Sugino mighty 900 Q factor ? Similar to Ritchey logic ? Other ST cranks with low stance width for 1X set up ( will use between 34 and 28 T )

W

willywombat64

Retro Newbie
Still trying to reduce the Q factor on my Pugsley build as with standard external cups and cranksets it's around 210 mm which irritates my arthritic knees a lot !

I have just tried a stronglight chainset (80 ? ) model I believe which works well on the drive side regarding reducing the chainstay gap and keeping the correct chainline it would seem , but the left hand crank on the 147 spindle touches the chainstay

I have since gone through numerous lh arms and found a cheapie that seems reasonable clearance wise .

I would like to find an inexpensive half decent solution and it seems ST is the only way so came across the sugino mighty 900 and Ritchey logic .

I know they come in different versions ( compact and sub? compact) .

I guess the compact is better for me as they allow smaller rings ?

Can anyone in the know advise re the difference between the sugino m900 and the Ritchey cranksets?

Is the mighty 900 similar quality ?

Would the Q factor be similar do you think ,..I cannot find info anywhere . Sheldon has figures for the Ritchey models .

If you do know the approx Q factor and BB length ( producing that for the mighty 900) it would be very much appreciated.

Also ..any suggestion for other ST chainsets that might do the job and not cost the earth .

Spa cycles have a TD 2 with a low Q factor 153 on the double ( 110mm BB) but 34 T is lowest I could go because of the bcd .

Thanks in advance

Bill
 
Good to see someone caring about q/tread factor👍
Rarely talked about but really important ! Changes a bike hugely ....
Don't know a pugsley....what size BB shell is it?
I'm surrounded by random frames cranks and BB sizes in my workshop right now...
 
it's a 100mm bottom bracket ..the smallest width available on most fatbikes unless you go custom / mod your frame by shaving the shell to take an 83mm bb or buy from someone like waltworks iirc . Those frames are far from cheap... even more so importing from the states.
I couldn't believe how the increased q factor messed with my knees . One 30 mile ride and I was in pain for 10 days . I normally ride flats but with pins they can be worse than clipless re not allowing float or the knee/leg some rotational leeway. Others have some success with orthotic wedges and massaging /lengthening tight adductors . Anecdotally there are many riders who cannot ride any fatbike because of the knee/ q factor issue. I'm no small guy either and have long legs but deal with medial knee wear which gets irritated easily .
 
I couldn't do a tread with much over 150...210 is like putting peddles on a cow!
Tyre size and how they effect chainstay will always dictate q factor...and then chainring tooth count has to fit in between them!
I have zero frames with a shell like that...68 or 73 keeps it all sensible......I've just managed a build with a 73mm shell, 45 tooth single 1/8 chainring and a q of 150.5.....tyre clearance for 2.35..you won't really squeeze much more than that!
A fat bike will always be that....fat. 😐
 
I've got some Sugino Mighty 900 cranks and I'm using a 107mm bottom bracket(68mm shell). The q factor appears to be approximately 160mm.
 
The LX m563 is slightly wider using the same 107mm bottom bracket (around 165 mm) and cheaper and easier to get hold of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top