Road Bike Crank Test - Fairwheel Bikes

[RedRider]

Fairwheel Bikes does some great objective testing... enjoy the long weekend, here's a lot of data to geek out over... Oh, and don't forget to shop heavily at your LBS on Friday!

https://fairwheelbikes.com/c/reviews-and-testing/road-bike-crank-testing/

[kramnnim]

Would like to see how the Hollowgram cranks compare...

[donevwil]

Man, those Praxis/Turn cranks are very reasonably priced. Too bad no 180s.

[Ken Robb]

Man, those Praxis/Turn cranks are very reasonably priced. Too bad no 180s.
Buried in the article were comments that most riders do better on shorter cranks for several reasons. Maybe you should try shorter cranks? I have ridden 170,172.5,175, and 180 cranks but most have been 175. I can't discern a 2.5mm. difference but I can feel 5mm. changes. I can spin 170 at a higher cadence. I had one set of 180mm and could really feel extra torque/leverage to muscle up hills in higher gears but-------I soon developed some knee pain and gave up on any longer than 175.

[donevwil]

Buried in the article were comments that most riders do better on shorter cranks for several reasons. Maybe you should try shorter cranks? I have ridden 170,172.5,175, and 180 cranks but most have been 175. I can't discern a 2.5mm. difference but I can feel 5mm. changes. I can spin 170 at a higher cadence. I had one set of 180mm and could really feel extra torque/leverage to muscle up hills in higher gears but-------I soon developed some knee pain and gave up on any longer than 175.

I'm not going to argue any of the logic/illogic on crank length. For me it's simple, I've been riding 180s for 25 years and have them on all my bikes. Any time I try anything shorter (177.5 included) or something with a wide Q, either my knees and hips bark or my spin is off. I'm sure I could get used to something shorter with enough time, a fit adjustment, etc., but why? Plus it gives me something to hoard.

[Ralph]

All those deflection tests may mean something to some of you, but it doesn't mean much to my old legs. My 06 Chorus cranks still spin good a lot of miles each week.

Not saying it may not be important to some. It's interesting to see how parts are evolving. And learn about the parts I'll move to soon as current stuff wears out.

[beeatnik]

Ralph, newer UT carbon cranks, Hollowgrams and most definitely the THMs provide a similar subjective experience to deep carbon wheels. You'll feel faster and more importantly you'll sense that you'll be able to spin one or two gears higher with the same amount of perceived effort. Pretty nice for old legs, no?

Also, IME, stiffer cranks are nicer climbing in the saddle.

[Ralph]

Ralph, newer UT carbon cranks, Hollowgrams and most definitely the THMs provide a similar subjective experience to deep carbon wheels. You'll feel faster and more importantly you'll sense that you'll be able to spin one or two gears higher with the same amount of perceived effort. Pretty nice for old legs, no?

Also, IME, stiffer cranks are nicer climbing in the saddle.

That would be nice.

[Uncle Jam's Army]

Surprised by the relatively poor showing of the DA cranks. Always thought they were the gold standard for stiffness. Even the Ultegra cranks tested with less deflection.

[chiasticon]

Would like to see how the Hollowgram cranks compare...agreed. and the rival cranks. when stages were working on their power meter, they said the rival crankset was the stiffest they tested. tour magazine said the same in their tests, a few years back. that was last gen (10 spd) though.

however, since fairwheel doesn't sell cannondale and rival is a little too cheap for them to offer, i don't see it happening...

[don compton]

I appreciate advancement in technology, but call me a dinosaur, I just feel at home on my 25yo steel Steve Rex with my crappy TA Zephyr cranks. I had a Specialized Roubaix with FSA Force light cranks. Maybe I could have ridden faster on that bike, but I just enjoy the handling and ride of my old stuff. Now, wheels and tires is another subject.

[beeatnik]

however, since fairwheel doesn't sell cannondale and rival is a little too cheap for them to offer, i don't see it happening...

The test rig was set up for BSA in order to include "universal" fit cranks.

Madcow says the next shootout will include BB30/PF30 cranks (Hollowgrams, Spesh, SRAM Red).

