New Dura Ace 10 Crank with Campy group?

[big D]

Copy of this post is at RBR general forum as well;

How much of a no no would it be to the fashion police to use the new Dura Ace crank with a Campy drive train. I need a super stiff and strong crank as I'm a huge rider and the campy crank was way to flexy. I also tried a FSA Gossamar and it was to short as they only carried 172.5 mm in lenght in Canada. I am thinking of going to Ultegra with the new DA10 cranks with 9sp rings or keep using my Campy Veleco/Centur mix and use the new cranks with 9sp rings. My iunseam is 35 1/2 " so i figure I would needat least 175 or 177.5mm. Thanks in Advance for the help.

Thanks in advance

[JohnS]

I would think that the flex would be in the bottom bracket as it is almost imposssible to flex a crankarm.

[Sandy]

Big D, I think that your biggest (no pun meant here) problem would not be how it would look, but whether it would even work. The new 10 speed Dura-Ace crankset is radically different in design from the 9 speed crankset and is not really compatible with the 9 speed Ultegra. Go to Dura-Ace.com and click on FAQ and there you will see the new crankset compatability issue addressed. You could have similar problems with other switches, so I would be sure to ask someone who really knows about it before you try to make any changes. I would also think that the frame would flex way before a crank would. I would think that it would be very difficult to really flex most crankarms significantly. But one thind for sure, Big D, I am never going to make Big D cranky about anything, hopefully. I hope that you are a gentle giant!

[big D]

Thanks for the reply guys. I have spoken to Shimano Canada on the subject of compatibilty between the Dura 10 and Ultegra nine. To make sure it would work properly i would have to switch the rings. From what they told me the pick up teeth on the 10sp rings are much more pronouced because the chain is slightly narrow at the pin. The spacing would be the same between the rings. I just a little worried (i know this is a little silly) about the look of mixing and matching the Campy and Shimano. I am use to mixing and matching stuff on the mountain side of things ( My 2003 heckler has parts from almost every major company). In fact Shimano has told me to go with the new DA crank as it is there strongest road crank. :banana: :banana: :banana:

[jerk]

yeah you're wicked huge dude....WHO ARE YOU KIDDING? any ability to flex a crank arm would flex the bottom bracket shell way before the crank moved....or maybe you're right...that must be why so many match sprinters perform so poorly on their square taper cranks.....or why the 2000 watts erik zabel produces at a peak just overpowers his campy record crank. you know what the jerk has a great idea for you...take a lesson from the pie eater down hill free ride hucker idiots and put some three-piece chromoly profile cranks on your bike....
honestly, sorry for the harshness...the jerk just doesn't understand this crank arm stiffness crap......IT DOESN"T MATTER...except fot sweetwings but that's another story....ask the jerk what he thinks about wheels deflecting on the veritcal plane if you want to make him real mad....

[big D]

Wow, the jerk actually responded to my post. Thanks Mr. jerk. I know I can't generate the power out put of a match sprinter, Mario & erik. The problem is that I can detect the flexing through the BB and the frame. I know it is the BB that is flexing all over the place. I am trying to get rid of that feeling. On my mountainbike, I still have an old sqaure taper Shimano XT 5 bolt crank because I was folding the rings on the 4 bolt cranks. As well when I used the new a Race Face cranks with the ISIS BB it only lasted 3 months until crunched all the tiny bearings. It just seems that these will get rid of this feeling. For my current mountain bike I'm already going to the new Shimano free ride crank. I am just special case.

[big D]

oh yeah, when I say I'm a little larger them most I mean during my playing days of bench pressing 225 27 times and squating 7 45lbs plates aside. Guys like Marty N. and most sprinters can generate huge amounts of power but when you are my size you put a whole different world of stress on a frame and components. I would go with Sweetwings if they were still avalible. I understand there is a "little " sarcasim in your response but I am really a special case. I reacll riding a Merlin Mountian bike in the early ninties, it was so flexy that it would track a straight line on a smooth peice of single track.

Oh yeah, I love these dancing bananas

:banana: :banana: :banana:

[dnovo]

dbrk: Calm, calm, calm. I have my software guru working on a Dancing Banana LED gun. Soon, all you will have to do is point it at the screen, and these annoying little critters will die squealing. Until them, I recommend more meditation, or a nice 40 year old Tawny Port. Dave N.

