Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

Best crank system.

  • Square taper

    Votes: 25 39.7%
  • Octalink

    Votes: 9 14.3%
  • Isis

    Votes: 6 9.5%
  • External

    Votes: 24 38.1%
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
cannondale

the cannondale integrated cranks are on the top of my lustworthy list (and on the BB of my bike). they're unique, well made, and well integrated.

second on my list are the integrated BB's on Pinarello's that have oversized bearings and standardized crank interfaces so that you can use whatever crankset you want.

I like the innovation and the companies that take the extra effort to think outside the box and break away from some of the standard molds....even if it does increase cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,601 Posts
Provided your frame is with-in proper tolerances and your crankset isn't FSA, external systems are the easiest to install and maintain. It's just a matter of screwing in the cups, stick the crank through, preload, and tighten the other arm.
 

·
BrooklynVelo
Joined
·
1,426 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Not controversial at all. I happen to agree. I've had Octalink, Isis and square taper on previous bikes and when it came time to build up my most recent race bike I couldn't think of a good reason to not use a square taper. Interesting results coming up though. The biggest leaders by far are the square taper and the external's. Interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
180 Posts
Bearing life on externals sucks. And the external cranksets have the worst chainline I've ever seen. In my experience, the ISIS interface yields the most repeateable chainline of them all. Bearings don't survive as much punishment as the square tapers did, but that's due to the size of the spindle and the ensuing lack of space inside the bottom bracket. Of course, no one will agree with me, but I've pretty much accepted the fact that I'm going to be a lonely guy forever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,860 Posts
Bearing life, bearing size

gmcastil said:
Bearing life on externals sucks.
I thought the purpose of external bearing BBs was because the bearings on tubular splined BBs (Octalink, ISIS) had short life because they were too small?

What happened to the initiative to increase BB shell diameter, to allow larger internal bearings to be used?
 

·
100% torqued
Joined
·
766 Posts
I vote square taper. I'm riding a 7 year old Race Face taper lock, I just took it off the bike pulled the seals off the bearings filled em' up with fresh grease and reinstalled. Like new again. I burned through two of the Isis on a SS in a season, not for me thanks. Octalink is OK but I can't repack them too easily. I know, I had a non cartridge XTR for a while and repacked it a few times but dang those rings are expensive. I have not ridden the outboard but was thinking the other day you are pretty much stuck with the chainline and you can't buy different length spindles if needed, not that it would ever be needed anyway, So I vote square not for riding sake but for repair, and durability of my current setup
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,601 Posts
Chain line shouldn't be an issue. For a decent double crankset of any BB design it's 43.5mm. I guess if your frame is out of spec you may have to adjust that, but I wouldn't blame the crankset because of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
180 Posts
When I first started seeing externals from Shimano, chainline was horrible. The newest versions from Shimano are much better than they used to be, but the rest (especially triples) still leave much to be desired.


As someone mentioned there was a push to increase the bottom bracket shell diameter. IMHO, a larger bottom bracket shell diameter coupled with the spline pattern of the ISIS cranks would be ideal. However, major manufacturers aren't going to retool an entire industry - they'll invent a new system (Hollowtech II) to work with the old and then market it as being much better and having longer bearing life, when in fact it doesn't. Phil Wood recently made a tool to allow removal of the seals for Shimano outboard bearings, but it doesn't do much but postpone the inevitable. Bottomline - a bigger bottom bracket shell is required.
 

·
Growing Older, Not Up
Joined
·
1,321 Posts
OK, so I want to switch to double this year. Why? I never use the granny and no matter how much you tweak you get some rub on the FD somewhere. The triple is a Gossamer Mega Exo.

I've narrowed my list to FSA Energy and Ultegra. The older varieties of these (isis/octalink) can be had for a fair amount less than their newer, outboard bearing successors. Am I better off one way or another? Will I really know the difference?
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top