I think we should put out a warning about this.
I remember seeing the chart you refer to, years ago!
I still remember it because it's misleading. I measured the new and old Campy spindles at the time, and again today. It's very clear that the new and old Campy spindles are nearly same-sized, but are up to two tenths of a millimeter (.2mm) thinner between opposite flats than JIS spindles.
The "modern" spindles I measured here are from the "Record" Carbon, 102mm and Veloce(?) 111mm cartridge units.
I measure spindles' thickness 3mm from the end. This is an easy measurement to make, because common metric, digital calipers have jaws 3mm thick. One only has to position the spindle end flush with the "other" side of the jaws. This avoids measuring over any radiused edges. You can also lock the caliper's jaws, then transfer that measurement to another spindle so as to compare any actual differences in engagement depth as installed.
JIS measures consistently around 12.87mm while Campy and Stronglight spindles measure from 12.67mm to 12.74mm at the location 3mm from the ends. There's always a bit of variance between spindles of different vintage, but it's a relatively slight +/- a few hundredths within this range, so ISO is always distinct from JIS. Note that Stronglight spindles and newer (cartridge) Campy spindles are at the small end of the range as compared to NR-era and C-Record spindles, while Suntour Superbe spindles measure smallest, as small as 12.60mm.
The added thickness of JIS makes such spindles effectively ~5-6mm longer when mated to ISO [Stronglight, Campy (& clones)] cranks. That's ~3mm longer on each end.
I would hate to buy a high-end bottom bracket and have to deal with unwanted, added "tread" and chainline due to uncompensated JIS dimensions.
David Snyder
Auburn, CA usa
> Ahoy !
>
> Pursuant to recent query regarding On Topic Campag & Clone Cranks and
> Modern BB's, several listers have pointed me toward Phil Wood.
>
> Crank Axle/Taper Compatibility Table on the Phil site seems to state
> that '93 and earlier Campag tapers are JIS or, at least Phil is using
> JIS tapers for this application. JIS on Campag doesn't align with the
> majority CR opinion I received.
>
> Have I mis-read the table ? Can anyone offer some explanation, please ?
>
> Not being critical of Phil, I am just plain perlexed.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Richard Cielec
> Chicago, Illinois; U.S.A.