Re: [CR] Crank cotter filing

(Example: History)

Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 11:59:50 -0500
To: beandk@rcn.com,"CR List" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
From: "Mark Stonich" <mark@bikesmithdesign.com>
In-Reply-To: <PLEDLMNNAFGCJOAIICLBMEHGEOAA.beandk@rcn.com>
References:
Subject: Re: [CR] Crank cotter filing


To elaborate a little on what Phil and Chuck wrote; The offset between spindle bore and cotter bore varies somewhat from manufacturer to manufacturer and sometimes even from unit to unit of the same crank. The best cotters I sell have to be filed to fit most bikes, but will work on those with a larger offset.

With practice you can file them pretty flat but they are soft enough that it isn't a big deal if they aren't perfect.

At 5/13/2010 05:27 AM -0400, David Bean wrote:
>I have never understood why filing crank cotters is so widely recommended.
>Two new crank cotters (of the same mfr and type, of course) must have the
>same bevel. Using a file on that bevel seems likely to render it less flat
>than it started out; therefore more likely to come loose in service. What
>am I missing here?
>
>David Bean
>Arlington, MA USA
>beandk at are-see-enn dot com

Mark Stonich;
     BikeSmith Design & Fabrication
       5349 Elliot Ave S. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 USA
            Ph. (612) 824-2372 http://bikesmithdesign.com
                        http://mnhpva.org