Shimano FC-M572 with BB-ES71 problems

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Kinkycowboy, Mar 16, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kinkycowboy

    Kinkycowboy Guest

    I just fitted a Shimano FC-M572 (Deore LX 2003) crank and BB-ES71 (XT
    2003) bottom bracket to my 2002 Specialized Enduro. Previously I had a FC-M571 and BB-ES50, which
    has migrated to another bike. I used a 68x113 BB, same as the old one. On fitting the new RH
    crank, I found that the inner chainring bolts interfere with the BBshell where it extends back
    to the main pivot. Have Shimano changed the chainline? Do the LX cranks fit further onto the
    BB spindle than the XT for which the BB is designed? Or have I got a bad example of the BB
    with the axle displaced to the right by a couple of mm, because there's room to shift the
    whole assemly sideways to make everything fit, though I don't know how the BB is constructed
    internally and whether it could be assembled wrong. How is the axle position set in the
    cartridge?

    On other bike designs, this placing of the inner ring inboard of the end of the BB shell might cause
    the inner ring to foul the chainstays.

    Kinky Cowboy

    *Your milage may vary Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts.
     
    Tags:


  2. Iguana Bwana

    Iguana Bwana Guest

    On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 23:50:01 GMT, KinkyCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I just fitted a Shimano FC-M572 (Deore LX 2003) crank and BB-ES71 (XT
    >2003) bottom bracket to my 2002 Specialized Enduro. Previously I had a FC-M571 and BB-ES50, which
    > has migrated to another bike. I used a 68x113 BB, same as the old one.

    Since no-one else has answered your post that I can see, I'll have a go. I'm just having a deductive
    punt here, but I think the FC-M572 *requires* a 121mm bottom bracket for a 68 shell. Everywhere I've
    seen it (M572 crank) advertised, it states "ES-51 ONLY" which tmk is available *only* in single
    sizing of 68/121 or 73/126.

    >On fitting the new RH crank, I found that the inner chainring bolts interfere with the BBshell
    >where it extends back to the main pivot.

    This intimates to me that the crankset itself is designed to accomodate the longer 121mm bottom
    bracket. However it doesn't quantify the equivalents in conventional BB crank fitment so as one can
    know if original chainline will be maintained. Does this make sense to you?

    I'm interested in your experience, as I was considering getting a '03 LX crankset myself, and had
    the same concerns re the apparent oversized bottom bracket length and its effect upon current
    chainline.

    >Do the LX cranks fit further onto the BB spindle than the XT for which the BB is designed?

    As it appears to me from the mandatory requirement for the ES-51, the answer to that is a most
    probable yes. You should be able to tell better by just looking at it.

    Sorry to not be of much help, but the ES-51 only caveat might give you the clue you seek.

    cheers

    Iguana Bwana
     
  3. A. Birko

    A. Birko Guest

    Interesting,

    I'm installing the same crank into an 1999 fsrxc and had a heated phone discussion about the same
    thing (mine takes a 113 in the other type of BB). However, the guy on the phone said that a 73/121
    ES-51 is available. At the moment, I'm waiting for the E-type required by my bike to come in. I'll
    let you know how it goes.

    -Andy

    "Iguana Bwana" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 23:50:01 GMT, KinkyCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >I just fitted a Shimano FC-M572 (Deore LX 2003) crank and BB-ES71 (XT
    > >2003) bottom bracket to my 2002 Specialized Enduro. Previously I had a FC-M571 and BB-ES50, which
    > > has migrated to another bike. I used a 68x113 BB, same as the old one.
    >
    > Since no-one else has answered your post that I can see, I'll have a go. I'm just having a
    > deductive punt here, but I think the FC-M572 *requires* a 121mm bottom bracket for a 68 shell.
    > Everywhere I've seen it (M572 crank) advertised, it states "ES-51 ONLY" which tmk is available
    > *only* in single sizing of 68/121 or 73/126.
    >
    > >On fitting the new RH crank, I found that the inner chainring bolts interfere with the BBshell
    > >where it extends back to the main pivot.
    >
    > This intimates to me that the crankset itself is designed to accomodate the longer 121mm bottom
    > bracket. However it doesn't quantify the equivalents in conventional BB crank fitment so as one
    > can know if original chainline will be maintained. Does this make sense to you?
    >
    > I'm interested in your experience, as I was considering getting a '03 LX crankset myself, and had
    > the same concerns re the apparent oversized bottom bracket length and its effect upon current
    > chainline.
    >
    > >Do the LX cranks fit further onto the BB spindle than the XT for which the BB is designed?
    >
    > As it appears to me from the mandatory requirement for the ES-51, the answer to that is a most
    > probable yes. You should be able to tell better by just looking at it.
    >
    > Sorry to not be of much help, but the ES-51 only caveat might give you the clue you seek.
    >
    > cheers
    >
    > Iguana Bwana
     
  4. etodd

    etodd New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Has anyone resolved this yet? I bought the same setup - M572 with 68/121 BB - for my 2001 FSR Enduro and the chainline is totally honked up. It won't even stay in first gear cause the crankset is so far to the right. I'm going to try and use the 68/113 BB (ES71) but i'm worried cuz they say it won't work. Anyone solved this riddle yet?

    - ET

     
  5. Kinkycowboy

    Kinkycowboy Guest

    I've been off my Enduro for a while after a crash which broke me but not the bike, so I haven't got
    back to the BB problem yet. I'm currently running 68/113 with just the outer two rings, which works
    fine, but of course no granny gear and a close ratio cassette makes the steep bits hard! I'm going
    to try a 2mm spacer between the fixed cup and the frame, I think that will move the whole set up far
    enough to the right to solve the clearance problem without pushing the chainline too far off or
    adding too much "Q". As far as chainline goes, this should be 49.5mm, and you can get a BB-ES70 in
    68/118 to give a 50.0mm chainline (This is one of the recommended BB units to use with LX cranks,
    according to shimano.com, whereas the ES71 is only recommended for use with XT cranks), which would
    obviously eliminate the need to fudge it and should give symmetrical Q for people who care about
    tthat stuff. I'll report any results.

    Kinky Cowboy

    *Your milage may vary Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts.

    On 6 Jun 2003 01:30:08 +0950, etodd <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Has anyone resolved this yet? I bought the same setup - M572 with 68/121 BB - for my 2001 FSR
    >Enduro and the chainline is totally honked up. It won't even stay in first gear cause the crankset
    >is so far to the right. I'm going to try and use the 68/113 BB (ES71) but i'm worried cuz they say
    >it won't work. Anyone solved this riddle yet?
    >
    >- ET
    >
    >Originally posted by A. Birko Interesting,
    >
    >I'm installing the same crank into an 1999 fsrxc and had a heated phone discussion about the same
    >thing (mine takes a 113 in the other type of BB). However, the guy on the phone said that a 73/121
    >ES-51 is available. At the moment, I'm waiting for the E-type required by my bike to come in. I'll
    >let you know how it goes.
    >
    >-Andy
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...