Perhaps I wasn't clear about the 157 BCD rings. I wasn't saying that TA made them, but that many old 3-arm steel cranks used them via use of three "carrier" pieces bolted to the arms, with the carriers bolted to the 6-hole 157 BCD rings. The best known such rings are the nice alloy Simplex, but Sutherland's also lists Nervar, Solida, Zeus and others. I personally have Simplex and Zeus alloy 157 BCD rings. I have never seen TA 157 BCD rings nor does Sutherland's mention them. The relevance to the TA discussion was that perhaps the TA Randonneur rings could bolt to the 3-arm cranks in place of the carrier pieces using the same bolts, allowing much smaller rings than 157 BCD had allowed.
BTW I'm a bit puzzled by discussion in an earlier post of 6--hole TA Randonneur rings with three additional "tabs" for attaching to three-arm cranks. Why would they need the tabs, when they already had six holes with the required 116 circle? Perhaps if I actually saw the catalog this would be clearer.
Regards,
Jerry Moos
Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jerry,
These are all interesting points and questions - to which I
have no real answers. All I can suggest is that, like other
French companies we've discussed, TA was actually a small
outfit trying to cover many bases. So I'm sure they were
trying to allow for simultaneous adaptation to all sorts of
circumstances.
One quesion I have is this: in your message, you mention
both 151mm and 157mm bolt circles. Did TA really offer those?
I'm only familiar with the 6 hole, 152mm rings that require one
of those Adapteur/Etoile pieces for use with any crank arm.
Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA)
> Frankly, I think I first encountered the Randonneur rings
> when I bought a fairly large lot of French bits from a CR
> member, Ted Ernst, perhaps. There were a number of various
> French rings, including one or two with a strange six-hole
> pattern that didn't match anything I was familiar with.
> Since these were sort of a "throw-in" with a lot of useful
> stuff, it was not a problem, but I was puzzled.
>
> I eventually established that the circle was 116 BCD, which
> suggested it might be for the old three-arm cranks, but why
> the extra three holes? Most of the old three-arm steel
> cranks were threaded to receive the chainring bolts and the
> bolts were typically "single" length, either securing a
> single ring direct to the arms, or securing a set of three
> "carriers" to which were bolted one or two 6-hole 157 BCD
> rings, of which Simplex made some nice alloy ones.
>
> I'm wondering if the Randonneur rings were designed to bolt
> to the three-arm steel threaded cranks, using the standard
> "single" chainring bolts. Then if one desired a second
> chainring, one could bolt it inside the first, using more
> modern bolt and sleeve attachment, and the remaining three
> holes. The inner ring could be either 6-hole or 3-hole. Of
> course one might ask, why not just manufacture longer bolts
> threaded to match the steel three-arm cranks, so that both
> rings could be secured by only one set of bolts. But in that
> case one needed only three holes, not six.
>
> Still it seems quite a coincidence that the Randonneur
> circle was 116 BCD, same as the old three-arm cranks. So
> perhaps it was a matter of designing an inner ring for the TA
> "Cyclotourist" type cranks, but choosing a circle which also
> allowed the rings to be used on three-arm cranks.
>
> This raises the question of the sequence of introduction of
> the various "Cyclotourist" type TA cranks, by which I mean
> those with a 5-pin outer ring, with inner rings attached to
> the outer. There has been a trend from WWII to the present
> of (more or less) steadily decreasing bolt circles. Did TA
> first offer the Criterium chainring set with 151 BCD (I
> think) inner, like old Campy Record? Then did they next
> introduce the Randonneur chainring set, retaining the 6-hole
> pattern, but dropping the BCD to 116 to allow rings as small
> as 36T (actually 35T I think)? Then finally (as far as on
> topic discussion is concerned) did they introduce the
> Cyclotourist with 80 BCD inner rings, allowing really small
> rings?
>
> If this was the sequence, it might make sense that they
> chose 116 BCD as the first step down from 151, with the bonus
> of allowing the the rings to be used on 3-arm cranks as well.
> So where, then, do the 3-hole rings and 3-arm Professional
> cranks (not necessarily siumltaneous) fall into the TA
> timeline? I think someone gave at least a partial TA
> timeline here not long ago. Sheldon perhaps? Is that
> available somewhere online?
