Ritchey vs Sugino vs TA chainring quality

[stackie]

Ok,

I'm going to put a 38 tooth inner chainring on my double.

Why? The 39 rubs just a little on the chainstay. I think that going one tooth smaller will get the ring far enough off the stay to eliminate this. (Correct me if I'm wrong on this). I've been through changing the BB, and cranks. It still does it. Also, I wouldn't mind a slightly smaller inner ring. I don't want to go compact as I use a 177 crank and the choices are quite limited.

Anyway, I need a 38 tooth ring in 130 BCD in silver. I've found them in Ritchey, Sugino, and TA. Also, Salsa, but it's pretty unattractive. The TA is pretty spendy. The Sugino and Ritchey are pretty economical. Any opinions on the quality. I can't afford something that will be out of round or flex too much as it will then strike the chainstay.

Alternately, should I just get a builder to crimp the stay a little?

Thanks for the advice

Jon

[Peter P.]

I have no experience with Ritchey but their parts don't strike me as high quality; at least as far as cranks and rings are concerned. I know you said they're pricey, but get the TA if you can afford it. I purchased mine from Peter White Cycles
http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/ and they look gorgeous and work well.

You've got something wrong if the ring is hitting the chainstay. I would try a Phil Wood BB if you use a square taper axle, as they come in many lengths and they have adjustable chainline using the mounting rings. Could it be you own a square taper crank and it's so old that the mounting hole is flared oversize?

If you have another type of BB such as Octalink, Giga Pipe, etc., then I would ask your local shop to order you a BB cup spacer in a 1 or 2mm thickness. Install on the fixed cup side and you should be all set.

[dbrk]

I would agree that this is a chain line problem since neither of the rings you are proposing should cause this sort of problem. A mild change with an adjustable bb, like the Phil, is a good choice though it will be far cheaper to change a ring than add a Phil bb!

Ritchey rings were once made by Sugino and Sugino rings are nicely made. I don't think they are any longer and the cranks are no longer the great stalwart cold-forged mighty wonders of the late '90s. (I'd rate the few old school Ritchey cranks I have as among the finest ever made.) TA cost more but wear well. Sugino is the choice if you want to save some money; not as highly polished but solid function and we are talking about an inner ring here, so not much at which to gaze. I'd get the Sugino...though I think Peter is right here about the chain line issue. _Don't_ try to crimp the stay!

dbrk

[Grant McLean]

The 39 rubs just a little on the chainstay. I think that going one tooth smaller will get the ring far enough off the stay to eliminate this. (Correct me if I'm wrong on this). I've been through changing the BB, and cranks. It still does it.

Jon

Just put a 1 or 2mm "freewheel" spacer under your fixed cup side of the bb.
That will move the ring to the right, and give you the clearance you need.

-g

[97CSI]

Very pleased with the TA 'rings (28 & 26) I bought at Vecchio's in Boulder last summer. High quality and $29/each, which is not that bad.

[DfCas]

If you need a shim,I've got 1 and 2 mm ,and I'll send them you one.

[Bittersweet]

Edit: I have Stronglights on my compact and TA Hegoas on my DA crank. Both are fine.

[stackie]

Actually, it's an Ultegra Octalink BB with a Dura Ace crank. The shim may be the answer. Question is how does shimming the BB affect the chainline. Would adding 1mm to the BB adversely affect the chainline significantly. How does one determine if chainline is appropriate?

Thanks for all of the advice.

Jon

[Louis]

Jon,

Sheldon (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_ch.html#chainline) info.

Good luck

[jbay]

Actually, it's an Ultegra Octalink BB with a Dura Ace crank. The shim may be the answer. Question is how does shimming the BB affect the chainline. Would adding 1mm to the BB adversely affect the chainline significantly. How does one determine if chainline is appropriate?
The adverse affect of increasing the chainline by 1mm is nothing compared to the adverse affect to the chainstay of not doing so!

However, I don't think you can shim a non-Dura-Ace Octalink bottom bracket. The "adjustable" cup has a flange that will bottom out on the bottom bracket shell before it tightens up against the cartridge unit itself, which I strongly suspect is a requirement. Furthermore, the inner diameter of the Octalink adjustable cup is a different diameter than the adjustable cup for a Shimano square taper bottom bracket, which does not have the offending flange, so you can't even substitute one of those!

I am also doubtful that a 1 tooth difference in chainring size is going to create a meaningful extra amount of chainring clearance. What type of frame is this, BTW?

-- John

[woolly]

Maybe try a wider Ultegra Octalink BB (the one made for a triple chainring crank)? Agree with others that making some chainline compromises is better than grinding away on the chainstay.