[BigMac]

Big D:

"Jerk" fellow is absolutely correct. If you are experiencing ANY BB flex its likely the frame. The spindle may flex a bit if its Ti, in which case you really should not be using a Ti spindle...in fact nobody should be using a Ti BB spindle in my opinion. You may also have a failing bearing although that would feel like vibration or drag, not flex. Get a Phil steel spindle BB and forget about it. A square taper BB is 17 mm Cr-Mo steel. The pedal spindles, again avoid Ti spindles here too, would flex looooong before a BB spindle. I would look very carefully at your right chainstay immediately behind BB, if you are experiencing excessive BB flex it could be a sign of a pending cs failure. I've broken many, this is a primary sign...a very noticable creaking should also accompany the flexing.

The ISIS BB's were partly a response to Shimano's proprietary Octalink design, but also to a need from the DH crowd. These folks are famous for landing cranks on rocks at very high speeds during jumps. A direct hit at spindle end on crank can cause a BB failure for square taper design, even an ISIS/Octalink on occasion. Normal pedalling under even the most muscular rider will not flex or break a properly built square taper BB like the Phil Cr-Mo version.

Ride on!

[big D]

Question for BigMac and The Jerk. Which crank and BB combo would go to then? BigMac has stated to go to a Phil Wood BB but what crank to use with that BB? Chorus or Record? I have to do this before I get married. My fiance does not mind me making the changes but I have to get it right this time. I know Phil Wood makes great BB's. I was even going to have him replace the bearings in the DA cups when they wore out since he offeres that service. My 105 bb which I got this year for the Gossamar cranks is already crunchy from a summer of riding (2 twice a week).

I am much more versed in the world of dirt, need help to make this work on the road.

thanks
Can't get over the bananas

:banana: :banana: ;)

[jeffg]

Big D --

This will likely be addressed by others; however, if you need 177.5 cranks, then Record is the only option as between Record/Chorus. Since my cranks are 172.5, I use Chorus cranks with Phil SS BB. On my bike that has DA (9 speed), I use a PMP 110 BCD crank with PMP's BB. I like both crank/BB combos better than DA 9, though it has everything to do with the lower Q factor on the Campy/PMP cranks and nothing to do with stiffness. Supposedly DA 10 shifts super smoothly; however, it's not worth the headache Q IMO. If you have your heart set on a DA 10 crank anyway, you might be able to use TA Hegoa chainrings. TA rings work for 9 speed Shimano or 10 speed Campy. The issue might be fitting the rings on the new DA beast.

best,

Jeff

P.S. Yes, BigMac, I know I would be better off with a Phil BB than that PMP Ti spindle business; however, that was what was available to me at the time, and I needed an Alpine double for the Dolomites. When it comes time to replace the PMP BB, I might ask whether Phil can make a custom spindle to fit the crank. Any idea about whether this is possible?

[BigMac]

My favorite all-time road bcd crank is the original Ritchey Road Logic crank. 130bcd, sqare taper BB interface, Q factor under 130mm, cold forged construction. What more could one ask for? These unfortunately were discontinued many years ago and are very scarce even on EBay. The NOS Mavic cranks were also very nice with similar features/benefits at a higher price.

I actually really like the new DA10 crank, not because of splined BB but rather its outboard BB bearing placement. Theoretically the enlarged bearing size and placement should result in extreme longterm durability, that's a very good thing in my book. My objection to the DA10 crank, that is besides its ridiculous price, is the same with all Shimano cranks: very high Q factor.

The modern Campy cranks have considerably higher q than the beloved Ritchey or Mavic but are approx 10mm less than Shimano, thus they are my current production preference. Choosing Chorus vs Record is pretty simple; if you prefer 170-175mm cranks get the Chorus, otherwise choose Record. I spin 177.5's so its Record for me. Campy claims the crankarm-integrated spider design of Record is stiffer...more marketing bs if you ask me....besides the '04 Chorus alloy crank now uses the 'hidden 5th arm' design anyway. The lone weakness of the Campy system is the BB. This is Campy's worst design of any component ever. If using a Campy crank, ALWAYS use a Phil BB. There are other fine BB's, the TA units designed for usage with their cranks are of equal quality/design to Phil, imo but they do not make a Campy compatible taper bb.

