Crankshaft Failures
I gots a question on the matter. I had a conversation with ATK on the matter and they seem to think that the only problems with the factory cranks were that they were unbalanced. That would explain why some fail and many don't. The failures were just the ones where Joe Blow drank too much the night before and put the crank together badly. If this is the case then why go through all the trouble of a Winky or Falicon crank. Why not just get your crank balanced or buy a new one from them. Oh yeah, the bearings sucked on the later ones also. But, they can fix that too.
Haydug, when will the Falicons be hitting the shelves?
Haydug, when will the Falicons be hitting the shelves?
Well there are various opinions about the cranks, and I'm sure Falicon cranks aren't the answer for everyone.
02 cranks where balanced, and they where billet and rarely failed. If all the cranks where like the 02's we probably wouldn't be going through this whole ordeal. (I've got billet cranks in both my motors btw)
Cannondale switched crank suppliers in 03 to save money, went to a cast crank of very similar design to the originals just cheaper. These are the ones that are unballanced, but their quality is also questionable.
Crank design is another issue for some of us that are more particular about what we put in our motors. The factory cranks have an integrated rod pin and where not designed to be rebuilt. When your balanced factory crank does go out you'll have to replace it with a new one or spend approximatly the same to have it rebuilt. Have you ever wondered why it cost $600 to rebuild a Cannondale crank and average 4 stroke crank rebuild is around $100? It's because of all the work involved in rebuilding a crank that wasn't designed to be rebuilt.
The Falicon cranks will have a seperate pin, new design that should help our motors run much smoother, overall quality will be far superior to the factory cranks, and it is designed to be easily rebuilt. Cost on the Falicon is marginally higher than a stock crank and the benefits far outweight the extra cost, at least for some of us.
02 cranks where balanced, and they where billet and rarely failed. If all the cranks where like the 02's we probably wouldn't be going through this whole ordeal. (I've got billet cranks in both my motors btw)
Cannondale switched crank suppliers in 03 to save money, went to a cast crank of very similar design to the originals just cheaper. These are the ones that are unballanced, but their quality is also questionable.
Crank design is another issue for some of us that are more particular about what we put in our motors. The factory cranks have an integrated rod pin and where not designed to be rebuilt. When your balanced factory crank does go out you'll have to replace it with a new one or spend approximatly the same to have it rebuilt. Have you ever wondered why it cost $600 to rebuild a Cannondale crank and average 4 stroke crank rebuild is around $100? It's because of all the work involved in rebuilding a crank that wasn't designed to be rebuilt.
The Falicon cranks will have a seperate pin, new design that should help our motors run much smoother, overall quality will be far superior to the factory cranks, and it is designed to be easily rebuilt. Cost on the Falicon is marginally higher than a stock crank and the benefits far outweight the extra cost, at least for some of us.
Oh, almost forgot about bearings.
There are a couple different oppinions here too, and no firm answer to the question.
The Torrington roller bearings in our motors are rated slightly lower than 11,600 rpm, BUT those ratings are based on the bearing turning at that RPM for an extended period of time, probably days on end. I personally don't think anyone will kill one of these because they ran it too fast.
The ball bearing alternative does have a higher RPM rating, but a lower load rating. Did the Cannondale engineers know something we don't about the load bearing requirements of our crank bearings?
It is also my understanding that the ball bearings will allow debris to pass through them much better than the rollers, is debris a problem in our motors?
You'll have to decide for yourself which one to use.
There are a couple different oppinions here too, and no firm answer to the question.
The Torrington roller bearings in our motors are rated slightly lower than 11,600 rpm, BUT those ratings are based on the bearing turning at that RPM for an extended period of time, probably days on end. I personally don't think anyone will kill one of these because they ran it too fast.
The ball bearing alternative does have a higher RPM rating, but a lower load rating. Did the Cannondale engineers know something we don't about the load bearing requirements of our crank bearings?
It is also my understanding that the ball bearings will allow debris to pass through them much better than the rollers, is debris a problem in our motors?
You'll have to decide for yourself which one to use.
I'm happy to say i'm way out of my depth here, I'm not an engineer, and have very limited knowledge of engineering/mechanics - in fact I keep putting off the stage 8 conversion cos It scares the absolute C**p out of me that I could mess thetiming up and there's little to no assistance, or anyone to help in the UK.
I've got to say though I agree with the post about two or three above me, Ithink this is all down to human error in manufacturing and cost cutting in late 2002 and 2003.
On the 'other' site there are people with bikes built, i gather, early 2002 that have had no problems at all. Been running racing 70 hours plus, no stage 8, no crank balancing or motor mount update - nuttink, and yet they still carry on going.
On the ther site too there's a link to the original Cannondale motorsports website, with lots of pictures of the employees happy at work...they are nearly all ex cycle builders, ie worked for cannondale for years and have been transferred from mountain bikes to putting together bike engines (check out the guy putting in the cartridge plates and bearings.......no wonder.....only kidding!!).
Anyway, the point of this is, has anyone got details of the failings of various bikes and compared them to when they were actually manufactured to see if there's any correlation??
just a thought, if i'm blabbering ignore me......
I've got to say though I agree with the post about two or three above me, Ithink this is all down to human error in manufacturing and cost cutting in late 2002 and 2003.
On the 'other' site there are people with bikes built, i gather, early 2002 that have had no problems at all. Been running racing 70 hours plus, no stage 8, no crank balancing or motor mount update - nuttink, and yet they still carry on going.
On the ther site too there's a link to the original Cannondale motorsports website, with lots of pictures of the employees happy at work...they are nearly all ex cycle builders, ie worked for cannondale for years and have been transferred from mountain bikes to putting together bike engines (check out the guy putting in the cartridge plates and bearings.......no wonder.....only kidding!!).
Anyway, the point of this is, has anyone got details of the failings of various bikes and compared them to when they were actually manufactured to see if there's any correlation??
just a thought, if i'm blabbering ignore me......
-
cannondale27
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
Guys I think we all gave up trying to come up with specific dates for anything.There were just too many combinations of different parts.Only real way to know what you have is to look yourself.If you look for failures you will find them from day one right to the end.This does not mean all failed.Plenty are running fine.Yes the early 02 with billet crank,cast case and aluminum valve cover seem to be lasting the best however there were failures of those also and there were way less of them made with alot of them factory remade also.Best bet is to ride it and maintain it religously keep motor fairly stock.Dont try to fix what aint broke unless you are willing to take some risks.
I am following a REAL promising technique for rebuilding the stock cranks that I think is the key to the reassembly press force issues. Assembled and dissassembled 3 cranks several times with the same positive result. I have not yet field tested them though as I am waiting on the new rods. Still several weeks out.
Thanks
Thanks
-
Ryanstones
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
QUOTE
Originally posted by bigdawg
On the 'other' site.....
On the other site too.....
if i'm blabbering ignore me......
On the 'other' site.....
On the other site too.....
if i'm blabbering ignore me......
You Mean www.cannondaler.com
It's ok, you can say it.
There are correlations between production date and particular problems, just not specific enough to make definite statements. throw out a date and there are several guys who can make informed guesses of potential problems. 27 has been trying to figure this out for a long while.