Chuck Schmidt wrote:
>
>I have never heard of any concern about Q factor until the last 10
>or 15 years.
I think it may have become less of a concern when alloy cranks became accepted around 1960-65.
In the early 1950s, this may have been different. I read it in Le
Cycle, about why racers were sticking to their steel cranks, when
everybody knew alloy cranks were lighter and as durable. I think the
article was written by D. Rebour. Of course, he may have been wrong.
But chainline and Q factor (not called that back then, but simply
"distance between pedals" or something) were major concerns to racers
back then. The cyclotourists didn't care too much, so they could use
aluminum cranks and 5-speed freewheels with cross-over gearing.
>
>What I have heard that was a concern to pro racers was a distrust of
>aluminum cranks and aluminum bars because of breakage. Steel cranks and
>steel bars and stems being used right up through the sixties in the pro ranks.
I don't know about reasons in the U.S. to stick with steel cranks. I find that the same equipment choices often were due to different reasons on different continents.
In France, the cyclotourists had shown that aluminum cranks were durable - often during the same events as the pros, such as the Poly de Chanteloup - even on tandems. Nor were the cyclotourists necessarily much slower - more than one moved on to become professionals. Roger Billet was a cyclotourist, riding for Singer and Follis, who broke René Vietto's (who was a pro) record up some hillclimb - maybe the Tourmalet in the 1940s. I doubt he was riding steel cranks... as he used Stronglight alloys otherwise.
Of course, racers always have been slow to be persuaded that "unfashionable" equipment might be as good or better. But I find that more often than not, what seems like stupidity or backwardness to us from a vantage point 50+ years later, in fact was done for good reasons. The racers weren't stupid, and their bikes were their tools of the trade. When something truly useful came along, they adopted it, unless there were reasons not to. For example, they didn't use the early derailleurs because of (unfounded) concerns about friction... rather than because they didn't want new-fangled stuff on their bikes.
--
Jan Heine, Seattle
Editor/Publisher
Vintage Bicycle Quarterly
c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles
140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C
Seattle WA 98122
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com