Any chainline issues on these frames when using standard double road cranks/bbs?

My Giant is fine w/ ultegra stuff. It's a pain in the neck because you need special rear wheels just for the cross bike. If I had it to do over, I would buy a standard rear spacing frame.

Any chainline issues on these frames when using standard double road cranks/bbs?

My Giant is fine w/ ultegra stuff. It's a pain in the neck because you need special rear wheels just for the cross bike. If I had it to do over, I would buy a standard rear spacing frame.

Thanks.

Anyone else have a cross bike with 135 rear spacing? What cranks are you using? Any issues?

Ultegra Double. No issues.

I have a Kelly cross frame, and it really isn't possible to use anything other than a mountain bike width bottom bracket. With a typical width road bottom bracket, the inner ring will not clear the chainstays which are set up more like a mountain bike - 135mm in the rear, and triple ring set-up in the front.

My problem with the chain line started when, not realizing the frame was designed around a triple set up the front (my fault for not paying attention), I ordered mine with 130mm rear spacing. That caused a pretty severe chainline problem when I realized I couldn't use anything other than the mountain bike width bottom bracket. Sooo, back I went to 135mm, and the mountain bike bottom bracket. Of course, since I was planning to run Campy ten speed, which all my wheels are set up for, this caused me a problem because changing all my wheel's spacing proved to be impossible. I had some wheels with King hubs (135mm), which can't handle ten speed, so I decided to stick with nine speed, and changed my shifters. All in all, a big pain in the arse.

I blame these problems on myself - not the fault of Kelly Bikes, who make a fine product. I do wish the would have pointed out the potential chainline problems I might be causing when I ordered the frame, but in the end I felt I was negligent in doing my own research.

The real issue for me was that I don't like the q-factor of the triple setup in the front, and all my wheels were spaced for 130mm. For the Kelly, and it's chainstays, those two don't mix well. Just something to keep in mind. Anyone want a 59cm Kelly? My Felt frames should be here today or tomorrow.

I have a Kelly cross frame, and it really isn't possible to use anything other than a mountain bike width bottom bracket. With a typical width road bottom bracket, the inner ring will not clear the chainstays which are set up more like a mountain bike - 135mm in the rear, and triple ring set-up in the front.

My problem with the chain line started when, not realizing the frame was designed around a triple set up the front (my fault for not paying attention), I ordered mine with 130mm rear spacing. That caused a pretty severe chainline problem when I realized I couldn't use anything other than the mountain bike width bottom bracket. Sooo, back I went to 135mm, and the mountain bike bottom bracket. Of course, since I was planning to run Campy ten speed, which all my wheels are set up for, this caused me a problem because changing all my wheel's spacing proved to be impossible. I had some wheels with King hubs (135mm), which can't handle ten speed, so I decided to stick with nine speed, and changed my shifters. All in all, a big pain in the arse.

I blame these problems on myself - not the fault of Kelly Bikes, who make a fine product. I do wish the would have pointed out the potential chainline problems I might be causing when I ordered the frame, but in the end I felt I was negligent in doing my own research.

The real issue for me was that I don't like the q-factor of the triple setup in the front, and all my wheels were spaced for 130mm. For the Kelly, and it's chainstays, those two don't mix well. Just something to keep in mind. Anyone want a 59cm Kelly? My Felt frames should be here today or tomorrow.

Good points, and I have the same concerns. I'm wondering if the Ultagra cranks that work for the posters above are a bit more "forgiving" in this area--ie they work on a wider range of frames than higher end cranks like Dura ACe or Ritchey, which have lower q factors. I also think that Kelly should have warned you of these issues, especially since you ordered the 130 spacing.

i remember seeing on Kelly's website that Kelly CX frames are designed to use mountain cranks, NOT road cranks. correct me if i'm wrong.

that said i'll be building up my cx with almost all mtn parts. coming from a mtb background i feel more secure when the parts are known to be able to withstand off-road riding.

I have a Kelly cross frame, and it really isn't possible to use anything other than a mountain bike width bottom bracket. With a typical width road bottom bracket, the inner ring will not clear the chainstays which are set up more like a mountain bike - 135mm in the rear, and triple ring set-up in the front.

My problem with the chain line started when, not realizing the frame was designed around a triple set up the front (my fault for not paying attention), I ordered mine with 130mm rear spacing. That caused a pretty severe chainline problem when I realized I couldn't use anything other than the mountain bike width bottom bracket. Sooo, back I went to 135mm, and the mountain bike bottom bracket. Of course, since I was planning to run Campy ten speed, which all my wheels are set up for, this caused me a problem because changing all my wheel's spacing proved to be impossible. I had some wheels with King hubs (135mm), which can't handle ten speed, so I decided to stick with nine speed, and changed my shifters. All in all, a big pain in the arse.

I blame these problems on myself - not the fault of Kelly Bikes, who make a fine product. I do wish the would have pointed out the potential chainline problems I might be causing when I ordered the frame, but in the end I felt I was negligent in doing my own research.

