who are having to do this work, but the
manufacturer. Koxx as the manufacturer should be telling the retailers
and customers, not the other way around. Remember when Kris had the
manufacturing problem with the rim (not his fault but a manufacturers
mistake)? He took the responsibility and arranged to get all the
affected rims replaced. Koxx have refused to admit that they could be
wrong. They were informed in September (6 months ago) of the
discrepancies in their manufacture. Here is an extract of what they
were told:

"I have then done a dimensional and physical check
on it. It seems to differ from the ISIS standard in 2 small ways.
The
fluted length is too short, the ISIS standard is 16.00 +0.5/-0.0 the
KOXX hub measures 14.40mm. The second problem is that the flutes do
not
seem to be deep enough. It is very difficult to measure this,
especially with the flutes being too short; but using a pair of good
vernier callipers they appear to be 0.2mm too shallow."

Koxx's response was that they were correct ISIS standard and KH, Onza
and Quax are wrong. This response forced KH, Onza and Quax to do
additional checks on their ISIS which were found to be within the ISIS
tolerances.

This is a problem that I hope that Koxx can resolve because it makes it
a lot harder for the retailers. The retailers have done everything
possible to help this situation by feeding this information back
quickly to them.

Roger


--
rogeratunicycledotcom

++++++++++++++++++
Unicycle.com in the UK
The UK's Unicycle Source
www.unicycle.uk.com
+++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------------------------------------------------
rogeratunicycledotcom's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4116
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

skrobo wrote:
its more than a little loose
uhmm
my torker DX cranks fit on the Qu-ax hub, but they are messed up.


Koxx isis is not the same as other ISIS cranks/hubs
The Koxx cranks fit the other hubs, but the other cranks do not fit the
Koxx hub

the KH moment cranks only fit on the KH moment hub.



nope. you can swap out KH moment with qu_ax and onza isis cranks.


--
mornish

aim:kiloornish
email: mornish AT gmail DOT com

muniaddict wrote:
does he have me confused with somebody who's actually good?


Brian MacKenzie wrote:
you're gonna need a flux capacitor and a shot of plutonium
------------------------------------------------------------------------
mornish's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11658
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

KOXX know exactly what the ISIS spec's are, they've been using the exact
ISIS interface spec's on MTB bottom brackets and cranks for years...

When I asked them about the K1 ISIS, they said that the splines were
intentionally made a bit fatter to increase the strength, since torsion
applied to a unicycle spindle on impacts is far greater than torsion
applied on a bicycle's bottom bracket, given the fact that on a MTB the
rear wheel hits first and the chainstay length provides a lever to
absorb part of the energy... Which makes sense...

I don't think they would have «made a mistake» with 3 different cranks
and 2 different hubs models... If they want to use their own splined
interface spec's, they are free to do it... And personally, as long as
it works well, and it does, I don't see where the problem is...

However, I do admit that if a splined interface doesn't match the ISIS
spec's perfectly, it shouldn't be called ISIS, even if based on the
basic 10 spline concept...

isisdrive.com for the details


--
division8.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------
division8.ca's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11818
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

rogeratunicycledotcom wrote:
What would you like retailers to say? Roland has been very clear (ok in
German) on the forum about the Koxx hub being outside tolerance.

I personally have not notified the forum about the tolerance
discrepancies with the Koxx hub. What we did do was issue a gentle
warning of none compatibility on our site. Being outside tolerance
does not make it any weaker (or stronger), it just causes problems for
retrofitting cranks.



Hello Roger,

thank you very much for your post, thats actually the kind of post I
was hoping for. The measurement by Roland was the one I was referring
to, but (as I understood it) it was just a quick check and not a
confirmation without doubt. As we just saw in this thread it was up to
now unclear if Koxx was ISIS or not.

Of course the retailers have no fault in this and suffer from the
situation. However, if Koxx is outside the specification then it is not
ISIS. ISIS is a protected name and using it for a non-ISIS component
breaks the license agreement. Selling it knowingly under the name of
ISIS is close to fraud (and this is also the responsibility of the
retailers).
There have been multiple posts in this forum from confused customers on
the matter of ISIS, so the incompability notice is not enough in my
view. Why can't you just call it "Koxx splined interface (similar to
ISIS)".

It's true that only retrofitting is affected, but this is a big deal
for some (like me). In my case it meant that I would have had to shell
out more for cranks that I liked less (I wanted shorter ones). I felt
really cheated and therefore sold my Koxx Devil (which was otherwise
really good) to get a KH20 07 instead.

