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 )


Anybody use the FSA Compact Crankset?(18 posts)

Anybody use the FSA Compact Crankset?Mariowannabe
Nov 19, 2003 3:39 PM
I'm contemplating upgrading my current Record 10 set up. I currently have a 53-39 coupled with a 13-29 cogset. I'm thinking of migrating it to a FSA 50-34 with a 12-25. I think the benefits will be better shifting (moving from a med cage to a short cage rear, as well as quicker shifts up front), and a closer gear range in my primary spead range.

Anybody done the Tyler switch? + or -?

Thanks,
My new (first) bike has itpedalAZ
Nov 19, 2003 4:09 PM
I can climb the big hill near my home with the granny gear. Thank goodness. When I'm not going up a big incline, I am basically in the big ring all the time. I doubt I could spin up a 53x12, so topping out at 50x12 seems adequate. I got 2 cassettes, 12-27 and 12-25. The 12-27 is on it now.

The shifts are fine up front.
I've got 'emSevenGuy
Nov 19, 2003 4:17 PM
I'm running a set on my Seven with a dura ace 12-25 cassette. I can't say enough good things about this combo. I have virtually the same gearing that I had with a 12-27 and closer ratios to boot. I'm a spinner and the 34t lets me spin up our hills 15-20rpm's faster than with my 53/39. Furthermore I don't spin out the 50. It's not for everyone but for us mere (and aging) mortals it's a great combo.
not quite right....C-40
Nov 19, 2003 4:37 PM
The difference in the lowest gears is only 6%, so you would be able to pedal only about 5 rpm faster, if your normal climbing cadence is 80-90.

All you're really doing is taking 6% off the top end and putting it on the low end.
no advantage....C-40
Nov 19, 2003 4:23 PM
You haven't done your homework.

You won't get a closer gear range with a 12-25 unless you consider the lowest 3 cogs your "primary spread range". The only difference in the cogs is at the very low end where you have a 23-26-29, compared to a 21-23-25.

You won't get quicker shifting up front with a 16 tooth spread instead of 14. If anything, the front shifting should be worse, since you will be exceedeing the stated 14 tooth capacity of the front derailleur. The total capacity of a short cage RD is only 27T and your setup would have a 29T difference. To be truly safe, you should continue the use of a medium cage RD.

There are folks who have successfuly used a short cage RD with a 13-29 cassette, FYI. Whether it will work depends on the position of the derailleur mount, relative to the rear cogs. Not all frames are the same.

You are also not gaining any lower gear with this setup. The 39/39 and 34/25 ratios are virtually identical. The top gear ratio (50/12) is only 2% greater.

I have one Campy Record bike with a 53/39, short cage RD and 12-25 cassette. I don't notice that it shifts any better than my other bike with a 53/39/30 triple, a medium cage RD and 12-25 cassette.

After riding the Colorado mountains since late July, I've come to the conclusion that my 53/39/30 triple with a 12-25 cassette is the best way to cover a wide gear range. You get 12% lower gearing than a 39/29 without sacrificing the top end and the shifting is as good as you could ask for. I like this setup so well that I just converted my second bike to the same triple setup.
hmmm.....SevenGuy
Nov 19, 2003 4:42 PM
1. It's much lighter than a DA triple group.
2. I've had absolutely no problem with shifting.
3. I've seen more problems with FD shifting with triples than anything I've ever dealt with in our shop....but my wife's DA triple does work quite well.
4. Personally I like not having to work the FD on climbs.
5. I like the versatility of swapping out 12-23, 12-25 and 12-27 cassettes. These with the compact give me anything I need.
6. They look good :-)
So maybe it ultimately lies beyond the actual numbers or whatever works for ya -- go with it.
apples and oranges....C-40
Nov 19, 2003 6:04 PM
An FSA carbon triple with Ti BB weighs about the same as a Record double. For guys who need gears lower than a 39/25 to worry about a few ounces is silly, IMO.

I have no problem with the front shifting of the triple, it's no more difficult to setup than a double. It does require more FD trimming than a double, but with Campy ergo levers, it's quite simple.

I don't use my FD on climbs either. If it's a "real" climb (mountain not a hill), I get in the little chainring and stay there for up to an hour at a time. Never seen a hill I couldn't master with a 39/25.

With a triple and 12-25 10 speed you never need to swap cassettes, I have every gear (and more) that your double setup has with three cassettes.

The FSA Team Issue carbon crank looks pretty fine on Colnago C-40.

