Crank question

Triathlon Forum
22

Hi TTN,
First, please calm down. I’m not miffed, I’m not calling you names, or resorting to profanity, and you need to chill out.

Second, please re-read your original post. Every time you feel compelled to defend yourself, you get farther and farther afield from your original post, which is what I responded to.

Thirdly,

"it is NOT a carbon crank - it is a spine covered in foam wrapped in a skin. it costs a lot more, and offers little more, if anything, compared to conventional cranks. it is a product clearly hoping to capitalize on a market infatuation with a material - one could say it would not even exist without this market preoccupation, given its limited benfit over the prevailing norm. i made no bold anything nor any threw any BS whatsoever. what in the hell is your problem ? "

Is total BS, and that’s my problem, if I have one. You are making bold, grandiloquent statements, with absolutely no supporting evidence, and you expect people to take them on face value. Sorry if my refusal to do so gets on your nerves.

You started this entire fiasco by claiming an “engineering perspective,” and you have to meet that burden when you make statements if your argument is to have any validity at all. Saying “it is NOT a carbon crank - it is a spine covered in foam wrapped in a skin…” merely proves to the world that you do not have a cogent argument to make; the statement is absurd on it’s face. What IS a carbon crank? Here’s a hint - there IS no such thing. The proper terminology is “composite crank,” as in “made of many parts.” To proclaim a hoax based on the presence of materials other than carbon in a crank displays a massive lack of understanding on your part. “Engineering perspective”, remember?

“…i made an accurate description of the thing, and offered a few views on it…” is a statement I will not accept. Your description of the product was clearly fundamentally innaccurate. Please re-read your original post.

“it costs a lot more, and offers little more, if anything, compared to conventional cranks”

This may well be true. I have little interest in the argument, truthfully. Interestingly, while this is the part of your argument that interests me the least, it is also the best supported, as it is based on nothing but subjective analysis.I will tell you that I have a friend who broke an average of 3 DA cranksets per year before switching to the FSAs. He has now been on the same crankset for almost 2 years. This product certainly offered something to him.

"it is a product clearly hoping to capitalize on a market infatuation with a material - one could say it would not even exist without this market preoccupation, given its limited benfit over the prevailing norm. "

One could say that, but then one would be trumpeting falsehoods to the world from their nether orifice. Thankfully, I do not share your cycnicism on this topic. I also am personally well acquainted with the entire staff of the FSA R&D department, and can thus merely ignore this statement as the cycnical ignorance it is.

Failing a reasoned response, I eagerly await your flames,

MH

23

fredly, i went back and looked at that original post. it looks fine to me, and i will stand by it. i will encourage YOU, sir, to reread the post without your defensive and aggressive and challenging demeanor, and - you know, just read what i said. if you like, remove the word “engineering”, since it seems to offend you or perhaps you place more meaning in the word than do i. anyway, i did not call you out as offering BS, - nor did i misinterpret your words and add to them in my own version of same.

it appears you have a vested interest of some sort in this product - care to tell us what that is ?

your point about the thing being strong is well taken. certainly for the multitudes of guys who regularly break their DA cranks the fsa would be a good choice !

24

From what I have read and seen, the DA 10 speed cranks (with aero chainrings of course … which are 1/2 the weight of the FSA’s) and it’s integrated BB blows the FSA out of the water, hands down, FSA is all flash - zero benefit IMHO.

Why does’nt Shimano use carbon bike compenents I wonder? Al. is king.

http://www.velonews.com/images/report/4128.4893.f.jpg

25

i am curious - how well would a “composite” frame made from an aluminum skeleton, covered in foam, and wrapped in a carbon weave skin be ?? particulaly if it cost more, and was heavier ( thanks, gary), and was probably just as stiff but according to at least some tests was actually more flexy than current offerings in hollow carbon or aluminum??? but hey - it IS strong !

i think the c-dale raven looked like this, btw. it stunk.

just curious.

26

“snip” i am curious - how well would a “composite” frame made from an aluminum skeleton, covered in foam, and wrapped in a carbon weave skin be ?? particulaly if it cost more, and was heavier ( thanks, gary), and was probably just as stiff but according to at least some tests was actually more flexy than current offerings in hollow carbon or aluminum??? but hey - it IS strong ! "

The great thing about this is just how specious an argument you are making - it perfectly parallels your comments so far.

The goal of good engineering is to use the appropriate materials to do a given job. Your example of a bike frame invalidating a construction method from consideration for another application, is, of course, absurd.