[weiwentg]

Wow, my Chorus ST cranks are a complete POS :p

I won't be upgrading to any of the tested ones any time soon. But this is the sort of stuff that pushes our equipment to get better and better. Respect to Alchemy.

[kgreene10]

Ralph, newer UT carbon cranks, Hollowgrams and most definitely the THMs provide a similar subjective experience to deep carbon wheels. You'll feel faster and more importantly you'll sense that you'll be able to spin one or two gears higher with the same amount of perceived effort. Pretty nice for old legs, no?

Also, IME, stiffer cranks are nicer climbing in the saddle.

I usually have good irony-radar, but not this time. Is this tongue in cheek or is there something I don't know. Carbon and alu cranks feel the same to me.

[beeatnik]

Hollowgrams are alu :banana:

[thirdgenbird]

I like the look of those praxis cranks. If I were doing a new build, I would get those, chorus 2015 shifters/derailleurs, and then use the money saved on ee brakes. The whole package should perform nicely for the price.

[beeatnik]

thirdgenbird, I like your style.

[thirdgenbird]

thirdgenbird, I like your style.

Thanks. One of these days, I will break down and do it. A zetti or peg would be ideal.

[beeatnik]

When I saw those Praxis cranks, I thought about putting them on my CAAD10. I've got a poor man's version of your build idea. Chorus shifters, fd/rd and S950 SRAMz BB30 cranks finished off with Planet X brakes. Um, picking up the cranks, BB and EE brakes would represent about what I spent for my complete bike sans wheels...

[thirdgenbird]

You do have the budget version. You even have large tires crammed into it like I would.

[rain dogs]

I wonder why Fairfield has never gone and tested Rotor 3d+. Comparing the 3DF to the others is like comparing centaur or rival.

The 3d+ claims to be stiffer, and it's somewhere around 60 grams lighter. Graphics are changed as well. I'd be curious to see Rotor's top end crank. Also would be curious about the hollowgram.

[thirdgenbird]

I wonder why Fairfield has never gone and tested Rotor 3d+. Comparing the 3DF to the others is like comparing centaur or rival.

The 3d+ claims to be stiffer, and it's somewhere around 60 grams lighter. Graphics are changed as well. I'd be curious to see Rotor's top end crank. Also would be curious about the hollowgram.

Comparable to rival? They considerably more than red, force, ultegra, praxis, and are on par with dura ace. I would love to see the 3d+ in the mix but the 3df is far from an outlier.

[fogrider]

Stiffness is what counts, wight is not so important. you may think your legs may not have the power to really go hard, but a stiffer crank will feel more responsive.

[rain dogs]

Comparable to rival? They considerably more than red, force, ultegra, praxis, and are on par with dura ace. I would love to see the 3d+ in the mix but the 3df is far from an outlier.

Rotor 3dF is not a top offering from the Rotor brand

I'm not comparing on price, I'm comparing on the brand hierarchy.

Chorus is an expensive crank too, but if they only reviewed Chorus (which is also missing) people would say: where is super record?

My point is, the top offering crank of each brand should be a given in any comparison of top end cranks. 3dF was below the 3D and the 3D+.

[oldpotatoe]

All those deflection tests may mean something to some of you, but it doesn't mean much to my old legs. My 06 Chorus cranks still spin good a lot of miles each week.

Not saying it may not be important to some. It's interesting to see how parts are evolving. And learn about the parts I'll move to soon as current stuff wears out.

As do my 1987 Record cranks on a(horrors), square taper BB.

Tests like this are always 'interesting'. Taking perceptions and urban legends, marketing(lighter-stiffer!!), mix with $, and get opinions.

Then these gents put numbers to all of it and then.....nice to ponder, I guess but in the grand scheme of things, it means little to the average 'enthusiast' or even pro. I doubt(hope), that nobody reads this article and then drops $1500 for a crank..based on the teeny differences between these tested cranks. Also pretty sure no pro is going to 'buy' a crank, paint to match sponsor's brand..so he can 'win' on his next sprint. At least I hope not.

[stephenmarklay]

Pretty interesting. I never thought about this really.

