TA chainsets

[cranky1]

I am thinking about getting a new chainset and am wondering if TA chainsets are value for the money. They are about twice the price of Stronlight or Campag my other two choices. So are they worth this extra and if so why?

NB I am using 9 speed chain etc currentley with friction down tube levers but that might change to Campag ergo with time.

[hamster]

Personally, I think that snazzy chainsets are overrated - they aren't even lighter anyway. But TA rings are my first choice: very well made and last ages.

So I go for old square taper Campagnolo with TA rings.

[lb1dej]

My most recent chainset has been Stronglight cranks with 3 TA chainrings from Spa cycles - not a cheap option about £80 as I recall. Or you could go for Stronglight cranks with S'light zicral rings for maybe around 60.

Complete TA sets are very expensive in my view

Dave

[gaz]

.

[pete75]

I've always admired the TA Cyclotourist chainset and reckon it must be about the best for a touring bike. The ring choice is immense, from 26 to 66 teeth and it's possible to have almost any combination you desire along with a choice of crank length up to 180mm.
I'd imagine those giants who need 180 mil cranks have no problem turning a 66 tooth ring.

[PW]

The old Cyclotouriste cranks have a nasty habit of snapping across the pedal threads, usually when the rider's honking up a hill. Not nice! The newer TA cranks don't seem to be as bad, I've not heard of it anyway. Personally I use Stronglight Impact for most things but I fitted a Speedlight on the new toy, it looks Campag-ish & uses an ISO taper B/B instead of the JIS one on the Impact. Impact chainrings go down to 26T in alloy or 24T in steel, combined with an 11-32 or 34 cassette in 9 speed you can find the right gearing for most eventualities.

[andrew_s]

The old Cyclotouriste cranks have a nasty habit of snapping across the pedal threads, usually when the rider's honking up a hill. Not nice! The newer TA cranks don't seem to be as bad, I've not heard of it anyway.

I've broken one (Zephyr) at the pedal threads.
It didn't actually snap, just let the pedal axle go about 10deg off square. I've also had a Middleburn and a Shimano chank go at the taper, so I've given up on fancy cranks and stick to Stronglight Impact now.

[lb1dej]

TA cyclotourist won't work with modern front shifters.

BTW: Impact cranks are actually made by Sugino - long established if not as long as TA!

Dave

[pete75]

TA cyclotourist won't work with modern front shifters.


Dave

Why not ? Are you just saying that or have you tried it?

[Woodbridge Pete]

TA cyclotourist won't work with modern front shifters.
Dave

Why not ? Are you just saying that or have you tried it?

They are just about OK for use with 7spd triples. The main problem is clearance of the front changer cage with the crank arm. TA Cyclotourist cranks are dead straight, whereas most modern cranks flare out a little, so giving a bit of clearance for front changers. The other issue is also to avoid narrow chains dropping in between chainrings (some 8spd chains and most 9spd chains)

[thirdcrank]

If you think about it, the modern triple set up has been faffed about and fine tuned to achieve indexing, slick changing etc etc. TA Cyclotouriste hails from the times when changing gear was a bit like signalling 'full ahead both'. If it does work with more modern stuff, it is by accident rather than design.

I personally think the prices of a lot of TA stuff is high but that is the direct result of paying French workers French wages etc., rather than paying chinamen peanuts.

The good thing about the TA range is the availability of good quality replacement chainrings.

Finally, FWIW I think that TA quality has dropped off in recent years. (I have mentioned before that I have a bike with a TA 'Professional' LH crank dating from 1980 and a similar RH which has only been on since something like 2000. The anodising on the old one is still immaculate, the newer one is already badly pitted.)

[pete75]

TA cyclotourist won't work with modern front shifters.
Dave

Why not ? Are you just saying that or have you tried it?

They are just about OK for use with 7spd triples. The main problem is clearance of the front changer cage with the crank arm. TA Cyclotourist cranks are dead straight, whereas most modern cranks flare out a little, so giving a bit of clearance for front changers. The other issue is also to avoid narrow chains dropping in between chainrings (some 8spd chains and most 9spd chains)

Mmm. I'm using Stronglight 100 which also has straight cranks with 9 speed triple. It all works very well.
I prefer straight cranks to flared ones as they give a better Q factor.

[CJ]

Mmm. I'm using Stronglight 100 which also has straight cranks with 9 speed triple. It all works very well.
I prefer straight cranks to flared ones as they give a better Q factor.

It's not fundamentally the straightness that causes the problem with old-design TA cranks. It's the very small amount of clearance between the outer ring and the back of the crank, that causes the wider cage of a modern front mech to scrape on the back of the crank before it's moved far enough to the right to shift the chain onto the outer ring.

Stronglight 100 is straight too, but nevertheless positions the crank a bit further out to the right.

[PW]

I had that problem years ago when the first mechs came out with a flared outer cage plate. The solution used to be some rather savage butchery to the rear of the cage, involving a mole wrench Pity because the quality of the Cyclotouriste rings was way better than anything currently available.

[jimcrosskell]

Easier and prettier than the mole grip adjustment is to fix a suitable alloy shim to the inside of the cage. I use chemical metal as the adhesive and it works well. Currently running a Cyclotouriste based 20~34~48 triple.
the best bit about TA is that you can bu**er about with spacers, swap rings inside out and they are fairly forgiving.