4-arm cranks: the future of groupsets?

[jasonification]

I've noticed recently that a lot of the big groupset manufacturers have become enamored with 4-arm cranksets. Aesthetically, this isn't my favorite look. However, I understand that it allows a more universal application of chainrings as well as greater weight savings (-1 arm!). What are your thoughts and how are you doing with regards to this..technological advancement?

[tuscanyswe]

I've noticed recently that a lot of the big groupset manufacturers have become enamored with 4-arm cranksets. Aesthetically, this isn't my favorite look. However, I understand that it allows a more universal application of chainrings as well as greater weight savings (-1 arm!). What are your thoughts and how are you doing with regards to this..technological advancement?

I agree not as nice looking as previous gens.
These days replacement chainrings aren't much cheaper then a new crankset which is faster and easier to shift than chainrings anyways. So its theoretically a good idea but the usability with the current pricing of chainrings vs cranks makes it meh imo. Usually one can find a good deal on a new crank, very few deals on chainrings around which makes em so close in price. This is for campy no idea how shimano price their rings vs cranks.

[livingminimal]

I don't really think about things like this. Dura Ace looks fine. it's what I use. I cant tell the performance difference between that and Ultegra.

[cachagua]

Aesthetically, this isn't my favorite look...

As ugly as home-made sin.

[sandyrs]

Why do people care so much about this? Seems like it comes up pretty regularly. Aside from them being functionally better I don't even think the four arm cranks are ugly.

[FlashUNC]

I'm rather partial to them myself. They've totally grown on me.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1709/24940834646_1ce73441e3_b.jpg

[Ronsonic]

Why do people care so much about this? Seems like it comes up pretty regularly. Aside from them being functionally better I don't even think the four arm cranks are ugly.


Sincere question: How are they functionally better? Less weight?

They are ugly. Mostly not the fact of four arms, but more the aesthetic decisions the manufacturers have made when designing them. That metal horseshoe crab on the bottom Shimano bikes is pretty gruesome.

[spartanKid]

Why do people care so much about this? Seems like it comes up pretty regularly. Aside from them being functionally better I don't even think the four arm cranks are ugly.

I have to agree. They're just *different* and people hate change. The ability to run anything from CX to TT gearing on one set of arms is pretty nice.

[pbarry]

I'm rather partial to them myself. They've totally grown on me.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1709/24940834646_1ce73441e3_b.jpg

Well, even a three arm crank would look good on a DS with osso buco stays..

[Mikej]

I'm rather partial to them myself. They've totally grown on me.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1709/24940834646_1ce73441e3_b.jpg

Sweet Santa...

[bshell]

four arm cranks and rings....aesthetically hideous.

[d_douglas]

I've got no issues with them. Like most things, they've grown on me. It's the 9spd. Ultegra cranks that make me grimace - so boring!

[11.4]

Dura Ace 7900/7950 cranks were some of the prettiest ever, and they had a finish that actually had great durability.

What four-arm cranks really have going for them is that they let the manufacturer exploit the benefits of hollow chainrings the most. You could do fine with three or potentially even two arms, if the market would buy them, because the hollow chainring design, as it's improved from 7800 to 9000, is incredibly strong and self-supporting. The stability of shifting on 9000 is the class standard, and it comes down to the chainrings. It's also why the 9000 chainrings are so damned expensive. There isn't really that much weight savings in losing one hollow arm because it takes more weight in the chainring to achieve a net improvement in stiffness; I would say, however, that Shimano has evolved those chainrings to take off a lot of weight. In a brand that just uses flat milled stock without a three-dimensional design like Shimano does, they are imitating Dura Ace but would probably be better off with five arms. Think about the persistent SRAM Red chainring issues as a case in point.

[adamhell]

i hated it at first but it has totally grown on me, especially after putting 6800 on my bike. it looks sick

[beeatnik]

9000 and 6800 are badazz (even 105 looks qoo). the Campy Revolution cranks are aight. Basically butterfaces. The arms are the hot body and the rings are the challenged visage.

[Joxster]

1697920695

Cpampag have been running four arm spiders since the 80's

[Peter P.]

The marketing people need to foist something new on us so we'll continue to make their boat payments.

