Re: [CR]Campagnolo Super Record bb question

(Example: Component Manufacturers:Avocet)

Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:30:31 -0500
From: "John Thompson" <JohnThompson@new.rr.com>
Organization: The Crimson Permanent Assurance
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]Campagnolo Super Record bb question
References: <20050601151816.31908.qmail@web81004.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050601151816.31908.qmail@web81004.mail.yahoo.com>


Jerome & Elizabeth Moos wrote:
> I have another question on this. Why did Campy switch to a nutted
> design with the second version of the SR BB axle? Chuck's Campy
> Timeline indicates that the second version also switched to a solid
> rather than hollow axle. Did the hollow ones break?

I'm not an engineer, but I don't think you gain a great deal of strength by going from a hollow axle to a solid one. For the type of loads a BB carries, I think spindle diameter would be more important than whether or not it is hollow,
> (Seems I've heard it said they did.) If so, the switch to solid makes sense,

Campy had breakage problems with a lot of the Ti Super Record pieces (except the derailleur bolts, AFAIK). The pedal axles were particularly notorious for this. The Super Record "Pro" group (same as SR except steel BB, pedal, and hub axles) seemed more popular for this reason.
> what advantage did they see in a nutted axle? Most other nutted
> axles at the time were on lower end stuff like Sugino Maxy.

I suspect the nutted axles were easier to manufacture; that's why they are used on low-end stuff. Titanium, at least in those days, was famous for being difficult to work with and Campy may have decided the hollow axle was just more bother than it was worth.

--
John (john@os2.dhs.org)
Appleton WI USA