Rene Herse Cranks, chainline, spindle length. Calling Jan Heine.

[dsjackson]

Folks. Hoping for a bit of help on specing appropriate BB spindle length for use with Rene Herse 2x Cranks on 142mm rear end disc bikes.

On the Rene Herse website, docs point to 110 for a 46mm chainline, with 110 being recommended for the 2x setups. Rear end spacing is not mentioned. Photo attached.

Then, if we refer to scripture (Bicycle Quarterly), 116 is recommended for 142/135 rear end bikes. Photo also attached.

My guess is that 110 is recommended for 46 chainline on 130 road rear and 116 is recommended for 49(!) chainline on 135/142 rears. Yeah +6 is not the same as +5, but im making an educated leap here. Is a 49mm chainline what the cool kid wide tire gravel crowd is running now? That just seems, well, wide. Yeah only 3 away from 52 x 148 boost, but those are 1x bikes…

Ive used 110 and 113 spindles with the RH double cranks on 142 rear bikes. 110 shifts better, no question. Anyone used the 116?

Jan - what should I do? Is 116 actually acceptable? If so, it’ll give me more fender clearance on an upcoming frame…

Thanks any and all.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smitty2k1]

Email them?

https://www.renehersecycles.com/contact/

[kingpin75s]

Originally Posted by dsjackson

My guess is that 110 is recommended for 46 chainline on 130 road rear

110 is recommended for 45 chainline on 130 road rear per Rene Herse 2x crank page for bikes needing wide stays. 43.5 chainline is considered the historical optimum and is stated on the RH page as well for 107mm recommend. As such, this comes down to clearances and preferences. I would run the 107mm vs. the 110mm on a 130 road if I could.

When moving to 135/142, a 115mm or 116mm would be fine, again if needed for wide stays. In this case I would run something around 112mm if I could to minimize Q-factor and to keep chainline to 46mm if just going of the base standard.

That said, you have used 110 and 113 spindles with the RH double cranks on 142 rear bikes and said the 110 shifts better, no question. That makes sense to me and is actually what I would do if I were in your boat and could make it fit.

116mm is fine but as you seem to already know 110mm likely will work better and the frame is not built, so go 110mm if it still gives you the room you need.

Good luck!

[Gwerziou]

Do you gents agree with running a 1 to 2mm shorter spindle w non-SKF BBs?

Slightly off-tangent, I have to tighten my RH cranks after almost every ride. I'm concerned that something is awry and I'm going to need a new set of cranks soon. I expected a bit of tightening needed over time but nothing like this -is that even slightly normal? I have an old Campy crank on another bike that has been tightened once or twice in 20 years and that has been all it ever needed.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by Gwerziou

Slightly off-tangent, I have to tighten my RH cranks after almost every ride. I'm concerned that something is awry and I'm going to need a new set of cranks soon. I expected a bit of tightening needed over time but nothing like this -is that even slightly normal?

No, needing to re-tighten the crank bolts is not normal, and is usually an indication that the crank tapers are deformed. This might be due to a manufacturing defect, or to using a BB spindle with an incorrect taper, but the most common way for this to happen is to ride with a loose crank. Unfortunately the only cure it to replace the crank.

[Gwerziou]

Sad! That is my conclusion as well. Oh well...

[kingpin75s]

Originally Posted by Gwerziou

Do you gents agree with running a 1 to 2mm shorter spindle w non-SKF BBs?

I think you must be referring to this comment on the RH page:

"Most other bottom brackets have slightly thinner spindles. We recommend JIS 110-113 mm bottom brackets."

This would actually mean to run a longer spindle if using non-SKF indicating that a 110mm non-SKF should be used in place of a 107mm SKF.

Have not run SKF, but I do find that my Phill BBs seem scant for their size so this makes some sense to me. That said, I will always favor a shorter spindle if I can get away with it to minimize Q and because I prefer an ideal or slightly inset chainline anyway.

[kingpin75s]

Originally Posted by Gwerziou

Sad! That is my conclusion as well. Oh well...

Not all crank and spindle combinations bed the same and some seem more prone to come loose. If there was none initially or you have not put any blue Loctite on your crank bolts yet, I would start there and torque to spec. If you still have issues, then Mark may be on the right and unfortunate track.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by kingpin75s

Not all crank and spindle combinations bed the same and some seem more prone to come loose. If there was none initially or you have not put any blue Loctite on your crank bolts yet, I would start there and torque to spec. If you still have issues, then Mark may be on the right and unfortunate track.

Locktite on the bolt can't hurt anything, but it isn't likely to help either. Typically, crank bolts don't loosen due to unscrewing, they loosen due to loss of preload - and the reason they lose preload is because the tapers continue to deform, or the cranks fit so poorly on the taper that they walk up the taper. If the cranks move on the taper so much that bolt can unscrew, then the crank hole will continue to wallow until the crank eventually splits.

[Spoker]

Is there a washer under the crank bolt?