from salsa:
“It is a pretty common practice for all bike frames to be filled before being finished, this is true for Steel aluminum and even carbon. That being said We’d take a look at any photos that you’re willing to send to us.”
yolo.
Yeah, this is something that pretty much every paint shop does when it’s not something that’s obvs gonna compromise the frame. Source: wife worked at a very high end paint shop for a spice-named boutique maker.
I send Salsa some pictures of a dented frame and they said “you can buy a new frame at a slight discount when they become available again.”
Bottom line - they’ll humor you, but reaching out to them is ultimately a waste of time.
I’m still not sure if you can get a Vaya frameset.
please believe in me.
DQ:
Based on my fuzzy math going from a 650bx48ish (roughly 49cm diameter) tire to a 26x1.8 ish tire (roughly 45cm) will change the axle height by 2cm.
So to keep the bb height the same the drop needs to decrease by 2cm right?
So a teeny tiny Hunter Gatherer with 26" wheels should have a bb drop of 4.5 rather than 6.5?
I feel like this so easy I’m going to screw it up somehow. I should probably be using bikecad rather than tarckcad™ but yolo.
Isn’t the drop independent of wheel size? Axles are alway at centers of wheels.
ETA: Oh, I see what you’re asking, where the BB height ends up. Sorry.
584 bsd to 559 loses 12.5mm in radius, plus 3mm less tire, puts the BB drop more like 1.5cm higher.
I vote don’t reduce the drop at all, or minimally if you’re shortening the chainstays too (wacky problems there)
tiny people will be using 165mm cranks anyway (or smaller! ox601d is available in 160 and sram 1x in 155+160)
you’re just burning standover, and working against the purpose of the smaller size
tl;dr: don’t make Surly design decisions
6.0 drop would be perfect with short cranks but prevent any geometry chart redditoring.
Yeah with a bb drop of 65mm, the frame has easily a high enough bottom bracket to run 650b x 38, which is much closer in diameter to 26 x 1.8. It is already conservatively high for use with a 650b x 48 tire; the nfe, for instance, uses a 70mm drop and was originally designed around use of a 650b x 40 tire, a combo which places the bb 13 mm lower than the day ruiner with 650b x 48. I use a 73mm bb drop with horizons and 172.5 cranks. No issues
I’m temped to run a square taper BB and a mtb triple run double, to achieve that nerd crank crankyness.
^ Or find the right era of 10sp hollowtech II triples (eg 6603) that have the granny bolt to the spider and not the middle ring. outer ring bashguard optional.
I have a long block of text on nerd crank options and crack hacking, probably belongs in the spreadsheet
clamp a bb shell into a 2 bolt dropper like a reverb, make the seat tube one piece all the way, have a height variable bottom bracket height.
we’ll have to reverse engineer the cartridge to pressurize the negative air spring instead of the positive (first, engineer a dropper with a negative spring), then we’ll be golden
[quote=oogens]clamp a bb shell into a 2 bolt dropper like a reverb, make the seat tube one piece all the way, have a height variable bottom bracket height.
we’ll have to reverse engineer the cartridge to pressurize the negative air spring instead of the positive (first, engineer a dropper with a negative spring), then we’ll be golden[/quote]
Have the saddle and the bb move up and down and we have a winner.
Mid '90s Shimano Deore XT M737 crankset (this thing), 94/58mm rings, would it make for a good 8-10 spd nerd crank with appropriate rings? Trying to decide if I want to keep it or not.
M737 uses a 107mm spindle to get a 47.5mm chainline (I believe), not much room to move to lower chainline / Q beyond a 103mm spindle for 2mm inboard movement.
Ritchey Logic compact 94/58 has the same issue, I have a Token ISO 102mm BB on mine to go inboard as far as possible.
A SRAM S952 crankset with an X0 GXP 104/64 spider (part#: 11.6115.551.000) is a very nerdy way to get an 11sp disc brake chainline nerd-crank setup. Q150
Or an XX1 crankset in 120/80 or 104/64. Q156 model.
For a ‘road/caliper’ chainline, look at S900, Force1/Force22 (carbon), Rival1/Rival22 (C-section forged* alu), S950 (carbon) plus the X0 spider (104/64 has much cheaper rings than 120/80)
I believe the guidance is “X0 spiders fit any crank, X9 don’t fit anything else.” and BB30 spiders are different to GXP spiders.
Other nerd crank options from my archive:
Easton EC90 spiderless plus “gravel rings” in 47/32 or 46/30.
The FSA adventure is boat anchor heavy in Tempo square taper, Omega uses garbage 19mm spindle, and 30mm spindle / BB386 in the lighter versions like SL-K. proprietary chainrings and weird BCD by the looks.
Praxis offer a 46/32 with their special rings on 110BCD Alba/Zayante models (and others now?)
Rotor offer 46/30 rings for their cranks.
Compass / Rene Herse (square taper $$$)
White Industries VBC (square taper or 24mm, MU$A)
IRD Defiant Compact (square taper, uggo)
Sugino OX601D and OX 901D (24mm, best chainring flexibility)
90s 58/94 BCD mountain cranks from Ritchey and Suntour that were designed for 120mm bottom bracket widths but run on 103 or 107mm BBs. There were a few Shimano ones too but they usually used shorter spindles. (also weirdo octalink &/or spiderless XT/XTR stuff)
TA Carmina / Vega with a 94, 94/58 or 104/64 spider. ISO taper BB. Pretty! 155-185mm lengths. 150mm Q. $
Velo Orange Grand Cru (TA Cyclotourist clone)(square taper),
Velo Orange forthcoming something in the works like the OX901 style.
Cycles Toussaint Luxe (another TA clone)
Sugino PX (TA clone)
Sun XCD Exceed (same as Luxe?)
Middleburn (lots of options, $$$, going out of business?)
Shimano Metrea can have the chainguard removed and small ring replaced with a small XT ring, 30T etc, wide Q and Tiagra weight though, and not that cheap
Stronglight Lexar 2x10 is interesting, hollow arm aluminium 104/64, unknown BB and Q though.
So how do I get my sugino ritchey running as a sub compact double? I have normal 110bcd and inner drilling for 74 I guess? Just run a middle and an inner and get rid of big?
Yeah, tweak BB length as needed, chuck a ~30 on the 74, a ~46 on the middle 110 - be careful of ring type due to chainring bolt recess locations. Optional chainguard on outer 110 (BBG bashguards) with double c’ring bolts, or single bolts and reduced aesthetic
Excellent
This is jogging some memories. I sort of recall picking 47.5mm for the chainline (Sheldon lists the crank as 47.5-50) when I moved it from the aluminum Stumpjumper to a Soma Groove because of its more slender tubes. My purchase history shows I used a 113mm BB on the Soma. So, if all that’s true, and I’m not sure it is, a 107mm spindle would give a (double ring) chainline of around 45mm and a 103mm spindle a chainline of around 43mm? All that stuff is gone, so I can’t measure what the chainline really was. But then maybe chainstay clearance starts to become an issue.