If you prefer high Q cranks and have very deep pockets, the DA10 is an excellent design that will offer full Campy drivetrain compatibility and should be very durable. For narrower Q an NOS Ritchey or current Record/Chorus with Phil BB will deliver many, many miles of service-free duty. If you still have "flex" issues, you may want to consider a beefier frame, developing a higher and smoother cadence and/or perhaps a check of your pedals. Best of luck to you.

Ride on!

[big D]

Thanks BigMac,

I don't mind the higher Q-factor. I currently have my cleats setup as far inboard as possible on my road bike. I have really big legs and the wider spacing feels better for me. I am looking at the DA cranks because they remind me the most of the Sweet wings and Bullseyes cranks (had those on a 1991 Roacky Mountain Hammer with Suntour XC Pro, at the time I weighted 285lbs, big boned). Those where the best cranks every. I could do 3' and 4' drops and they would even sqeak.
I think I might move to the new DA cranks. Once the bearings burn out I will send them to Phil Wood to get the his replacement bearing. With the PW bearings they just might be the best crank out there. Thanks for the advice.
BigMac, if you don't mind can you answer some question for me. Did you play in the NFL or Pro football? And, what was your postion. I seem to remember reading you played football in your past.
Again thanks for the help.

[saab2000]

If you are going to go with a square taper BB spindle, it is hard to go wrong with Phil. They last forever and are made of the best materials.

If you are really super duper strong, the added couple of grams of the Phil BB with the stainless steel retaining cups won't bother you.

The only possible negative of the Phil is something I noticed on two which I own. They are the correct length, and the taper is supposedly identical to Campagnolo (Because I ordered them with the Campy taper) but the cranks to not pull onto the spindle as far as with the Campy. I do not know why. Other than this, they are great.

If you get one and do your own work, it pays to spend the extra money to get two Phil BB tools instead of one. I guess that this could be considered another negative, albeit slight. The Phil BB can only be installed and removed with the Phil tool.

[BigMac]

Saab:

I would suggest you call Phil Wood directly, something is definetely amiss if your Campy cranks are not bottoming out on taper. In fact, the proper Phil BB will actually allow the cranks to fit further onto taper than the stock Campy BB(Phil tapers are noticably longer than Campy). This can actually be troublesome for some users of fat/OS or widely splayed cs's. Phil offers a 105mm Campy taper for this very reason (stock Campy is 102mm). If your cranks are not properly seating on Phil tapers, you could do serious and permanent damage to those pricey cranks, it could infact lead to stress riser and catastrophic failure. If your Campy crank(s) is the cf version Record, they did have an early taper problem wherein the tapers were not installed square and distorted during manufacturing/curing process. This was a pretty rare instance involving early production but worth checking if yours fit this description.

I'm able to fit the 102mm Campy taper Phil on my Legend w/o any clearence issues. Phil cups are adjustable on each side as well thus its easy to maintain proper (43.5mm?) chainline and further reduce Q by 2-3mm.

Always use the ss Phil cups no matter rider strength/size. The alloy cups are double the cost, squeak (yes even the newest teflon coated ones squeak after a few 1000 miles) and will corrode in Ti or aluminum frames. SS cups last forever, never corrode no matter the frame material and weigh something like 14g more....basically nothing.

Ride on!

[big D]

I just spoke to soimeone at Phil Wood and they suggest i go with the new DA crank and when the bearings burn out get new PW bearing installed. The person i was speaking with basically stated that the new crank is owrlds stiffer and with the PW bearings almost bullet proof. I think I am going to bite the bullet and get the new cranks. I don't know if I should swap my campy parts for Ultegra and use 9 sp rings or just stay with my mid and lower end campy parts and go with the 9sp rings.

thanks for the help everyone.

[shinomaster]

It is superior technology.:banana: :banana: :beer: :beer: :argue: :crap: :crap: :)

[shinomaster]

If Jan ullrich and erik zabel can win like super stars then the Campy crank must be fairly stiff. I have two campy cranks...but I cant flex anything..:crap: :crap: :crap: :crap: :crap: :crap: