the taper dilemma is an endlessly confusing one but from what i understand (based mostly on some forum discussions where i believe a Phil employee weighed in) the Phil Wood 'JIS' taper as listed on their charts is their own standard, somewhere in between the traditional European and JIS tapers.. apparently Phil felt the tapers were close enough to make one spindle that splits the difference.
this might all be hearsay but I do believe Phil Wood are very communicative and helpful in answering questions concerning their products.. emailing or calling them might be illuminating...
in practice, i have found using a Phil JIS bb with a Campy record crankset adds about 2.5mm or so to the spindle, per side. for example: setting up a ca. 1970 Campy Pista crankset on 108mm Phil JIS spindle (original campy spec was 109mm, symmetrical) requires the whole bb to be offset a couple mm to the non-drive side for a perfect chainline.. in the future, i might try using a shorter Phil spindle to allow things to be more centered in the bb, although this setup has led to no real troubles..
i also might add that, in my (somewhat limited) experience, mixing tapers is acceptable practice as long as you keep in mind the ultimate effect on the desired chainline.. occasionallly, it might even come in handy when dealing with a crankset that has worn tapers and presses too far onto its originally spec'd spindle...
andrei padlowski glen ridge, nj
On Jan 5, 2008 1:10 PM, r cielec <teaat4p@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks to all for these data. In green eyeshade and sleeve protectors,
> I have been dillegently reading the discussion.
>
> Follow-up Questions, please:
>
> (1) Has anyone actually measured the Phil Wood spindles cited as for
> NR/SR ? Are the Phil-for Campag NR/SR really JIS ?
>
> (2) If Phil-for Campag NR/SR are really JIS, how does this impact the
> determination of which length Phil to use ?
>
> Thank you.