Cannondale Hollowgram crankset spindle lenght for PF30

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Post Reply
User avatar
LouisN
Posts: 2291
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Location: Canada

by LouisN

I have a PF30 frameset and a CAAD10 frameset.
I want to put two Cannondale Hollowgram SL (older models 2012-2015) cranksets on both.
The PF30 frame is wider than the Cannondale BB30.
Is the standard Hollowgram road spindle ok with the wider PF30 frame ?

For the same frames, I had two Sram BB30 cranksets, and the Sram Red I bought, originally to fit on the PF30 frame, had to be fit on the CAAD, because it was too tight, even without any spacer, on the PF30 frame.

Louis :)

User avatar
bikerjulio
Posts: 1901
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:38 pm
Location: Welland, Ontario

by bikerjulio

PF30 BB shells are 68 mm wide, just like BB30.

Perhaps you have a BB 386 frame? That would be wider.

What's with your avatar by the way? Is that LA? Or are you a doppelganger?
There's sometimes a buggy.
How many drivers does a buggy have?

One.

So let's just say I'm drivin' this buggy...
and if you fix your attitude you can ride along with me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GekiIMh4ZkM

by Weenie


User avatar
Dan Gerous
Posts: 407
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Physically in Montréal, but my mind is in the Pyrénées
Contact:

by Dan Gerous

If your PF30 is 68mm wide, same spindle and spacers as the BB30 setup on the CAAD10... But, with PF30, the old spider lockring which was more or less flat might need to be replaced with the more recent lockring with the ends of the teeth beveled a bit toward the end so it doesn't rub against the PF30 cups.

Old one:
Image

New PF30 compatible one:
Image

If your PF30 is actually PF30a like the new Cannondale Evos, you can't use the 104mm spindle with a non-driveside shoulder. You could use the newer 109 shoulderless spindle with the appropriate spacers but know that if you follow the 109mm BB instruction with older arms made for the 104mm spindle, you'll then have your stance offset and a 5mm wider q-factor. The drive-side arms have the same measures and geometry but the cranksets made for the longer spindle have a different non-driveside arm that has 5mm less lateral offset so the 5mm longer spindle doesn't widen the q-factor... You can either play with spacers (less non-driveside, more driveside) but then the chainline might suffer. You could also move the non-driveside cleat so your actual feet are centered. Or, find just a non-driveside arm made for the new spindle (so SISL2 or 3D forged SI)...

They changed to these new spindles and changed the non-driveside arm geometry when they introduced BB30a so they could then make the same cranks and spindles work on all their framesets, just by switching a non-driveside spacer depending if the frame has a 68mm or the asymetric 73mm wide BB...

User avatar
LouisN
Posts: 2291
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Location: Canada

by LouisN

Hey Thanks Dan, very useful info here.
I'll definitely check on the exact width ( with my digital vernier) of the PF30 ( Norco tactic SL ) frame with the Sram PF30 BB pressed in ( (outside to outside) Though I'll ditch this crap and change for something better)...
And use your precious info before shopping for the next C'Dale Hollowgram crank deal to come by. Especially since I'll send the left crank arm to 4iiii Precision to install a left crankarm powermeter on :) ...

@julio: re. avatar= long story - short : DC41, WW member here about 10 yrs ago offered to make some avatars to the members. I never changed mine, don't even know how ...I'm only a cook after all ;) ...


Louis :)

duckit
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:37 pm

by duckit

Dan Gerous wrote:
Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:33 am
If your PF30 is 68mm wide, same spindle and spacers as the BB30 setup on the CAAD10... But, with PF30, the old spider lockring which was more or less flat might need to be replaced with the more recent lockring with the ends of the teeth beveled a bit toward the end so it doesn't rub against the PF30 cups.

Old one:
Image

New PF30 compatible one:
Image

If your PF30 is actually PF30a like the new Cannondale Evos, you can't use the 104mm spindle with a non-driveside shoulder. You could use the newer 109 shoulderless spindle with the appropriate spacers but know that if you follow the 109mm BB instruction with older arms made for the 104mm spindle, you'll then have your stance offset and a 5mm wider q-factor. The drive-side arms have the same measures and geometry but the cranksets made for the longer spindle have a different non-driveside arm that has 5mm less lateral offset so the 5mm longer spindle doesn't widen the q-factor... You can either play with spacers (less non-driveside, more driveside) but then the chainline might suffer. You could also move the non-driveside cleat so your actual feet are centered. Or, find just a non-driveside arm made for the new spindle (so SISL2 or 3D forged SI)...

They changed to these new spindles and changed the non-driveside arm geometry when they introduced BB30a so they could then make the same cranks and spindles work on all their framesets, just by switching a non-driveside spacer depending if the frame has a 68mm or the asymetric 73mm wide BB...
good day !
:thumbup: on the above.

sorry to hijack your thread since i am having issue with my spindle length
would like to share my case and see if you guys has any input

2015 caad 10 - bb30 ( 68mm width ) which i am pretty sure everyone is aware

my case is kinda different from everyone because im not using a conventional bb30 bearing
i had purchased a bb from c-bear product code pf42-30-r to act like a " pressfit " bottom bracket with internal cups to prevent the irritating creaks. its something i want to explore and so C-bear claimed it will aid to prevent creak.

i had purchased an used hollowgram Si spidering crankset with 175mm crank-arm taken off a bb30a bike and it came with a 109mm spindle.

as the 175mm crank arm will seems too long for my inseam, i also purchased a 172.5mm hollowgram SL crank arm that came with 104mm shoulder spindle.

i guess theres probably two ways to do it

method A - use the 109mm spindle + 172.5mm SL crank arm with 7.5mm spacer on the NDS ( apart from the 2.5mm on the DS + 1-3 x 0.5mm shims + wavy spacer on the NDS )
method B - use the 104mm spindle + 172.5mm SL crank arm with no additional spacer ( usual 1-3 x 0.5mm shims + wavy spacer on the DS )

so my questions would be

1) which model crankset / crank arm actually had the geometry changed on the NDS crank arm like you mentioned ( assuming Si and sisl2 onwards ? )
2) with method A - i probably will get a decent chain line but not on the Q factor
3) with method B - i probably will get a decent chain line and Q factor ? since the SL crank arms is meant for the 104mm spindle and 68mm bb shell width ?


Thanks for looking !

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post