In the end what matters most to me is shifting. I don't care if I my cranks are 1.X% more efficient if every time I shift I am worried about chain suck or the like. Ask Andy Schleck what he thinks :)

[numbskull]

Fascinating reading but they need a real world power output test using riders.

Energy is not lost in a spring, it is stored. Deflection in a crank is stored energy and (as they discuss) will be returned somewhere in the pedal stroke. This is almost certainly occurs before the bottom of the stroke. Accordingly deflection stores some of the energy provided in the most powerful portion of the stroke and releases it as power diminishes. Effectively it smoothes out the power transfer from your legs to the pedals. Doing so ought to reduce instantaneous peak stresses on your ligaments and muscles.

While a stiffer crank might feel faster it may just be producing similar total power with more strain on your legs. In a sprint stiffness may have a slight advantage whereas in sustained pedaling the more compliant crank might delay muscle fatigue, hence a real world test would be interesting.

[thirdgenbird]

Rotor 3dF is not a top offering from the Rotor brand

I'm not comparing on price, I'm comparing on the brand hierarchy.

Chorus is an expensive crank too, but if they only reviewed Chorus (which is also missing) people would say: where is super record?

My point is, the top offering crank of each brand should be a given in any comparison of top end cranks. 3dF was below the 3D and the 3D+.

I get that, but just because it isn't the top offering, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be compared. I agree that the 3d+ should have been in the mix.

What I disagree with, is that the 3df is comparable to rival just because there are several levels above it. The 3df is right with the Ultegra and force crankset in weight and deflection at a much higher price. Just because it is at the bottom of the rotor hierarchy, it doesn't become a competitor to the bottom of the groupsets. Hierarchy in ones own brand is meaningless. That's like comparing a Lincoln mks and bmw 7 series just because they are the positioned at the top of each brand.both optioned out, the bmw is twice as much.

What would really be interesting is to see how 3df, 3d, and 3d+ compare and how chorus and record compare. In the Campagnolo example, both cranksets use very similar designs, the record is just hollow where chorus is solid. I wouldn't be surprised if deflection across both brands was similar.

[SpokeValley]

I do agree with his comment on the Campagnolo UT 5th chainwheel bolt. It's a huge PIA compared to others. I like my crankset for all of the other reasons, though.

[Gummee]

When I went from square taper to Octalink I could feel the stiffness gain immediately.

...for about a week.

Then they were cranks again.

Everything since has been 'a crankset.' How much stiffer than stiff do you really need?

M

[rain dogs]

I get that, but just because it isn't the top offering, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be compared. I agree that the 3d+ should have been in the mix.

What I disagree with, is that the 3df is comparable to rival just because there are several levels above it.

It sounds like we mostly agree. Ideally there would be this data for every crank out there, but that's probably unrealistic.

I just find it misleading a little if brands aren't all represented by their best products. I think it's a safe assumption that the higher in the brand hierarchy the better stiffness to weight (assuming Rotor does it's own testing and I think that's a safe assumption). And if this isn't true (S/W), that would be interesting to know as well.

Rotor seems to fair quite poorly in the results, but they are testing a poorer crank from that brand. We don't know if rotor makes an inferior product from these tests vs the mean, or if their low end is lower and their high end is superb?

Maybe my statement about rival is misleading, it's was just s throw away line about me not knowing how to gauge rotor from these tests, because I have no idea where their ceiling is.... I only know about their floor.

[Uncle Jam's Army]

How much stiffer than stiff do you really need?

M

As much help as I can get. Excuse me while I go take my blue pill.

[thirdgenbird]

It sounds like we mostly agree. Ideally there would be this data for every crank out there, but that's probably unrealistic.

I just find it misleading a little if brands aren't all represented by their best products. I think it's a safe assumption that the higher in the brand hierarchy the better stiffness to weight (assuming Rotor does it's own testing and I think that's a safe assumption). And if this isn't true (S/W), that would be interesting to know as well.

You would think. but it also wouldn't shock me at all if some of the more expensive cranksets focus on weight (something anyone can easily measure) and stiffness somewhat goes out the window. Look at lighting vs record UT. lighting scores better in stiffness to weight, but record ut is considerably stiffer and lighting is considerably lighter. Real world, which one is truly better? I'm guessing record ut.