If all I rode was hills, I'd ride a double too.
re: Anybody use the FSA Compact Crankset?dickruthlynn
Nov 19, 2003 5:27 PM
I have a FSA 34/50 on a Gisallo with a 12/27 and noticed a big improvement. But then again I'm 64.
questionmorkm
Nov 19, 2003 5:33 PM
I think the 50/34 crankset is interesting....a question I have is will that crank, combined with an 11x19 in the back, be a lighter and more effecient combo than a traditional 53/39 with 12x23? I want to run the combos through a gear calculator, but my brain suggests that the FSA combo would be almost the same....anyone have any ideas and any sites with great gear calculators?
Y'all head over to this site and......SevenGuy
Nov 19, 2003 5:40 PM
calculate your hearts out and draw your own conclusions.
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
Calculate your own gear ratio.............Mike Tea
Nov 19, 2003 5:43 PM
.....inches. Here is the simple formula -

Gear inches = Chainring teeth x wheel diameter (I use 27") divided by Sprocket teeth.
Today I did a semi-Tyler.Mike Tea
Nov 19, 2003 5:39 PM
My new bike (Argon Platinum) came standard with Mario-sized 53/39 and 11/23 gearing. At my age and on my terrain I would have had a whole pile of wasted gears at both ends of the range. 53/11? Get real.

I was coming from 48/42 and 13/21 on my old bike.

The dealer swapped out the DA cassette to a slightly more friendly 12/21 but there wasn't much leeway with chainrings as Mr. Shimano must think everyone rides at 30mph with 45mph sprints all the time. All that's available are 53 & 52. That's not much of a reduction.

Then I got e-mailing back & forth with my ol' buddy SevenGuy who's here on this thread and he mentioned TA rings. I've been well aware of TA for over 40 years but they didn't enter my consciousness during my gearing search. Thanks Bud.

I found a goldmine at two places -

Peter White Cycles (USA) and Bicycle Specialties just up the road in Toronto.

Today my 50/39 Alize rings arrived to give me semi-Tyler gearing. They are very nicely finished rings and a perfect fit on my DA cranks. They even have Shimano's shifting aids built in.

So anyone with 130 bolt circle cranks can have anything from 56t to 48t on the outer and from 44 to 38 on the inner. Of course TA make rings for just about every other bolt circle too.

Take *that* Mr. Shimano.
TA rings?Scotttheroadie
Nov 20, 2003 8:04 AM
What are they and do you have a link?
You could................Mike Tea
Nov 20, 2003 8:53 AM
.....have Googled Peter White cycles but here I did it for ya. Nice stuff.
re: Anybody use the FSA Compact Crankset?lithiapark
Nov 19, 2003 7:01 PM
I have the FSA 50/34, 12-27 cassette, Ultregra shifters and derailleurs (RD is med cage) and Wipperman chain. Shifts well, and I think takes less shifting than my bike with a triple(I can use the whole cassette from either chainring without retrimming if I need to in a pinch although I don't go out of my way to cross chain). The FSA is well built(I've used them on my MTB), are as light as Record Carbon, and look nice. Since I'm not a professional racer, the lack of some top end down quite steep hills doesn't bother me. There must be enough top end for folks like Tyler. Does anyone know what cassette he was running in the TdF? Mostly I didn't want a triple because I didn't want to look like a grandpa, but needed a lower gear because I am. Please don't disturb my delusion :)
Great debate - Thanks!!!Mariowannabe
Nov 19, 2003 8:23 PM
Like C-40, I have a C-40 but I can't see putting a tripple on it. I rode in the Pyrenees this summer with a bunch of guys who had tripples, and I don't want the ability to ride that slow - 'cause I know I'd use it;-)

The gearing I'd really like is the 50-17, fitting in where a 53-18 would. I'd use that in the hilly, windy situations that I often find myself in.

Thanks again for the input.
I like the idea of a 50 chain ring up front.Psalm 147-10_11
Nov 20, 2003 8:34 AM
I've been intrigued by Tyler's set up and have been considering it as well.

In the meantime, I'm building up a new cyclocross bike (steel Pinarello) and came accross some old Campy Racing T cranks that use 50-40-30 rings. I'm going to take the granny ring off and use the cranks with just the 50-40 on the cross bike. At some point, I'll probably also switch out my 53 on the road bike to see how I like it on the roads as well.

During my search for chainrings for my cross bike, I discovered that TA and Salsa make rings for Campy (135 BCD) down to a size 48.

http://store.yahoo.com/cyclocrossworld/spectapinout.html

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/chainrings.html#135
Cinelli StarshipSTI Guy
Nov 20, 2003 9:18 AM
I just built a Cinelli Starship and opted for the FSA Compact Crankset. I'm using a Campy 13-27 cluster with the Record medium cage. I've just had two test rides so far with no problems. I definitely am going to like this setup!
Keep the rubber side down.