>
> To confuse things even further, I seem to recall that one
> of those odd 116 BCD 6-hole rings that started me wondering
> about this was actually not marked TA, but rather Stronglight
> or perhaps Simplex. Anyone know of other manufacturers who
> produced the Randonneur pattern?
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
>
>
>
> Bob Hanson wrote:
>
> Jerry Moos wrote:
> "...I'm interested in the six-hole 116 BCD Randonneur rings,
> and hope to
> learn a bit more from this thread. You seem to be saying
> these were
> designed as a middle/inner ring which attached to the outer
> ring of a TA
> Cyclotourist crank...."
> --------------
>
> Yes Jerry, the 5-pin Randonneur outer chainrings were just a
> different
> drilling the rings used on a 5-pin (ref.710) crank arm.
> (Basically, if
> you're eyeballing a 52 tooth outer ring the drilling would
> appear to be
> right about at the center of the arms).
>
> -----------------
> JM:
> "...I had been guessing instead that the Randonneur rings
> were first
> used with the three-arm cottered steel 116 BCD cranks made by
> very many
> manufacturers. I had about concluded that three holes of the
> Randonneur were used to attach to the crank, while the
> remaining three
> were used to attach a three-hole 116 BCD inner ring like the
> TA
> Professional...."
> ------------------------
>
> You had lost me here, Jerry. The TA 3-pin Professional set
> which I have
> (circa 1975) has only 3 holes on both inner and outer rings.
> And, they
> bolt together with 3 simple bolts passing through the crank
> arm spider
> (just like Campy, etc)...
>
> BUT, just now Jerry, I've finally found more info. ~ In the
> 1963 Ron
> Kitching catalog (page 10), there is shown two different
> configurations
> for "Type Randonneur Chainwheels."
>
> For the Randonneur 3-arm double (ref 2213) or the triple (ref
> 3213), the
> outer chainring (ref.RA203) is drilled with 6 holes for
> connecting the
> chainrings and this ALSO has 3 ADDITIONAL tabs extending
> between three
> of the windows, for attaching separately to 3 arm cranks
> (which TA did
> not yet produce themselves).
>
> This page also shows the rings for the standard 5-pin cranks
> (which TA
> actually was also making by then). These sets were the
> Randonneur 5-pin
> Double (ref.2215) and the 5-pin Triple (ref.3215).
> That outer chainring was (ref.RA205)
>
> The TA inner chainring used for BOTH the 3-pin and 5-pin
> Randonneur
> set-ups was the same (ref.206).
>
> -------------------
> JM:
> "... One reason I thought this is that most of the few
> Randonneur rings
> I have seen are 48T to 52t, i.e. an outer ring, while I have
> seen lots
> of three hole rings in 42T, 40T or 38T...."
> -------------------
>
> Yesterday I got an interesting email from Mike Barry in
> Toronto [Bicycle
> Specialites]
>
> He said:
>
> 1. I was about the only person who has even mentioned these
> rings in all
> the 35 years he has been dealing with TA.
>
> 2.) He knew just what I was talking about and actually had a
> couple of
> the inner rings - but just in 39 and 48 teeth.
>
> [ It struck me odd that there even would be a 48t inner
> ring ]
>
> -----------------
> JM:
> "...Anyone know for sure which applications the Randonneur
> rings were
> first designed for?
> Regards,
> Jerry Moos
> Big Spring, TX "
> ---------------------
>
> Which came first; a very interesting question.
>
> TA's 5-pin configuration chainrings were being manufactured
> by them
> since maybe 1950, and it would be easy to re-drill the outer
> rings,...
> but why bother when the 80 BCD already had this covered.
>
> TA's choice of using specifically the 116 BCD - which is
> exactly the
> diameter same as the arms on common 3-arm cranks - would seem
> to imply
> that originally they intended those cranks to receive the
> Randonneur
> rings. However, their outer rings for the 3-arm cranks were
> unique
> forgings with 3 additional mounting hole tabs... although
> they already
> did make a single road chainring for the 3-arm cranks - with
> just 3
> holes drilled, and down to a 36 tooth ring.
>
> With that drilling TA would actually be able to use THE SAME
> inner rings
> on both style of cranks... They could still use their basic
> 5-pin outer
> ring forgings for various patterns by just making an
> alternate
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com