Jeff,
To add a bit of extra info...
There are no Campagnolo spindles that use the JIS taper. All are ISO or old style Campagnolo taper. There are pretty much the same, although (and I base this in my own measurements) one might say that the older Campagnolo spindles are on the "fat" end of the production variation allowed by the ISO.
Many old Campagnolo crank arms have had their mounting areas stretched through the years. So, by the time a Campagnolo crank is 40 years old, a JIS spindle is a better fit than an actual Campagnolo spindle. This is one reason that Phil Wood spindles, which "split the difference", seem to work so well with older Campagnolo cranks.
By my measurements, TA spindles also split the difference between ISO and JIS, so one of those can also work well with an old Campagnolo crankset whose mounting hole has been stretched.
Finally, George mentioned Greg Parker's Web site. It has some truly useful information on this topic. Also, if you do this search, you will find dialogues between Greg, me and others on this subject. You will see where we agree, where we agree to disagree, and where we disagree even while we are in agreement:
http://search.bikelist.org/
Fred Rednor - Arlignton, Virginai (USA)
> Jeff,
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Try this link at Greg Parker's Bicycle Classics:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> http://00eda5d.netsolhost.com/
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Scroll to the bottom of the page and you may find what
\r?\n> you're looking
\r?\n> for. Now if I can just figure out what I need on my 1974
\r?\n> Cinelli. Thick
\r?\n> rifled cups? No, the thin ones? But are they rifled. It may
\r?\n> be best just
\r?\n> to ask or buy from someone that knows.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> George Allen
\r?\n> Lexington, Kentucky
\r?\n> USA
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> jeffrey piwonka wrote:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> >i know this has been covered and i did a little
\r?\n> searching of the archives and couldn't find much.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >where is the link that lists the different campy
\r?\n> spindles, the lengths and all that fun stuff?
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >why am i asking?
\r?\n> >I have some record cranks that are in fine shape
\r?\n> (double), (i think they have a "2" in a circle
\r?\n> which means '82 model).
\r?\n> >i have rifled cups with a "68-SS" spindle,
\r?\n> it's asymmetric, chainline is fine, barely have
\r?\n> clearance at the right chainstay.
\r?\n> >this is the reason, the cranks will almost slide all
\r?\n> the way down the taper on the spindle.
\r?\n> >i was thinking oh well someone just overtightened these
\r?\n> cranks and i have some really nice looking cranks i
\r?\n> can't use now.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >after this ordeal last night i'm wondering about
\r?\n> campy spindles...
\r?\n> >i have another set of cranks, 151bcd, i mated them to a
\r?\n> 68-P-120 spindle that was in a track frame i got.
\r?\n> >they too, were sliding very far onto the taper so much
\r?\n> that i took the left arm off thinking it was trash...i found
\r?\n> a few lone arms to try.
\r?\n> >the crank arm bolt actually doesn't fit that
\r?\n> spindle well either so i replaced the BB with some different
\r?\n> cups and a "68-SPc" spindle i had around just to
\r?\n> see if it worked out.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >here is the weird part. the old cranks that were not
\r?\n> fitting too well on the "68-P-120" spindle fit the
\r?\n> "68-SPc" spindle great.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >Is the "68-SPc" spindle JIS taper???
\r?\n> >Now I'm wondering if there is another spindle I can
\r?\n> get for the '82 Record cranks (double) that I have that
\r?\n> are not working well with the "68-SS" spindle.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >so who knows of the link?
\r?\n> >was it branford bike or campy only?
\r?\n> >me and campyonly aren't compatible because i
\r?\n> can't ever find the info i need on that site and i know
\r?\n> it's there...
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >Jeff Piwonka