Phil Wood track crankset
Dave Hickey
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Joined
·
20,696 Posts
Joined
·
8,108 Posts
meow
What are the arms, 175?
What are the arms, 175?
Joined
·
868 Posts
I went to the link and clicked on the next photo and came up with this crank, that has that retro feel.
I don't know. I've always liked the clean look of the 7400 series Dura Ace, the Sugino 75, Suntour Superbe Pro, the mid-'80's Shimano 600 on my fixed, etc.
Don't get me wrong - the Shimano 600 "Arabesque" on my '72 Raleigh Super Course is right.
The psuedo-retro style is just that - "psuedo."
Joined
·
344 Posts
Hmm. I've been looking at this photo for a while, as I've seen it posted everywhere the last few days. On the one hand, I like that there's another modern set to consider. But I'm not sure this is one I'd select if I wanted something new. I'm assuming price is going to be at least $50 more than Dura-Ace or Sugino 75 options (nothing to base that on other than knowing Phil components are typically costly).
I can't figure out the look they're trying to create here.
Chainring:
The chainring looks retro'ish, but not really. It's a bit noisy looking. The Phil etching is nice, and I'm glad they didn't color it in with red. It is certainly more interesting to look at than a Sugino or Dura-Ace chainring.
Spider:
This has the potential of being the most interesting component of the crank. It appears to be "flat" which is a characteristic the other mentioned cranks do not have. This certainly sets if heavily into the retro look. I would like to see a profile view. The other unique aspect is the taper then flute from the center to the chainring bolt area. It reminds me of the shape of many chainring tools. The also appear to have a slight bevel on the outside edge but that could be the photo tricking me.
Arms:
The red Phil is a nice touch. Also nice is that they didn't put it where your shoes will rub it off after a good amount of use. That's smart I'd like to see the profile of these as well. I'm curious how thick it is on each end of the arm and how much it's tapered down. I'm not sure how I feel about the gold cover, I guess it's nice in that it's elegant bling without being distasteful.
My overall conclusion is that I would very much like to see these in person. One photo from one angle just doesn't tell the whole story.
I can't figure out the look they're trying to create here.
Chainring:
The chainring looks retro'ish, but not really. It's a bit noisy looking. The Phil etching is nice, and I'm glad they didn't color it in with red. It is certainly more interesting to look at than a Sugino or Dura-Ace chainring.
Spider:
This has the potential of being the most interesting component of the crank. It appears to be "flat" which is a characteristic the other mentioned cranks do not have. This certainly sets if heavily into the retro look. I would like to see a profile view. The other unique aspect is the taper then flute from the center to the chainring bolt area. It reminds me of the shape of many chainring tools. The also appear to have a slight bevel on the outside edge but that could be the photo tricking me.
Arms:
The red Phil is a nice touch. Also nice is that they didn't put it where your shoes will rub it off after a good amount of use. That's smart
I'd like to see the profile of these as well. I'm curious how thick it is on each end of the arm and how much it's tapered down. I'm not sure how I feel about the gold cover, I guess it's nice in that it's elegant bling without being distasteful.My overall conclusion is that I would very much like to see these in person. One photo from one angle just doesn't tell the whole story.
Joined
·
711 Posts
With the caveat that it's comparing apples and oranges I think I'll stick with White Industries cranks. The availability of chainrings is nice for the Phil, but if I'm going for modern American made stuff I'm going to do it with both feet. This feels to me like the design is playing it too safe. It reads to me like a simplified '80s campy rig with an after market chainring. I know I'm hammering on a lot of toes here, but innovative design is still possible, but this feels like yet another iteration of "everything was better in the (insert decade)" design and marketing philosophy. It's pretty and all, but generally leaves me flat.
I am, however, very glad to see other manufacturers taking on track crank design and would love to see others do more track specific work (I'm looking at you Velo Orange, White Industries). After all, the more players there are on the field the more choices we have.
I am, however, very glad to see other manufacturers taking on track crank design and would love to see others do more track specific work (I'm looking at you Velo Orange, White Industries). After all, the more players there are on the field the more choices we have.
Joined
·
434 Posts
That Philly looks like a Sugino Cranks.
Joined
·
344 Posts
That's what I originally thought too, and why I'd like to see them in person. The only view they gave in the photo was top down. The top down shape of the crank arms remind us of Sugino 75, but when you look side by side they are very different. Still similar enough for our memory to connect the two. The big point however is that Phil cranks have a flat spider vs. Sugino's curved spider. I believe if we get to see these in person, that's going to keep them looking nothing like the Sugino.
it's phil, so you know it's made well. and it is certainly gorgeous. but the price has got to be astronomical, and the polished silver is a little bling. black ano would be nice, maybe flat? silver rings?
in any case, if i were buying a boutique crankset it would be a deck-o-cards pauls i think. for now, i make do with my $99-at-nashbar (yes, really) campy centaur carbon!
in any case, if i were buying a boutique crankset it would be a deck-o-cards pauls i think. for now, i make do with my $99-at-nashbar (yes, really) campy centaur carbon!
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
