Over the past 120 hours my athletic world seems to have been turned upside down, or rather, right side up. It’s been an unexpectedly awesome 5 days. I’ll not go into all the details, but I met a lot of great people in the tri/cycling industry, discovered along with those people that I may just have some potential as an athlete, found out I’ve been sitting approximately 55mm too low (no joke), and met a random (or not so random maybe?) guy today that I talked to for 2 1/2 hours about Tesla, Chaco Canyon, Renewable Resources (photo-voltaics and turbines), Rock Climbing, Sun Worshipping, and a host of other things.
What does it all mean? It means it’s time for me to get rid of my triple cranksets and move to a double like the rest of the men on planet Earth. As I ride in the mountains, a 39 is just not enough for me at tempo efforts or below in many sections, sooooooo…I’m thinking it’s wise to go with a compact crankset. I understand their merit, but I don’t know much about the different ones available. Is there any consensus as to which is the “best”? If not a consensus, how about an opinion?
The “average” compact crank is a 50/34 although you can go to a 48 big ring and a 36 small ring is available.
I was one of the first people on the forum to convert and went with the Stronglight cranks with 50/34. Good cranks but you must use their square taper BB. At the time all that was available was Stronglight and very expensive FSA carbon. Since then there are other options such as FSA alloy, Campy and Ritchey. AFAIK, Shimano still hasn’t come out with a compact crank. Ritchey’s are probably the best bang for the buck.
Don’t believe any of the macho BS posts that compacts are just for wimps. A lot of triathletes are over geared and don’t realize it or won’t admit it. Everybody gollygeewhizzes over Bjorn’s big ring, but what has it ever done for him on the run. Tyler Hamilton shocked the cycling world by winning a TDF stage on compacts.
If you live in a hilly area compacts are the ticket. I’m not going back.
It’s sort of like comparing a Ch Aero cover vs Renn vs Zipp. Performance wise they’re all just as aero, but the quality of construction and coolness factor is a different matter.
Any 50/34 compact will perform just the same as the next. The carbon FSA’s will certainly look the coolest. If money is less of an issue for you than it was for me then go for the carbon FSA’s.
i don’t dig on carbon cranks. probably a personal problem, not something you should be concerned with (although you do seem like a sensitive guy … not that there’s anything wrong with that).
i like my cranks like i like my music: metal, and the hairier the better. in your shoes, here’s what i would get:
I’m quite fond of my Miche compacts, although I do find the 34 to be a little difficult to use effectively. It’s great in the mountains, but I find myself shifting a lot and hitting crossover gears at times when riding the flats and rollers. When I get a little fitter I’ll likely swap it out for a 36.
I have no experience with the FSA compacts, but I chose the Miche cranks because they were significantly less expensive than the Campy ones, I’m fond of Miche as a company, and I could be reasonably certain that very few if anyone else would have the same cranks as I. I’m also a retro-grouch who loves his tapered square.
First of all square holes have been around for over 100 years without any proven design defect. Shimano reinvents something that wasn’t bad with the latest and greatest Octalink, then abandons that great idea for the top of the line Dura ace and Xtr groups. Bar none any square hole crank with a Phil Wood BB will out smooth and outlast any other BB made. I have one from 1972 on a bike that is still as smooth as the day I got it. End of Rant.
I kind of like the Ritchey WCS at $200 or the Pro at $150. Nice low Q factor, and will fit Octalink BB. Not too sure if they offer an Isis as well. I like the FSA line, but am not convinced that carbon cranks are any lighter or better than alum. Not too sure on the FSA bb as some have posted complaints. One of the wrenches at LBS messed up his BB on one of the FSA external BB. He is a damn good wrench, so I would assume that you have to be a tad careful on installation.
Campy is well Campy and of course they came up with a model that is unique to itself. However hooked up to a Phil BB that could be a winner. Just my thoughts.
Rotors…the beauty of Rotors: put in a 50/34 combination or go back to 53/39 by simply unscrewing 4 bolts on the plates and sliding them on and off…so easy!!! Rotors…welcome to the dark side.
My wife got a set of the Bontrager alloy (the Race Lite model I think) for Christmas and loves them. The carbon is not much lighter and costs a ton more. If money is no object then the Carbon (Race X Lite) is great, but dollar for dollar the alloy model is a better deal. Of course, this is probably the case for almost any cranks.
I use the new FSA Mega Exo SL-K compact carbon and they are great. The ratio you can get with a 50/34 will allow you to run very close to a straight step cassette and still have some very low climbing gears, especially if you have a 10 speed system. FSA makes good stuff, at least in all my experiences, and carbon is definitely the way to go IMHO.
I bought the FSA Energy, alloy compact about this time last year and have a little over 4000 miles on them. I love em! I was unsure about them and didn’t want the full carbon price. But, I’m sold on compacts now. I’d still buy the alloy versions, cause there are just other things I’d rather have than just more sexy cranks. I put my savings to use on a Powertap last year.
Just be weary that if you go to something like a 50/34 CR that your shifting won’t be as smooth. Your chain line won’t be very pretty either, especially if your riding a tri bike with short chain stays.
I can vouch for FSA’s either carbon or alloy. There ain’t any significant difference between one or the other, other than looks, so you might as well go with the cheaper ones. Just buy them in 50/34 and buy the separate 36 ring and then swap according to taste or terrain.
Let’s be smart about this. Since you have a triple, start a log about how you are using them. I.e. course, gearing, pace, HR, etc. Actually…this would be a pretty cool project for a Motionbased activity.
The key is to figure out the gearing you need at your fitness level. Then, you can increase your fitness while sharpening your gear ratio (and range).
Perhaps you’ll find you NEED a triple. Make the product fit you rather than you fit the product. “Compact cranks” is a nice buzzword, but it’s more of a bike set-up issue based upon your needs that has some fairly significant pros and cons…
The Tyler compact story is nice folklore. Just because he rode a compact doesn’t mean he was riding 34-23. It still comes down to watts.
