Re: [Classicrendezvous] Stronglight cranks, small parts specs


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 13:51:21 -0500
From: Jerry Moos <moos@penn.com>
To: Mike Self <self@fuse.net>
CC: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [Classicrendezvous] Stronglight cranks, small parts specs
References: <3.0.5.32.20001112101605.011f0040@j.imap.itd.umich.edu> <002701c04e60$6570eba0$402344d8@Mike>


Mike, it is very common for a Stronglight left arm to be very close to the adjustable cup. Sometimes there is barely clearance to insert a wrench to adjust the cup without removing the arm first. I would think a 120mm axle would help, assuming the added 2mm is not all on the right side. You shouldn't need to change the whole BB, as the longer axle should still have the same distance between bearing races, so the cup positioning shouldn't change. As mentioned here recently, Japanese JIS standard BBs like Sugino Maxy (but not Mighty) work with Stronglight crankarms and place the arms farther out for a given axle length. If you go that route, you may need to use the complete JIS BB though. Sutherland's mentions that Phil Wood axles work with Stronglight arms, but I don't know what Phil axle length is ideal. I also don't know if Phil makes a Stronglight-specific model with a different taper angle than their Campy compatible versions or not. Some of the LBS owners can probably answer that. Also, I've found in the past that Phil Wood support people are very good about answering tecnical questions via email.

Regards,

Jerry Moos

Regards,

Jerry Moos

Mike Self wrote:
> I have a related 93 crank/BB question. I have an early or mid 70's
> Motobecane Le Champion ($5 at a yard sale). It had what looks to be
> original Stronglight 93 crank & BB w/ 118 Stronglight axle. Right arm is
> fine. Left arm looked like it had been overtightened, but 2 other 93 left
> arms fit the same way.
>
> Sutherland's 1985 3rd ed. lists the 118 mm for the 5 pin (ie #49) & a 120 or
> 123 for a 5 arm double like the 93. I need to replace the entire BB,
> thought I would get another Stronglight, but maybe there are other
> alternatives. What would be best to try a 120 or 123? What about
> availability? On the high end, Phil Wood lists 119 & 123 mm axles - would
> either of these work?
>
> Any comments?
>
> I will send an introduction soon.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike Self
> Raleigh Internationals, RRA, Moultons
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph Bender-Zanoni" <jfbender@umich.edu>
> To: "KCTOMMY" <KCTOMMY@email.msn.com>; <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 1:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [Classicrendezvous] Stronglight cranks, small parts specs
>
> > >
> > >Does the 93 crank have a standard spindle taper so that the arms would
> work
> > >with a Shimano or Campy bottom bracket?
> >
> > I think it is standard enough to work on Campy, Sugino etc. In the old
> days
> > Shimano had a shallower taper as I recollect.
> >
> > >
> > >Can I use standard crank bolts and washers? I know the extractor is a
> > >unique Stronglight size.
> >
> > Yes, and it is simpler to avoid the 16mm Stronglight bolts as a very thin
> > socket is required.
> >
> > >
> > >What length spindle do the arms take?
> >
> > If you start swapping spindles it depends on where the cranks end up
> > seating on the tapers. Based on a Stronglight axle chart, I would say
> 120mm
> > with the right side 4mm longer than the left.
> > >
> > >Are the chain ring bolts an odd size?
> >
> > I think run of the mill would work but the "shoulder" is larger for the
> > Stronglight.
> >
> > >
> > >Does $45 sound right for the crank arms?
> >
> > With rings and in nice shape that is OK. It you have to hunt down all the
> > rings and hardware I'd look for something more complete.