Next up: 3-arm and 6-arm cranks. You heard it here first, folks!

[Joxster]

The marketing people need to foist something new on us so we'll continue to make their boat payments.

Next up: 3-arm and 6-arm cranks. You heard it here first, folks!

1697920696

Here you go Peter ;)

[oldpotatoe]

Why do people care so much about this? Seems like it comes up pretty regularly. Aside from them being functionally better I don't even think the four arm cranks are ugly.

I don't get it either. Cranks that can easily go from 'standard' to 'compact' to 'mid compact', or something else(50/39, what I use), less $ for the rider and fewer skus for the manufacturers. I guess those that have an older DA or SR crank enjoy spending $$lot$$ for that trip to the alps, once in their lifetime..

[ahumblecycler]

Like others have stated, my biggest beef with the 4-arm design the need to use that manufacturer's rings. While I feel that most companies have stepped up thir game and are producing better rings (Shimano being the benchmark), I still prefer having the option to make choices based on needs and economics.

Me, I am rocking two TURN Zayante cranks and could not be happier.

[11.4]

1697920695

Cpampag have been running four arm spiders since the 80's

This is actually five-arm. The fifth arm is hidden behind the crank arm and has its own chainring bolt.

[tv_vt]

I don't mind them. I really like the new standard 110 BCD.

But have to say, the 7900-7950 DA cranks were quite nice looking.

[Joxster]

This is actually five-arm. The fifth arm is hidden behind the crank arm and has its own chainring bolt.

But the look is the same as the "New" styled cranks, just pointing out that look has been around since the 80's

[benb]

I really love the 6800 crankset I have. Works great and I think it looks great too.

Haven't had to try swapping rings to get different gearing but I like the idea of it. I've already got enough cranksets hanging around my garage!

[bfd]

1697920696

Here you go Peter ;)

But this one is available NOW:

https://janheine.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/rhcrankrl.jpg

At $435, it is not cheap! But it is supposedly lighter than a Campy Record carbon crank (1st gen, square taper). Hurry, operators are waiting....

BTW, a six arm crankset has already been done too:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1zXNujLIljc/TQ03LNNefLI/AAAAAAAAAIA/u1Y-Hd-frqk/s1600/78+Colnago+003.jpg

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp328/velosniper/2712726176_5ee98fe715.jpg


Good Luck!

[Black Dog]

I don't mind them. I really like the new standard 110 BCD.

But have to say, the 7900-7950 DA cranks were quite nice looking.

We will have to agree to disagree on this point. :D

[thirdgenbird]

We will have to agree to disagree on this point. :D

Yep. I think the 7900 crankset is one of the ugliest things in road cycling. The desgin and finish both look wrong. It has aged poorly too. It looks like the past's interpretation of the future. 9000 may not be be classically pretty, but it has clean lines and a respectable finish. 9000 works in vintage steel or modern carbon. 7900 cranks rarely look good on anything.

[Uncle Jam's Army]

9000 and 6800 are badazz (even 105 looks qoo). the Campy Revolution cranks are aight. Basically butterfaces. The arms are the hot body and the rings are the challenged visage.

Translation please.😜

[beeatnik]

^11s Shimano cranks have a nice aesthetic. New Campy cranks look good but the chainrings are ugly.

[zennmotion]

http://www.suginoltd.co.jp/us/products/road/ox.html#pnH4OX901DClassicCompactPlus

This will go on my new lugged steel custom, where the 4 arm cranks look just wrong IMO. Unfortunately more $$$ than 9000 DA but many more options down to 30t and the rings are less expensive than Shimano 11 speed.

[donevwil]

Negotiating the Campy website is torture. Have they finally written off 180mm cranks in any form ? They never did make a compact, but last I checked they still offered 180 in standard. SRAM has dropped 180 in Rival as well. What's left ? Appears only Dura-Ace.

[Mark McM]

I don't get it either. Cranks that can easily go from 'standard' to 'compact' to 'mid compact', or something else(50/39, what I use), less $ for the rider and fewer skus for the manufacturers. I guess those that have an older DA or SR crank enjoy spending $$lot$$ for that trip to the alps, once in their lifetime..

I don't get the hate either. In addition to the above pluses, they have the same BB standards and pedal threads as the 5 arm cranks they replace, so there's not much down side.

