Re: [CR]Campy Spindles

Example: Framebuilders:Jack Taylor

Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 13:56:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom Dalton <>
Subject: Re: [CR]Campy Spindles
To: Rob Hawks <>
In-Reply-To: <>

> I'm assuming you mean Comsumer Products Safety
> Commission,
> but why would these changes be made for safety
> reasons? Hmmm.

The front edges of the front derailleur cage were deemed some sort of hazardous protrusion, so Campy had to put rolled lips on these edges. This required that the distance between the outer ring and the right arm be increased for clearance. The changes in the crank required that the BB be redesigned to restore the chainline. One tiny change for Uncle Sam, three redesigned parts with limited interchangability. Revised hub QRs, brake QRs, coated tire guides and rear derailleur spring covers also arose from the CPSC regs, but the crank BB change was the only compatibility issue.
> So, would markings of 68 (or 74) == SS (or P) == 120
> (or 110)
> indicate pre 1977, then the same markings along with
> the +1.0/+1.5
> indicate about 1977, and the 68 == SS indicate post
> 1977?

That's pretty much it, though 1977 may have been the last pre-CPSC year rather than the first post-CPSC year.

Tom Dalton