By the way, if you have an example of a well done test showing the results you are citing, I would love to see it… (rhetorical comment of course - you don’t, but please don’t let that stand in the way of your bad argument.)

The FSA CHAINRINGS are heavier, but you would, of course have to have read Gary’s post to have understood that.

MH

27

snip - “i will encourage YOU, sir, to reread the post without your defensive and aggressive and challenging demeanor, and - you know, just read what i said. if you like, remove the word “engineering”, since it seems to offend you or perhaps you place more meaning in the word than do i. anyway, i did not call you out as offering BS, - nor did i misinterpret your words and add to them in my own version of same.”

Frankly, I think that you and all the members of this forum deserve a “challenging” read of their posts. That’s part of why I am on this forum.

I don’t see how you can say I am misinterpreting you - I have been parenthetically citing you throughout this discussion.

“Engineering” has a meaning. If you don’t mean it, don’t use it: the whole context of your original post was framed by that term. If you had said “look, from a layman’s perspective, knowing very little about materials science or the actual construction of this product…”

I do not have a vested interest in this product, nor am I unaware of it’s shortcomings - notice I am not disputing anything Gary has said. I do work in the bike industry, and was at one time employed by FSA.

AHA, you say!!

Sorry to burst your bubble. My parting with them was not particularly amicable, and I don’t have any particularly good reason to stick up for them. If you would care to listen some time, I could certainly give you some valid engineerig critiques of this and most of their products, ditto their competitors. That isn’t the point, of course. My original purpose was not to stick up for FSA, but to point out the factual innaccuracies in your post. Please, by all means attack the company: there is plenty there to go after. Just please do it with some semblance of logic and thought.

Of course, in best high-school debate style, you have turned this around so that I have a hidden agenda - kind of like your nonsense about the cranks being a 100% marketing gimmick (I paraphrase loosely, obviously.) This is, of course, the last refuge of a losing argument.

Please, if anything I have said is BS, and you can logically support that conclusion, by all means call it out. I would hope that you would (although I doubt that you can…)

MH

28

First off to hell with how it performs - I think FSA cranks are ugly and would never put one on any of my bikes. Second, is that new Record Carbon crankset I ordered a aluminum shaft with black woven decor? Third…more of an idea…now, if I was to take a titanium spoke, wrap in in foam, carbon, aluminum and more titanium with a carbon weave…would that be stronger and lighter? (maybe only if I had an ISIS BB?)

And I challange ANY ONE…to NAME a person and BACKUP with facts PROOF that ANYONE has ever “Broken” more than one Dura Ace crank in a LIFETIME let alone a year (with out the help of ignorant crashing skills or the support of a wayward motor vehicle). Something sounds a bit fishy with that one to me

.http://www.3si.org/portal/forums/images/smilies/new/bsmeter.gif

29

“aluminum shaft with black woven decor”

That was one person’s interpretation, but not what I read from fredly. He said (paraphrasing liberally) that the significant strength comes from the carbon, with other materials being present not so much for stiffness as to create a substrate for the carbon.
I can’t say which one is correct, but in my opinion they are clearly saying two different things.

30

"And I challange ANY ONE…to NAME a person and BACKUP with facts PROOF that ANYONE has ever “Broken” more than one Dura Ace crank in a LIFETIME let alone a year (with out the help of ignorant crashing skills or the support of a wayward motor vehicle). Something sounds a bit fishy with that one to me "

Gee, do you want his phone number? how about his email address? He happens to be a personal friend and a gazillion time national champion, who also weighs right around 200 lbs. He breaks - yes BREAKS cranks at the arms. He runs a 56t chainring on his road bike, and I can’t even imagine the wattage this guy puts out…

PS. broken DA cranks aren’t that unusual. I used to see them occasionally as a wrench.

Your BS meter needs re-calibration.

By TTN’s standards, ANY crank with aluminum inserts for the threads and bb interface isn’t a carbon crank. THAT’S MY POINT!
(and by the way, Campy has had some problems with the inserts pulling out of their carbon cranks. I have personally seen a couple of examples. It will be interesting to see how these cranks hold up over time. I hope they do well - I’m a huge Campy fan.)