[choke]

I find them hideous, repulsive and repugnant. There's no way I would ever own a bike with one....I would rather walk first. It's a sad day when I find that Sham has the best looking crank from the major companies.

To your title, yes, unfortunately they probably are the future 'standard', at least for the next few years. Then the companies will have to come up with some 'new and improved' idea.

I don't get it either. Cranks that can easily go from 'standard' to 'compact' to 'mid compact', or something else(50/39, what I use), less $ for the rider and fewer skus for the manufacturers. I guess those that have an older DA or SR crank enjoy spending $$lot$$ for that trip to the alps, once in their lifetime..The bolded part is the primary reason IMO. One can easily change rings on a Campy CT or other 110 BCD crank to go between 'standard', 'compact' and 'mid-compact' if they desire so there was no reason to come up with a new design.

[Mark McM]

Like others have stated, my biggest beef with the 4-arm design the need to use that manufacturer's rings. While I feel that most companies have stepped up thir game and are producing better rings (Shimano being the benchmark), I still prefer having the option to make choices based on needs and economics.

Me, I am rocking two TURN Zayante cranks and could not be happier.

Just like with 5 arm chainrings, there is no doubt that aftermarket manufacturers will produce 4 arm chainrings. TA and Stronglight already show them on their web pages, we just have to wait for the distribution channels to start stocking them.

[bfd]

Just like with 5 arm chainrings, there is no doubt that aftermarket manufacturers will produce 4 arm chainrings. TA and Stronglight already show them on their web pages, we just have to wait for the distribution channels to start stocking them.

Yup, it is already happening:

new Shimano TA chainrings:

http://www.wiggle.com/shimano-ultegra-fc-6800-inner-chainring/

http://www.wiggle.com/ta-x110-inner-chainring-for-shimano/

New Campy TA chainrings:

http://www.wiggle.com/?s=TA+X112

http://www.wiggle.com/?s=TA+X145

Good Luck!

[ahumblecycler]

I happily acknowledge my ignorance :beer:

[saab2000]

I happily acknowledge my ignorance :beer:

I'm happy to acknowledge that I just don't care. When I ride I want the stuff to work.

Oh, and changing the old Campagnolo from compact to mid-compact to standard wasn't happening with Campagnolo rings.

I am indifferent on the aesthetic and don't find them to be beautiful but I don't find them to be ugly either.

[FlashUNC]

Negotiating the Campy website is torture. Have they finally written off 180mm cranks in any form ? They never did make a compact, but last I checked they still offered 180 in standard. SRAM has dropped 180 in Rival as well. What's left ? Appears only Dura-Ace.

Yes, done and dusted.

[oldpotatoe]

I find them hideous, repulsive and repugnant. There's no way I would ever own a bike with one....I would rather walk first. It's a sad day when I find that Sham has the best looking crank from the major companies.

To your title, yes, unfortunately they probably are the future 'standard', at least for the next few years. Then the companies will have to come up with some 'new and improved' idea.

The bolded part is the primary reason IMO. One can easily change rings on a Campy CT or other 110 BCD crank to go between 'standard', 'compact' and 'mid-compact' if they desire so there was no reason to come up with a new design.

Okay and geez lowezzz. Rather walk ehh?? wow.

'Cept chainrings these days, at least from Campag and shimano, are optimized for EPS and Di2..which means STIFF. A TA 53t ring on a DA or older Record compact crank 'may' be stiff enough for legendary shifts up and down the chainrings but...maybe not.

Gots a spam crank thats 130mm BCD, wanna to ride Alps? need a compact?

yer $

And for right below..yup, tool, not trophy..I don't even match the color of my tires or saddle to bar tape(horrors!!)

I'd love to swap my Athena compact crank for a 2015/6 Chorus one..I think they are keen.

[berserk87]

I noticed the 4-arm standard when I mounted my DA 9000 cranks. I have not noticed them since. I don't study my cranks other than to inspect for defects occasionally. Count me in the crowd that is surprised that crank arm number is a thing.

I ride my bike and use it as a training tool. I even race on it. I never plan on taking it to the prom. That said, I wish I had gotten to ride my prom date. That's another story.