#1
|
||||
|
||||
FSA chainring puzzle
FSA labels their 110bcm chainrings 50/34, 52/36, etc. Why? Does this mean that a 50-tooth ring labelled 50/34 is incompatible with a 36?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The big ring is ramped and pinned to shift best in the listed combinations.
Although there is some difference in the ramps, I doubt that switching from a 34 to a 36 would cause serious problems, just not as perfect as the matched set. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Campagnolo and Shimano also label their rings this way too...
...for the reason Dave pointed out... "compatible" isn't an on-off switch, there is a range of what works ideally, and what you can still get away with. It's about tolerances. -g |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I'd agree with Dave and Grant - it's more a range of tolerance and not an on/off thing.
I started with a 50/34 on my FSA SLK MegaExo, and found the 34 was too light an inner gear. Switched to a 36 without finding a 50 marked "50/36". Shifting is good, but isn't quite as precise as when it was matched with the 34. I find this noticeable on trying to shift from the 36 to the 50 while under load. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
ps
i find they all work aok. i use freakin suntour rings on a da10 bike and they shift fine... they even "get machined" on the back w/ ramps after awhile. dont worry about it. anything now works multiple times better than the best stuff 30 years ago. eg. cheapest trashy shimano atb stuff works , say, 50 times better than nuovo record in 1975. its like the richter scale in earthquakes. hmmm, the new ultegra stuff ranks as a 175. means it works 175* times better than nuovo from the past. * but it looks 175 times worse... esp the crank. |
|
|