As I said I had hoped for a post like yours long ago. Why did it take
that long to clarify the situation? The behavior of Koxx is in no way
acceptable, and Koxx should feel the consequences. I tried to contact
the ISIS consortium and inform them of the violation, but their email
address did not work. Maybe a retailer would have better luck and other
means of contacting them.


--
Niko

-the harder you try, the dumber you look.-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Niko's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10976
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

division8.ca wrote:
When I asked them about the K1 ISIS, they said that the splines were
intentionally made a bit fatter to increase the strength,



Thats interesting! So they either lied to you or in the response Roger
spoke of?

I don't buy the reason though, since the difference seems to be too
small for any real effect. And if there was a good reason they could
have informed the other manufacturers to achieve compatibility.


--
Niko

-the harder you try, the dumber you look.-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Niko's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10976
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

division8.ca wrote:
KOXX know exactly what the ISIS spec's are, they've been using the exact
ISIS interface spec's on MTB bottom brackets and cranks for years...

When I asked them about the K1 ISIS, they said that the splines were
intentionally made a bit fatter to increase the strength, since torsion
applied to a unicycle spindle on impacts is far greater than torsion
applied on a bicycle's bottom bracket, given the fact that on a MTB the
rear wheel hits first and the chainstay length provides a lever to
absorb part of the energy... Which makes sense...



Thanks. :-)

Sorry this wins my favourite post of the day. A few points. Koxx are
a trials bike company that have existed for less time than
Unicycle.com, which is considerably less time than Onza. They don't
make any MTB's as far as I can tell.

Oh... and how can making the interface 1.6mm shorter make it stronger?

Oh and as for Koxx cranks fitting on everyone else's hubs... sorry,
this is a great comment as well. Of course it does, it is larger! it
does not mean that it will give a reliable interface.

Roger


--
rogeratunicycledotcom

++++++++++++++++++
Unicycle.com in the UK
The UK's Unicycle Source
www.unicycle.uk.com
+++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------------------------------------------------
rogeratunicycledotcom's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4116
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

Last fall I built a Koxx 1/Truvativ Luftalarm/Large Marge wheelset (it
can be seen in my avatar). Everything went together great. When
statements came out about Koxx 1 not being true ISIS, I was interested
in why. I did read Roland's post on the German forum (translated by a
friend and also remember it being stated as a rough measurement). I
then measured my hub. My flute length was 16.0mm (within the spec) and
the distance between flutes was roughly measured at 17.3mm (I don't
have a very accurate micrometer).

Since the Truvativ cranks fit on my Koxx 1 hub I assumed that it was
within the ISIS specification. I then downloaded the ISIS spec and
noticed that the tolerances in the spec make it possible for a set of
ISIS cranks to not fit a ISIS hub. At this point I assumed that the
incompatibility was due to the tolerances in the ISIS specification.

So it looks like I was lucky enough to have a true ISIS Koxx 1 hub and
Roland saw a number of out of spec Koxx 1 hubs. It would be nice to
have Roland confirm what he mentioned in the email to Koxx (hopefully
in english ).

I am interested in how widespread this problem is.

Was I just lucky to get an in spec Koxx 1 hub?
Were the out of spec hub's that Roland measured because of quality
issues or intentional?
How many other people have been able to fit (non-Koxx 1) ISIS cranks on
a Koxx 1 hub?
How many people have not been able to fit ISIS cranks on a Koxx 1 hub?

It would be nice to get a "clear" answer from Koxx about this
compatibility issue. Not just "we are within the ISIS specification".
It would be nice to see proof.


--
jayhawker
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jayhawker's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11274
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058

Roger,

First point : year after year, the KOXX bicycle lineup always counts
between 15 and 20 bikes, bikes that use 1.125" headtubes, 68xBSA1.37"
BB sheels, 135mm spacing rear hub, etc, are called MTB's... Let's not
play with words here.

Second point : If you can put your hands on a ISIS BB, and compare it
with the K1 hub spindle, you'll see that the difference is actually
noticeable if you pay attention... Of course, even I didn't notice
until I actually tried to fit an ISIS MTB crank on the K1 hub...
Removing less material when grooving the spines certainly can't make
the spindle weaker...

Now, was it done intentionnally or not, I can't tell.

Third point : I never said you should use K1 cranks on other hubs. I
would rather even strongly advise against it. Use the K1 stuff as a
combo. Just like you can't use an ISIS crankset on an Octalink Spindle,
or why different BMX 3pc cranksets from different manufacturers all use
a different spindle interface. If the interface isn't the same on your
cranks and spindle, you're definitly asking for problems...


--
division8.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------
division8.ca's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/11818
View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/58058