Need a clue to take off cranks - Help?!?



J

Jbk

Guest
I'm a novice mechanic trying to rehabilitate a bike abandoned by a friend. It's a Nishiki Sport (mtn
bike), ~10 years old. I'm trying to replace the bottom bracket, which has disintegrated. I took off
the nuts where the cranks (apparently) attach to the bottom bracket but I can't figure out how to
get the cranks off. Here are 3 close-up pictures: http://johnkim.myserver.org/public/bike/ I looked
at some how-to books & websites to no avail. Can someone provide a clue? Thanks,

-John
 
D

Doc

Guest
You need a crank extractor,see your local bike shop to buy one and ask to
the guy how to use it. Good luck! Jim.
"JBK" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a novice mechanic trying to rehabilitate a bike abandoned by a friend. It's a Nishiki
> Sport (mtn bike), ~10 years old. I'm trying to replace the bottom bracket, which has
> disintegrated. I took off the nuts where the cranks (apparently) attach to the bottom bracket
> but I can't figure out
how
> to get the cranks off. Here are 3 close-up pictures: http://johnkim.myserver.org/public/bike/ I
> looked at some how-to books & websites to no avail. Can someone provide a clue? Thanks,
>
> -John
 
D

Dan Daniel

Guest
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:28:40 -0800, "JBK"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm a novice mechanic trying to rehabilitate a bike abandoned by a friend. It's a Nishiki Sport
>(mtn bike), ~10 years old. I'm trying to replace the bottom bracket, which has disintegrated. I
>took off the nuts where the cranks (apparently) attach to the bottom bracket but I can't figure out
>how to get the cranks off. Here are 3 close-up pictures: http://johnkim.myserver.org/public/bike/ I
>looked at some how-to books & websites to no avail. Can someone provide a clue? Thanks,
>
>-John
>
>

http://www.parktool.com/repair_help/FAQrCarm.shtml

Looks as if your axle has a threaded end. The photos on the Park site show mainly ones that have
internal threads. No biggie- you just need to back off the inner part of the crank puller tool
enough so that it pushes against the end while *thoroughly threaded* into the crank arm.

Be careful threading the tool on- go slow, backwards until you feel it drop into the end of the
threads and then thread. Don't force. Grease on the threads of the tool is helpful.
 
J

Jbk

Guest
"Dan Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Looks as if your axle has a threaded end.

Yes, the ends are threaded (and had nuts on each end, which I took off [2nd picture]).

> back off the inner part of the crank puller tool enough so that it pushes against the end while
> *thoroughly threaded* into the crank arm.

I hope this makes more sense once I get a crank extractor, but ... what's holding the crank in place
right now? Is it friction? Or is it screwed in somehow? Or some sort of clip?

I took a look at some crank extractors online and there seem to be universal ones that fit both
threaded axles and square axles. I hope something like that works for my bike. I'll swing by a local
bikeshop tomorrow and see what they have.

Thanks Doc & Dan.

-John
 
V

Vic

Guest
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:03:37 -0800, "JBK"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Dan Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Looks as if your axle has a threaded end.
>
>Yes, the ends are threaded (and had nuts on each end, which I took off [2nd picture]).
>
>> back off the inner part of the crank puller tool enough so that it pushes against the end while
>> *thoroughly threaded* into the crank arm.
>
>I hope this makes more sense once I get a crank extractor, but ... what's holding the crank in
>place right now? Is it friction? Or is it screwed in somehow? Or some sort of clip?

It's basically friction.

The crank arm is mounted on a tapered square drive, and the retaining bolt has pushed the arm onto
this taper with considerable force.

Have a look at:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tooltips/cotterless.html

for more info.

>
>I took a look at some crank extractors online and there seem to be universal ones that fit both
>threaded axles and square axles. I hope something like that works for my bike. I'll swing by a
>local bikeshop tomorrow and see what they have.
>
>Thanks Doc & Dan.
>
>-John
>

a) Top posting.
b) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
 
R

Ronald

Guest
> a) Top posting.
> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?

You prefer spam over top posting?!

"vic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:03:37 -0800, "JBK" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"Dan Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Looks as if your axle has a threaded end.
> >
> >Yes, the ends are threaded (and had nuts on each end, which I took off
[2nd
> >picture]).
> >
> >> back off the inner part of the crank puller tool enough so that it pushes against the end while
> >> *thoroughly threaded* into the crank arm.
> >
> >I hope this makes more sense once I get a crank extractor, but ... what's holding the crank in
> >place right now? Is it friction? Or is it screwed in somehow? Or some sort of clip?
>
> It's basically friction.
>
> The crank arm is mounted on a tapered square drive, and the retaining bolt has pushed the arm onto
> this taper with considerable force.
>
> Have a look at:
>
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tooltips/cotterless.html
>
> for more info.
>
> >
> >I took a look at some crank extractors online and there seem to be
universal
> >ones that fit both threaded axles and square axles. I hope something like that works for my bike.
> >I'll swing by a local bikeshop tomorrow and see
what
> >they have.
> >
> >Thanks Doc & Dan.
> >
> >-John
> >
>
>
> a) Top posting.
> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
 
V

Vic

Guest
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:20:21 +0100, "Ronald"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> a) Top posting.
>> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
>
>You prefer spam over top posting?!
>

Weeelll, yes and no: I really don't give a toss about newsgroup spam, as I only ever have to
download the headers. Yes, it pushes worthy stuff off some high-traffic groups, but with a decent
newsfeed, this ain't ever fatal.

Spammers are like incontinent feral animals, recognising no rules and rspecting nothing and nobody.

Top-posting newsgroup participants really should know better.

Vic.

a) Top posting.
b) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
 
S

S o r n i

Guest
vic wrote:
> Top-posting newsgroup participants really should know better.
>
> Vic.
>
> a) Top posting.
> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?

Didn't it used to say /most annoying/ thing?

Bill "more accurate, IMO" S.
 
V

Vic

Guest
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:40:47 GMT, "S o r n i"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>vic wrote:
>> Top-posting newsgroup participants really should know better.
>>
>> Vic.
>>
>> a) Top posting.
>> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
>
>Didn't it used to say /most annoying/ thing?
>
>Bill "more accurate, IMO" S.
>

I'm not sure... I'll do a quick Google later to check.

Vic.

q) What's the most annoying thing about UseNet?
r) Pedantry.
 
W

Werehatrack

Guest
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:20:21 +0100, "Ronald"
<[email protected]> may have said:

>> a) Top posting.
>> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
>
>You prefer spam over top posting?!

a) because I don't read it, and wouldn't respond to it, so it doesn't cause me to have to fix the
format before I can do something with it.
b) why is spam less annoying than top posting?
c) yes, though I am known to delete both *unread*.
d) You prefer spam over top posting?!

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
 
W

Werehatrack

Guest
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:38:00 +0000, vic <[email protected]>
may have said:

>On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:40:47 GMT, "S o r n i" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>vic wrote:
>>> Top-posting newsgroup participants really should know better.
>>>
>>> Vic.
>>>
>>> a) Top posting.
>>> q) What's the worst thing about UseNet?
>>
>>Didn't it used to say /most annoying/ thing?
>>
>>Bill "more accurate, IMO" S.
>>
>
>I'm not sure... I'll do a quick Google later to check.
>
>Vic.
>
>
>q) What's the most annoying thing about UseNet?
>a) Pedantry.

AOL may be worse than pedantry.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
 

Similar threads