MH

31

wow fredly. now i am " setting standards" ? and to think, you still claim you are not putting words in my mouth ! always so fun to try to have a casual conversation with an engineer, or at least with a guy who have to prove to himself and others that he is one.

anyway, the phrase " all carbon" is acommon one in bike speak, and is well enuf understood. tell me, do you go around correcting everybody who talks about their “all carbon” fork ?? it means the thing is - you know, all carbon and not carbon wrapped around something or bonded to something orwhathaveyou. it does NOT imply the fork doesn’t use an insert to hold the wheel in.

etc etc. you cannot stop from misinterpreting what was a valid point and commentary, so this is it. my original statement was but a couple lines long, and tho you claim not to, you have extrpolated it into an entire thread ! you continue to say i am wrong about what the crank IS, when i am in fact correct, plain and simple. you take accurate conversational statements and dissect them into engineering treatises. you seem completely unable to grasp that there is more at work in the marketing of a high end bike product than. . . . . . .engineering. i say the product has a large market driven appeal with carbon-lust and you say i just said the product is a sham. do you see how it your OWN insistance on misreading and misdirecting materail that makes you such a pain to have a conversation with ? gee, nobody has ever said THAT about an engineer before, i bet.

here is a little joke for you : what do you call three overly verbose , arrogant, and patronizingly hostile eggheads wildly intent on reshaping casual conversation into technical arguments they can bully their way around in with grand self-styled bluster- buried up to their necks in sand ??? …

32

Well this has certainly been an entertaining thread!

t-t-n insists on writing his own dictionary and re-interpreting things that are still sitting there for all to read, and fredly is too anal retentive to just shrug and walk away.

For the record, fredly, you won this one on a TKO in the first round. Cool Hand t-t-n just refuses to leave the ring (I hope that reference doesn’t date me too badly).

So what else can we argue about?

33

So what else can we argue about?

Nobody can eat 50 eggs!

34

snip -
"Well this has certainly been an entertaining thread!

t-t-n insists on writing his own dictionary and re-interpreting things that are still sitting there for all to read, and fredly is too anal retentive to just shrug and walk away.

For the record, fredly, you won this one on a TKO in the first round. Cool Hand t-t-n just refuses to leave the ring (I hope that reference doesn’t date me too badly)."

To be honest, I was getting kind of a sadistic pleasure out of the thread, but there was no way I was going to follow up today. My apologies for “carrying” the other corner into the later rounds.

I have walked away.

I love Cool Hand Luke.

MH

35

What else can we argue about…?

CLYDESDALES RULE!!!

Take that you freakin’ skinny bastards.

36

And I didn’t even have to pay anything to watch it…

I’m only 170 lbs, you fat b@st@rd, but after I kick sand in your face, I can outrun you…

The cool thing about Clydesdales is that they start in the wave AFTER my ancient butt, and I don’t have to bike through them like an obstacle course, the way I have to do with all the young dorks who don’t realize that some of the geezers are actually pretty fast.

38

If you want carbon cranks, get either the Cat Carbon Bikes Cheetah cranks (with square spindle) or the Colnagos. Yes, they cost a mint, but they’re done right. Neither of these companies put their name on anything until they are right. I am not particularly saying that about Campy at all, as I have not seen the specs on those.

If it were me, I would go with a pair of aluminum Ritcheys or Shimano (for the Shimano inclined), Stronglight, or Tiso. I wouldn’t waste the money on a carbon crank that is below the price point of $700, myself (unless I got them for wholesale).

I ride Sweet Wings, which are made of chromoly, and weigh a little over 450 grams with bottom bracket (outboard bearings) and integrated, splined spindle (from 1996). With the exception of the material, it sounds like a certain maker is doing something AWFULLY familiar…

And on one other subject, carbon can be done right. It is just expensive as hell. Think you can’t find a pair of carbon drop bars that can have an aerobar attached? Think again- Kestrel makes a pair for $200, but Schmolke Carbon makes two (for $370 U.S. incl. shipping for their cheap model) that are lots lighter than the Kestrel bar. I am not saying that carbon wrapped around a skeleton is not “done right”, but it is a poor man’s use of carbon, and frankly carbon not done to it’s highest potential.

I franly can’t wait until the carbon lust passes, or that the carbon “done right” gets cheaper to manufacture. This is why you won’t see me on a pair of carbon cranks. I do like the carbon bikes- they are “done right”.

39

yeah, what he said ( bunnyman).

answer to quiz: not enuf sand. :slight_smile:

40

Not to take this even further…but I would like to know how Lance Armstrong can sleep at night knowing that with his huge strength he may snap his Dura Ace cranks at any given moment. I just have a very hard time thinking that a “National Blah Blah Blah” is busting cranks all over the place - and the peloton is not having any issues.

41

I’m about 99% sure the Cipo is riding DA this year. That is probably why he didn’t make it into the tour, the danger of his taking out the peleton when he busted the cranks is too great.

42

Have you ever heard the little story about the chain??The chain is only as strong as the weakest link,how can you break cranks without breaking thousands of chains?