Re: [CR]Predicting/preventing NR/SR crank breakage

(Example: Production Builders:Tonard)

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 12:15:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Dalton" <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Predicting/preventing NR/SR crank breakage
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <412171.1030549413277.JavaMail.monkeylad@mac.com>


Dear simian friend, Oh my, you've misunderstood my point. <snip> "Can you name one top end non-CNC crank made after the "classic" era that has a page dedicated to it's failures."

I think the prevalence of Record arms in the Hertzberg (sp?) archive reflects the prevalence of their use among serious riders. Record arms may have failed more frequently under fixed conditions than other high-end cranks, but in the absence of any real data, this is only speculation. In the end it is more relevant that high-end lightweight cranks (and frames, bars, stems, pedals, etc.) will eventually fail under their intended use, and they must be frequently inspected and periodlically replaced.

<snip>Also I can tell you my classic era Shimano 600 crank works fine with 9-speed if you just change the rings.

Sure, as long as you also use a classic era BB. But in today's market a lot of guys will buy a whole new 9-speed ace crank and BB, or grouppo, or bike, rather than nurse along "last years" square axled cranks by replacing worn rings. My point was that the propensity of today's riders to buy new equipment sooner may lead to less heavily-used stuff out there on the bikes of serious riders and therfore fewer failures. I don't know what has caused people to be more inclined to buy equipment, but in my experience it seems that they are. Some of this may be due to the so-called planned obselesence of designs, some may be due to changing demopgraphics (as the boomers age, racers are becoming older and thus richer), and some is due to the fact that stuff really does improve at a significantly faster pace these days, which is almost certainly fueled by the aformentioned demographic changes. Whew... there is always marketing too.

Now don't get me wrong, I think newer standard equipment like Ace and Record is probably a bit less failure-prone than SR, but the reduced service life certainly plays in too. (BTW, I have afriend who cracked a 9-speed Ace arm in about two years of hard weekend riding, so anecdotally we "know" those new cranks can break.)

<snip>If you like friction shifting parts becoming "unserviceable due to incompatibilities" isn't an issue.

If I did (and I don't) I would still have trouble getting good BBs to fit my old cranks, for example. But who cares? I just use the new stuff because it is better, cheaper and easier to find than NOS vintage gear.

<snip>I'm not trying to start another firestorm, but I really do tire of the "modern" bashing that sometimes happens. We really don't have to disparage modern things to make classic things special. I like to see evidence not anecdotes.

As I said, I like the new stuff.. Shimano Ace, Mavic clinchers, Time pedals... I'd like to get a modern Al bike soon and some Ksyrium SSCs, but don't tell anyone. And yet classic-era stuff is still special to me.

Tom "not meaning to spank the monkey" Dalton

Bethlehem, PA

Brandon"monkeyman"Ives Always willing to stir the pot in Santa Barbara, CA _______________________________________________

---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes