Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5
Quote | Reply
Just a heads up that eTap does not really play well with Cervelo R5 and S5 (at least with a 54cm). Actually it also doesn't fit on a few others such as Colnago (both a 50S and a 54 traditional) we tried and from my frantic web search seems others also have the same problem with Williers. Problem is entirely around the front derailleur braze on position - it's far too high for a 50/34 and a bit too high on a 52/36. Additionally, once you have it as low as it goes on the 52/36 then the lower limit screw impacts the crank arm with both Dura Ace 9000 and Rotor 3D. Solution so far has been to remove the lower limit screw - I understand in other markets people have been successful in getting a shorter limit screw from SRAM to address this. With these changes we have been able to get the front shifting to be acceptable but not to the level of Di2 or EPS. Disappointing, and I'd warn anyone else out there to test fit eTap before they go ahead and buy the grouppo.

Next step for me will be to try moving the derailleur down with a shim, something like the one Rotor sells to improve shifting with their rings.

_____________________________________________________
"Oh man, it's going to take days to kill all these people!" - Jens Voigt
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just set up eTap on my S5 (size 58, original, not the 2nd gen S5) so I'll add my experience for others. I had some of the same experience that you reported, but I think it is frame related not eTap related: The front derailleur sits just low enough for my 52t big ring, there would be a gap if I were on a 50t. I had this same problem with my old red yaw derailleur, so I wonder if the braze on is too high. Also, I when in the smallest gear (little front-big back) I get a bit of chain rub that I have a hard time adjusting out. Again, this happened with my old mechanical FD, so I wonder if the braze-on sits too far outboard. All that said, the shifting is awesome. I've never ridden Di2 so I can't compare, but it's pretty damn good as is.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsoderman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's a combo frame and eTap issue. The Cervelo (and other frames') braze on is too high for eTap, however the derailleur could actually be lowered a bit more but the derailleur itself hangs on the top of the braze on. The chain rub is normal with most setups running extreme angles (eg. big-small, small-big) and not SRAM-specific.

The rear shifting is great, slightly slower on the stand than Di2 and EPS but on the road the difference is not noticeable.

_____________________________________________________
"Oh man, it's going to take days to kill all these people!" - Jens Voigt
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It works pretty well with a Rotor dual-Power crank (52-38) on my P5. I don't know if the braze-on is lower on the P5 than on the R5/S5.
Then again, since I use O-Symmetric's, I have used the small block to lower the FD so it plays nicely with the ovalized shape. Maybe, this could help you out as well.

I currently ride with eTap on both my P5 as on my Venge and absolutely love it. No bad experience or negative point thus far. The eTap RD even worked with a 11-32 cassette for Norseman. Admitted, I had to adjust the screw to avoid cassette and top ring of the RD touching each other, and it made a little noise due to the angle, but it shifted nicely and never protested. Typically, I ride using the default 11-28 cassette and that is just a sweet setup.

GReetz,

S.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have eTap on my 54cm P5 with 53/39 rings (when not riding 1x). It just fits and would not work well with 52 ring. My di2 had no problem with 50/34.




jsivvy wrote:
Just a heads up that eTap does not really play well with Cervelo R5 and S5 (at least with a 54cm). Actually it also doesn't fit on a few others such as Colnago (both a 50S and a 54 traditional) we tried and from my frantic web search seems others also have the same problem with Williers. Problem is entirely around the front derailleur braze on position - it's far too high for a 50/34 and a bit too high on a 52/36. Additionally, once you have it as low as it goes on the 52/36 then the lower limit screw impacts the crank arm with both Dura Ace 9000 and Rotor 3D. Solution so far has been to remove the lower limit screw - I understand in other markets people have been successful in getting a shorter limit screw from SRAM to address this. With these changes we have been able to get the front shifting to be acceptable but not to the level of Di2 or EPS. Disappointing, and I'd warn anyone else out there to test fit eTap before they go ahead and buy the grouppo.

Next step for me will be to try moving the derailleur down with a shim, something like the one Rotor sells to improve shifting with their rings.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Curious if you could remove the braze on hanger and go clamp on? Or maybe clamp it low enough you don't have to remove the hanger? Can the eTap FD you have even convert or have a kit to convert it to clamp/band-on? (honestly don't know)

Also, I saw on another forum that a person had issues with eTap FD fitment on a Supersix Evo Hi-Mod (2015 I thnk) and Hollowgram sisl2 cranks. The arms are thicker down around the pedal region enough that the drive side arm back side hits the hits the derailleur battery/servo casing above the cage. This guy ended up altering his spacer setup to allow for to gain enough clearance. Oddly enough a guy with a CAAD12 had plenty of clearance for eTap so I can't explain what is so different between the 2 since the geometry should be almost the same.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have the latest generation S5 (56cm) with Rotor cranks (w/P2Max pwr mtr), SRAM Red 22 50/34 rings and eTap. Fortunately I have no problems. Yes, the inside of the drive side crank arm is close to the FD cage, but no interference.
After reading this thread, I went down to my basement shop and put my eTap/S5 on the stand to see if I could get it to drop a chain, etc. Nope. I didn't think it would after the mileage I've put on the last few months with no issues.

Maybe I'm just lucky. I've been wrenching for over 20 years and I've learned one has to think like a surgeon not a mechanic. Especially with eTap, Di2 and 11 speeds. Tolerances are closer. For example, the slightest angle that FD is set at or that 1/4 turn or the hi-lo limit screw can make a big difference.

I also have an S5 (generation older than current model) with Di2 and 52/36 rotor rings. Does it shift smoother....maybe, if I'm paying attention and have ridden them back to back. But not enough to hamper anything.

I remember a few years back when 50/34 & 52/36 rings were becoming more popular. A few mechanics would drummel the slot on FD braze on mount so the FD could be mounted lower.

BTW, I also have an R5 but that's with DA-9000 mechanical, DA 50/34 crankset. Not part of this topic, but no probs there either.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [Blmgtnbkr] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have current S5 in 58cm with 52/36 and no problems.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I had a bunch of issues at first with my etap front derailleur. But my frame is tiny. I'm riding a felt IA in a 48.
At first, I had 53/39 praxisworks chainrings, rotor 3d+ crank and a power2max power meter. With this setup my front derailleur didn't work shifting from small to big chainring as it would over-trim hitting the crank arm. Also the wedge had not been installed which is required for the front derailleur to have something to brace against to shift.
The power2max was sent back (another discussion) and replaced with an SRM Spider. Chainrings replaced with 53/39 SRAM chainrings.
Once I swapped spiders we also had to put a spacer on the crank arms because the frame was so small and aero that the chainrings actually rubbed the frame. But now there is plenty of room for the front derailleur to shift. Now it shifts.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [shamerli] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
+1 eTap on 54 P5 with 52/36 Quark with Rotor Q Ring.

Set up by Nytro ..... https://www.nytro.com/bike

Works great!

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster
Last edited by: nealhe: Aug 24, 16 21:25
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [loxx0050] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Curious if you could remove the braze on hanger and go clamp on? Or maybe clamp it low enough you don't have to remove the hanger? Can the eTap FD you have even convert or have a kit to convert it to clamp/band-on? (honestly don't know)
Nope, the seat tube on the R5 and S5 is not round so couldn't use a clamp.

_____________________________________________________
"Oh man, it's going to take days to kill all these people!" - Jens Voigt
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [Blmgtnbkr] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Blmgtnbkr wrote:
I have the latest generation S5 (56cm) with Rotor cranks (w/P2Max pwr mtr), SRAM Red 22 50/34 rings and eTap. Fortunately I have no problems. Yes, the inside of the drive side crank arm is close to the FD cage, but no interference.
After reading this thread, I went down to my basement shop and put my eTap/S5 on the stand to see if I could get it to drop a chain, etc. Nope. I didn't think it would after the mileage I've put on the last few months with no issues.

Maybe I'm just lucky. I've been wrenching for over 20 years and I've learned one has to think like a surgeon not a mechanic. Especially with eTap, Di2 and 11 speeds. Tolerances are closer. For example, the slightest angle that FD is set at or that 1/4 turn or the hi-lo limit screw can make a big difference.

I also have an S5 (generation older than current model) with Di2 and 52/36 rotor rings. Does it shift smoother....maybe, if I'm paying attention and have ridden them back to back. But not enough to hamper anything.

I remember a few years back when 50/34 & 52/36 rings were becoming more popular. A few mechanics would drummel the slot on FD braze on mount so the FD could be mounted lower.

BTW, I also have an R5 but that's with DA-9000 mechanical, DA 50/34 crankset. Not part of this topic, but no probs there either.

This is pretty funny for a few reasons:

1) I AM a surgeon
2) I have eTap on a Boardman with 50/34 front rings
3) I dremmeled the slot on my braze on

;-)

____________________________________
Fatigue is biochemical, not biomechanical.
- Andrew Coggan, PhD
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [shamerli] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The O-Syms in a 52 measure much higher at their peak than a traditional round ring (prob along the lines of a 55 tooth round ring) so that helps with the eTap height issue. I've ordered the Rotor shim/block so will try that.

_____________________________________________________
"Oh man, it's going to take days to kill all these people!" - Jens Voigt
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [rroof] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
This is pretty funny for a few reasons:
1) I AM a surgeon
2) I have eTap on a Boardman with 50/34 front rings
3) I dremmeled the slot on my braze on


Lol. Dremmeling is my last resort. The R5 is my wife's brand new frame so I'd like to avoid surgery if possible! Running 52/34 in meantime.

_____________________________________________________
"Oh man, it's going to take days to kill all these people!" - Jens Voigt
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I forgot about that and basically had a brain fart on that one.
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [jsivvy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Woww,

52-34 is really pushing the limit in teams of size :). Not impossible but it will be a tight fit :)
Quote Reply
Re: eTap compatibility issues - Cervelo R5 and S5 [shamerli] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
52/34 is working alright. It's actually the perfect gearing for Hong Kong where there is only very steep up and very fast down!

_____________________________________________________
"Oh man, it's going to take days to kill all these people!" - Jens Voigt
Quote Reply