The real issue for me was that I don't like the q-factor of the triple setup in the front, and all my wheels were spaced for 130mm. For the Kelly, and it's chainstays, those two don't mix well. Just something to keep in mind. Anyone want a 59cm Kelly? My Felt frames should be here today or tomorrow.

Good points, and I have the same concerns. I'm wondering if the Ultagra cranks that work for the posters above are a bit more "forgiving" in this area--ie they work on a wider range of frames than higher end cranks like Dura ACe or Ritchey, which have lower q factors. I also think that Kelly should have warned you of these issues, especially since you ordered the 130 spacing.

I guess they could have warned me, but I have to take the blame too. Like I said, their product is great, I just didn't forsee the problems the change would cause.

I tried several different combinations of bottom brackets and cranks. Campy, Shimano (Dura-Ace and Ultegra), FSA - nothing worked because, since the entire frame is really setup for a mountain bike drivetrain, the chainstays couldn't handle the lack of width of the bottom brackets, whether they were 108 - 112mm. The was no way to get around that inner chainring rubbing on the chainstay. I actually came close with an isis bottom bracket (which one escapes me at the moment), but the inner ring was still about 2mm from the chainstay and it rubbed when I put down my massive power (laugh, laugh, cough, cough). The only thing that works is what that particular frame was built around - 135mm in back and 118mm up front.

However, that's the Kelly. It would seem that other frames don't have this problem, nor might you or others have a problem with the q-factor a mountain bike bottom bracket provides. I guess you just have to do what you're doing - find out the potential problems others may or may not have faced, and then asked the manufacturer. So, I guess your question is really frame-specific, and I found out the hard way. Needless to say, my choice of new cross frames for this season excluded any frames with 135mm spacing in the rear.

I guess they could have warned me, but I have to take the blame too. Like I said, their product is great, I just didn't forsee the problems the change would cause.


However, that's the Kelly. It would seem that other frames don't have this problem, nor might you or others have a problem with the q-factor a mountain bike bottom bracket provides. I guess you just have to do what you're doing - find out the potential problems others may or may not have faced, and then asked the manufacturer. So, I guess your question is really frame-specific, and I found out the hard way. Needless to say, my choice of new cross frames for this season excluded any frames with 135mm spacing in the rear.

Did you order your Kelly direct from Chris or through a shop? Chris Kelly will talk your ear off about why and how you should use a mountain bike crank if you order direct. I'm not in agreement with him that you need a triple for cross, but I like his bikes.

The ideal set-up on a Knobby X (and Chris would have explained this) is an m952 XTR crankset with an Ultegra 109.5 splined BB (you could also use any square taper mtb crank and road BB). This brings in the triple crank significantly, but the rings still clear the stays.

It's an expensive lesson to learn, believe me I had to sell my Kelly because I bought a frame size too small. I was too caught up in debating drive train set up to think hard about how the Kelly frames fit.

Anyway, to the 135 mm spacing question. Echoing Jroden, I have a lot of 130 spaced wheels so it makes sense to me to get a frame that I can easily swap wheels with. Chainline and spacing are going to be frame specific. Talk to the builder about what he or she has designed the frame to be built up with. A lot of experimentation and frustration can be avoided by a phone call or email.

Did you order your Kelly direct from Chris or through a shop? Chris Kelly will talk your ear off about why and how you should use a mountain bike crank if you order direct. I'm not in agreement with him that you need a triple for cross, but I like his bikes.

The ideal set-up on a Knobby X (and Chris would have explained this) is an m952 XTR crankset with an Ultegra 109.5 splined BB (you could also use any square taper mtb crank and road BB). This brings in the triple crank significantly, but the rings still clear the stays.

It's an expensive lesson to learn, believe me I had to sell my Kelly because I bought a frame size too small. I was too caught up in debating drive train set up to think hard about how the Kelly frames fit.

Anyway, to the 135 mm spacing question. Echoing Jroden, I have a lot of 130 spaced wheels so it makes sense to me to get a frame that I can easily swap wheels with. Chainline and spacing are going to be frame specific. Talk to the builder about what he or she has designed the frame to be built up with. A lot of experimentation and frustration can be avoided by a phone call or email.


I ordered it right about the time they were moving last year and, though I forget the name of the guy I talked to, he wasn't very knowledgable or helpful when I placed the order. It wasn't Chris, and it was a very busy time for them. But, again, I take the blame, it's pretty clear from the website (although not specifically stated at the time) that the frame is designed around an XTR crankset - the bottom bracket is news to me - probably the one combination I didn't try. Live and learn. Still a great frame, in my opinion.

Picked up the two Felt frames yesterday, though, and they are sweet.

Anyway, to the 135 mm spacing question. Echoing Jroden, I have a lot of 130 spaced wheels so it makes sense to me to get a frame that I can easily swap wheels with. Chainline and spacing are going to be frame specific. Talk to the builder about what he or she has designed the frame to be built up with. A lot of experimentation and frustration can be avoided by a phone call or email.

Yes, I have determined that the frame in question is set up for mtb cranks. Though I can see the advantage in terms of being able to run fatter tires, I personally would rather be able to run road cranks with their lower q-factor. Thanks for all the replies.