RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Chorus cranks cost more, weigh more also??.(4 posts)

Chorus cranks cost more, weigh more also??.pessot
May 7, 2003 9:09 AM
I know this is a weight weenie kind of question.

I always thought that paying more for components got you lower weight. Why then do Chorus cranks which cost more than Centaur or Veloce also weigh more?
One benefit is...Nater
May 7, 2003 9:40 AM
you're able to use the Chorus and Record BBs with the Chorus crankset. That overall combination, especially if you use the Record BB is lighter than a Centaur crankset/AC-H BB combination. The Centaur and lower level cranksets use a 111mm BB spindle so you're stuck with the AC-H BB or a Phil Wood($$$$). I recently went through this when building my road bike, weighed all of my options and got the Centaur/AC-H combination. Who knows, maybe I'll penny up for the Phil Wood BB when this one wears out.
The centaur crankLeroy
May 7, 2003 9:49 AM
and phil wood - either steel/alloy or ti/alloy - combination is a winner. That's a good plan.
re: Chorus cranks cost more, weigh more also??.BergMann
May 7, 2003 9:43 AM
Assuming Chorus really does weigh more, my best guess would be that they're slightly beefed up for stiffness. For years, Shimano LX cranksets were lighter than XTR & XT cranksets, but were notably flexier (at least the pre-hollowtech models were).
Decide what's more important to you: $ and weight, or rigidity.