I need some larger chainrings, so I’m looking into getting some aero chainrings. It seems that the two major players are FSA and Shimano. Does anybody have an opinion for or against either?
It seems that the FSA are a little cheaper and have a lenticular shape. I don’t know what kind of difference that would make.
Thanks,
-Colin
i us a shi,ano 54 that is solid in design. no problems ever and i have FSA Carbon cranks on it. just mu .02. i don’t think yo ucan go wrong either way. i did se soem sweet looking carbon rings, yes carbon at interbike but don’t know how they hold up!
Go Shimano DA. I’ve ridden both. I like the DA’s better, besides they are lighter and look better. BUT if you want an FSA 54 I have one I’ll let go. It was on my bike when I switched over to Rotor Cranks. Send an email to innkeeper@innoncharlotte.com and we can discuss a resonable price.
CCF,
Rather than spend your money on aero chainrings and question if there is any data to identify if there is any time to be saved by using them versus standard chainrings, spend your money on the new Oval carbon aerobar for only $1,200.00. This will definitely save you a few seconds. And lighten your wallet!
Just my 2 cents.
I have the FSA CSC carbon cranks with an FSA 55 and a DA 42, and they work perfectly together. It sounds strange, but that’s the only setup that has ever shifted properly. I think the cranks were the problem since they shifted weird with 9spd, 10 spd, old chain, new chain, original 53/39, and with both FSA aero 55/42. On a last ditch effort, I put on the Dura Ace inner ring and it shifted perfectly.
I will be contacting FSA to figure out if they had problems with that batch of cranks. I would rather have matching chainrings since the FSA inner looks sweet from the non drive side, and if I have to get new cranks, I will go that route.
Let’s get this straight…
The reason to own a 54 or bigger chainring is to get the right gear combinations for your riding style and conditions. There is NO reason to buy these chainrings for aero benefits.
Don’t believe me???
If there were significant aero benefits…they’d be marketing the same style chainrings in 53 and smaller as well…even in the compact sizes.
The reason the chainrings are solid, rather than having cutouts has to do with maintaining stiffness, especially when you get in to the Bjorn sizes of 58 and 60.
I have a 54/42 DA setup on my Talon SL. That setup, combined with an 11/21 puts me in a 54/14 to 54/16 for the majority of my flatland racing…i.e. a nice straight chainline and a few gears up for the minor downhills. This gearing works for me. Now that I’m here in Quantico, VA, though, I really need to swap out to a 53/39 since the terrain is much more rolling and I find myself having to do too much double shifting with the 54/42. My road bike is much better with its standard 53/39. I might even grab a compact crank for riding around here.
Cranks and chainrings should be considered from a gearing options standpoint…NOT aero…
The cool factor doesn’t matter if you find you can’t push the gear…neither does any minute aero benefit.
To be fair, I never said that I was buying the chainrings for a “cool factor”, nor for an aero benefit. I referred to them as “aero chainrings” because I wanted readers to know that I meant I needed rings bigger than the standard 53.
-Colin
Ahh…I see…
As you can see in a couple of the responses, though, some folks ARE under the mistaken belief that these rings give a significant aero factor.
Gotta be careful with how you discuss things…If cool and aero are not your concerns, a better question would have been “How do I know if I need to go bigger than a 53 chainring…and if I do…which one(s) is/are best?”
The best way for you to determine that today is to determine what gears you spend the most time in on your current set-up…which gears do you routinely have to go to in significant terrain or wind conditions…how many double shifts do you have to do in your routine riding…
After you ask yourself these sorts of questions…go find a gear chart on the web that lets you input different combinations of chainrings and cassettes. Check out your current setup and compare it to setups you are considering…does a 54/55/56//42 setup give you better gearing options? Does the 4,5 or 6 cassette cog middle gear on any of these make a gear/inch that corresponds to your most frequent racing/hard training gear? If not, then these chainrings probably aren’t for you. In fact, don’t discount the compact gearing as it often gives the best combinations of gears given these considerations.
Now…if your bike is 650, then you’ll likely find that a 54,55, or 56 is the way to go since their gearing is smaller for each combination of chainring/cassette cog. If your bike is 700, I think that if you do your homework, you’ll find that unless you routinely race at speeds above 25mph or just like mashing huge gears at low cadence ala Bjorn A, that you’ll find your 53/39 works best…or that a compact gearing is an even better choice.
Thanks! That was the advice I was looking for!
-C
No aero benefit? Oh darn…
Biggest benefit from the “aero” rings is increased stiffness, second is coolness. I use 56/39, because I’m a weak climber and several of the races I do have hills or significant rollers where a 39-23 comes in handy. At the same time, there are some screaming downhills where that 56-11 has me flying by people. It also gives me momentum to get me partway up the next roller so I don’t have to work too hard.
Personally, I’ll settle for the coolness, cuz it probably doesn’t get me much of an increase in average speed when all is said and done.
No shifting problems with the 56/39 combo?
Do you frequently spin out your standard 53 tooth chainring? Sure, going downhill and 50 mph. I’d say save your money. Most people can barely push their 53/13 on a flat road.
“No shifting problems with the 56/39 combo?”
It works fine. I was told that 58/39 might even work, but I hope that I’ll be ready to climb with 42 by the time I graduate to a 58.
Personally, I’ll settle for the coolness,
Dude, are you picking up chicks with those rotors?
Do you frequently spin out your standard 53 tooth chainring? Sure, going downhill and 50 mph. I’d say save your money. Most people can barely push their 53/13 on a flat road.
The gears I use most are 53x17 on the road bike and 53x16-15 on the tri bike. That gearing on the tri bike enabled me to get a 2:30 1/2IM split on a rolling course last year. Today, after 2.5 weeks on the trainer, I was able to get on the road for the first time on my powercranks. I spent most of the 2 hours in the 53x14 (on the road bike). It was moderatly windy (15-18mph, which, sadly, is moderate for here), and when the wind was at my back I needed something bigger than the 14 (chain doesn’t like to go into the 13 right now for some reason). With 7 more months until IMWIS and 9 until IMFLA, I anticipate needing bigger rings, since this change is after only 2.5 weeks on the PC’s, and the 2.5 weeks were preceeded by 3 months of no riding (marathon training).
Wow, that was almost certainly too much information.
-C
“Dude, are you picking up chicks with those rotors?”
See for yourself…
Do you have 11 and 12 tooth cogs? The gearing increase from a 12 to an 11 cog is much greater than a 53 to 54 chainring.
Poser!
;->
That’s MISTER Poser if you don’t mind.