Talking to a buddy of mine from Cheddar Land…who is certainly “in the know”. I guess Trek is all over ShimaNO to get a carbon crank out. ShimaNO wont let Trek put non ShimaNO cranks on some of their bikes apparently due to a contract agreement between the two. ShimaNO takes the “why would we need carbon? Have you seen the new DA” stance…Trek retorts with “yeah but people love carbon and think of the profit!”.
So, who do you agree with? Get a carbon crank cause consumers will think that they are cool, and they must be better cause they are carbon. I am not one to agree with that mentality. I have not seen any benifit of one crank over another based on anything but weight. I have never felt a crank flex…I have felt a frame flex though. Why does it seem to me that more and more the big MFG’s are more of marketing companies trying to pick up that bottom line. I think that sometimes we get innovation for profits sake, not innovation for the sake of innovation. What have they really done in recent history that made us say WOW? What is the latest clipless pedal from Look? What is the latest Scott DH?
I for one think that Trek even asking ShimaNO for a carbon crank is odd at best.
It’s nice to know that Shimano is basing it’s products on solid engineering and innovation, and not just adding carBLING just because. Too bad Campy feels the need to dress up their products with gimmicky carbon. JK
I couldn’t believe how wishy washy my Chorus crank arms were until I switched to carbon. Now I rocket instead of just putzing along struggling with aluminum crank arms. I’m moving up from cat 5 to cat 1/2 also. Those aluminum crank arms were probably absorbing half the power I was generating, or was it the weight difference? Now I just don’t know. I’ll have to slow down and try to figure it out.
I consider myself “Mr. Practical” in my bike purchases. Why spend extra for anything if it won’t make you faster. That’s why I have CH Aero covers instead of a Zipp.
My post was sarcasm. I’m sorry for leading you on.
In reality, I doubt that any recreational cyclist would ever be able to notice the difference were he blindfolded.
In the real world I don’t believe carbon cranks would make any difference for anyone other than perhaps one of the elite professional cyclists when climbing mountains. Then because of a weight issue, not that the aluminum crank arm was absorbing all the power they were generating.
In the recreational bike industry, I believe for the most part, carbon cranks are more effective at separating a cyclist from the green in his wallet than one cyclist from another.
The money you save on carbon cranks you should spend on a coach. It will produce much greater results.
I switched and could feel the difference. For a time I had a bike with FSA carbon cranks and a bike with Campy Chorus cranks. Not only could I tell the difference the minute I got on the carbon cranks, I have to say that they were a pretty big improvement over the Campy’s.
The difference? I don’t know, probably a combination of BB and Q factor rather than the carbon, but I noticed the difference. They just plain fit me better and I felt more powerful. Now both of my bikes run FSA’s.
My understanding is that Trek will be introducing tons of carbon this year.Bontrager cranks,full carbon stems,carbon saddles,carbon flat top handlebars and a $12,000.00 Madone SSL.
Cullen
In reality, I doubt that any recreational cyclist would ever be able to notice the difference were he blindfolded.
maybe not but it would sure be funny watching that test take place…a bunch of blindfolded rec cyclists trying to find out which crank was carbon…the one that made a cracking sound when I crashed…not a metalic squeeking sound…that had to have been aluminum…medic!
I was amused at the contemplation of that scenario when I posted that response but considered few would take it so literally. The crashes of blindfolded cyclists were envisioned. The distinctive pings rather than carbon cracks/thuds when the crank arms broke was not. Thanks for sharing the humor.
Well, bottom line here is that Trek is a bicycle manufacturer. If they are losing sales because they don’t have carbon cranks on their bikes, that is something they HAVE to address. We, as some of the more informed consumers, may or may not be indifferent to the whole issue…but Trek cannot afford to be. The moment you hesitate in business…you become an also ran. If I can change a product and make more $ (without crossing liability risk lines), then as a CEO, I have to explore that option. There is nothing odd about that concept. Frankly it is very judgemental to blast a company for successful marketing strategies (again…provided their products do not cross liability boundries…i.e. the products are unfit and unsafe.)
Ultimately it comes down to this…Trek wants to remain a viable company in the cycling world. They occupy a large-scale position in the market, meaning their marketing focus cannot afford dogmatic strategies. To do so would quickly see them lose grasp on their position. Look no further than companies like Schwinn and GT for fine examples of large bicycle companies that failed to keep pace with the market. Sure, other factors were involved, but they lost touch with their primary customer base.
So you think Trek can afford to ignore carbon’s marketing force? And keep in mind, they aren’t going to go sticking carbon cranks on their $1000 road bikes… No, they can’t afford to ignore this aspect. Why do I say so? Look at the other large manufacturer’s higher end (complete bike) offerings. Look at the ABG bikes. Look at Bianchis. etc. etc. Carbon cranks abound.
The bigger the manufacturer, the more they must meet marketing forces of their intended customer base. That’s simple economics. Smaller manufacturers, especially those who build their reputations on certain niche ideas, can afford a level of dogmatism and adherence to principle. (Gerard refuses so far to market a carbon version of the P3 at this point, for instance. But if the market forces (and don’t mistake a few lustful Slowtitchers for broad market forces) make it a financial liability, we’ll see a Cervelo Carbon P3 or somesuch.)
There is nothing wrong with believing much of the current carbon craze is just that…“flavor of the day” or “me too.” Just don’t make the mistake of painting everyone into the same decision matrix you are using. The cycling world NEEDs the Treks, Cannondales, Bianchis, etc. just as it needs both Shimano AND Campagnolo.
Oh, and I find it supremely ironic that you, Record, are defending Shimano on this one (even if you don’t say it directly, or, heaven forbid, admit it!)
Carbon Cranks are classic ShimaNO R&D or Ripoff and Duplication.
Some buyers are after carbon cranks, they have a slighly different dampening effect through the pedals apparently, but on the whole they are are another techno fad like bio pace.
just put a pair of fsa carbon pro team issue on my bike. did it because it was cheaper than going dura ace, and i needed to get a longer crank. carbon cranks are also much lighter than aluminum…i want to say 540g for team, 470 for k-force, compared to 600 for old dura-ace, much more for new dura ace. thats a lot of weight.
i want to say they feel stiffer than my three year old ultegra crank, but that’s not a great comparison, making the jump from 175->180 and all.
Would you care to elaborate on your opinion that Shimano “ripoff” and duplicate? And would you also like to explain why you do not apply the same adjectives to Campagnolo (maybe you do, but that is not clear, and certainly not implied in the tone of your caustic moniker.)
Shimano is very good at releasing products with lots of hype to create value for their products. I use the DA crank, and while it looks lovely, the whole thing about the crank stiffness is a load of croak. The stiffness and function of the intergrated BB is another story, but Shimano like Microsoft release products to create profit, and occassionaly (always high $$) better products.
Some manufacturers take a passionate approach to releasing the best products (ie. Lightweight), others buy the copyright and produce cheap versions so everyday riders can afford newer products (ie. VP and Weyless). Shimano release products to maintain their share price.
I’m a Shimano user so I won’t pass comment about a groupo I havn’t used.
The DA10 crank weight includes the intergrated BB. It’s not servicable but it is stiff and smooth.
