Aha! Just possibly might fit, tho' a 125 mm spindle might be better.
Thanks.
Patrick Moore
iPhone
On Apr 4, 2014, at 11:25 PM, rcnute rcn...@hotmail.com wrote:
Amended answer, 150mm.
Ryan
On Friday, April 4, 2014 5:06:33 PM UTC-7, rcnute wrote:
Patrick: I think it's somewhere around
On Friday, April 4, 2014 12:55:09 PM UTC-7, David Banzer wrote:
What bottom bracket width would I use if...
42t chainring is in the outer position; OR
42t chainring is in the middle position with a guard on the outer position
I've used the XD as a double and triple with a 110 spindle. With a
110 spindle with 135 rear spacing/hub and ring on inside for me. (Then I
went to a Sugino AT with a 122 spindle and ring on the outside.)
Ryan
On Friday, April 4, 2014 12:55:09 PM UTC-7, David Banzer wrote:
Howdy!
Figured some folks here might have an answer from direct experience with
Then I went to a Sugino AT with a 122 spindle and ring on the outside.
That's interesting, I happen to have a Sugino AT and a Tange 122.5 bottom
bracket sitting in the parts bin right now. Looks like I'll be able to
setup the Redwood and go for a ride this weekend.
David
--
You received this
If either of you switch to the ~122/AT, can you tell me the resulting Q? I
wonder if a similar switch would cut a cm or so off the current ~160 with
the X2D/Phil 113. (The 113 does give a perfect chain line in the main
cruising gear.)
Thanks.
Patrick if narrow is good, narrower is better Moore
Patrick: I think it's somewhere around the mid to upper 140s with a 2mm or
so spacer on the drive side. Whatever it is it was an improvement for me
for riding fixed, though I don't mind a wider Q-factor when geared for some
reason (lower 150s is perfect but up to 160 okay).
Ryan
On Friday,
Around 1998, Grant set me up with a Sugino AT and a 115 spindle for use as
a single (remember when Riv used to sell cool old NOS parts?). I believe I
used a 3mm spacer to get clearance where the chainring bolts mount. This
was for use with a 126mm rear hub. I'm not sure if a modern 130/135mm
Thanks, Ryan. It looks as if that would be too narrow a setup for the
Fargo's wide stays (even though they are indented). The
chainstay-to-chainstay distance (measuring from the outside of each) is
slightly more than 120 mm; add (2) 12.5-15-mm-thick crankarms and another 5
mm gap per side, and you
Amended answer, 150mm.
Ryan
On Friday, April 4, 2014 5:06:33 PM UTC-7, rcnute wrote:
Patrick: I think it's somewhere around the mid to upper 140s with a 2mm or
so spacer on the drive side. Whatever it is it was an improvement for me
for riding fixed, though I don't mind a wider Q-factor
