Dura Ace 7400 Chain Alignment

Re:

Just checked the crank arm on drive side, the arm isn't straight but it looks parallel to the down tube at the point the pedal screws in, I've took a few photos. Is the 7400 arm meant to be flat like the 600 one or is it designed to fit closer to the bb and be offset?

Still need to check the frame for straightness.

Cheers
 
Re:

Hi Dan, the crank arms come off the bottom bracket at a slight angle for clearance at the chain stays, but if you put a ruler up against the crank arms they should be flat against it and they are not slightly curved like some Campagnolo cranks. I will take some photos and post them up this evening.
 
Re: Re:

WimVDD":3f3ychgn said:
I think you have a bent BB axle.

if this is the case, taking the crank off and refitting it turned through 180 degrees would make it obvious
 
Re: Re:

cce":31jmdfkt said:
WimVDD":31jmdfkt said:
I think you have a bent BB axle.

if this is the case, taking the crank off and refitting it turned through 180 degrees would make it obvious

true, than there should be a gap between chain and crankarm.

I don't think the frames rear triangle can be that bent without making the bike unrideable.
 
Re:

This is a puzzle.

Have checked on various bikes. I have 2 Perthus 753s, both 126 OLD (one is a spare frame, hanging in the loft, still with it’s sticker from the factory).

The Shimano 600 bottom bracket that came off one of them is 115 mm. Looking at a Dura Ace 7400 chainset and BB, all 1991 (on a Gazelle 731os Exception, with stainless steel stays), the crank does pass close to the stay, 7 mm at the closest point at the pedal end.

The 753 I use a lot has a Stronglight chainset currently so no useful comparisons there, with a 17 mm clearance between crank and stay on the drive side and 19 mm on the other.

My guess is the solution lies with the BB or bent crank. As already suggested, there may be a variation in taper between the crank and the axle, allowing the crank to sit further into the frame, or maybe the axle has a left and right and somehow in the wrong way. Using a 118 mm BB might offer a solution. Alternatively, the bent crank is the other explanation, although not sure what you’d need to have done to bend it – cracked, yes, but bent, not seen.

I haven’t used a smallest cog for some time, encouraging to know there are those who still can. By the way, I use modern wheels on my Perthus, 10 speed, 130, and not a problem, even with hard use on the harsh road surfaces of the Howardian Hills, Wolds, North Yorkshire Moors and the Dales surrounding York where I live, so don't think the problem is to do with numbers of cogs.

Good luck.
 
Re:

I can confirm it's a bent drive side crank arm, I've added more images.

Will either live with it as it is or machine a small area of the back of the crank arm to stop it rubbing... new/used cranks seem a lot of cash!

Thanks for all your assistance on here, you've been very helpful.

Dan
 
Back
Top