# How does chainset quality affect ride



## latusaki (15 Jun 2015)

I am trying to find how the quality of chainsets can differ, and what performance gains you can get.
Correct me if I am wrong, by chainset I refer to the cranks that hold the pedals, and the big gears connected to the cranks. It feels like this is a quite simple structure, so how does it affect performance?

And for a hard example: My bike, fuji tread 1.1 has the following chainset 'Oval Concepts 520, forged 6066 arms' ( couldnt find specification anywhere). How could my ride benefit if I upgraded to shimano tiagra(which matches the rest of components)


----------



## Drago (15 Jun 2015)

What do you mean by 'quality'? In consumer terms it means fitness for the intended purpose.


----------



## simon.r (15 Jun 2015)

Tiagra will probably weigh a bit less, be slightly stiffer and shifts will be a bit smoother, but in practical terms I doubt you'd notice any significant difference.

Looks are subjective.

Check BB compatibility before buying anything.


----------



## latusaki (15 Jun 2015)

I am not looking to buy anything, I just wasn't sure what separates a good crankset from a bad one (other than price), and how this affects performance. Is it only weight? Also, slightly stiffer (for the cranks) means you got slightly more effective energy transition?


----------



## latusaki (15 Jun 2015)

Drago said:


> What do you mean by 'quality'? In consumer terms it means fitness for the intended purpose.


It appears there are categories. I am asking what separates a Claris crankset from a Tiagra/Ultegra. Is it only weight?


----------



## Citius (15 Jun 2015)

Other than weight differences, there is no performance difference between different cranksets. They all do the same job, in the same way.

Some claim benefits from oval rings, but that's more a matter of personal preference.


----------



## jack smith (15 Jun 2015)

I assume you mean better performing, generally they get stiffer as the price increases this lets you shift under load abit easier and also transfers your power more efficently to the bike, useless if you have a good crankset and rubbish flexy frame though, i was going to directly compare sram rival and sram red cranks thisweek as i was interested but ill be getting rid of the bike mow before i can test it


----------



## jack smith (15 Jun 2015)

Citius said:


> Other than weight differences, there is no performance difference between different cranksets.


Nah the chainset on my mtb was horrid you had to stop peddaling to shift the chainrings flexed so much


----------



## HarryTheDog (15 Jun 2015)

Looks like fuji are using the same cranksets on a 105/ultegra equipped bikes. So maybe your upgrade to tiagra might be a downgrade?http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/reviews/road-bikes/fuji-roubaix-1-1


----------



## Citius (15 Jun 2015)

jack smith said:


> Nah the chainset on my mtb was horrid you had to stop peddaling to shift the chainrings flexed so much



How would stopping pedalling in order to shift gears work on a bike with derailleurs?


----------



## simon.r (15 Jun 2015)

Some years ago I had Middleburn cranks on a singlespeed MTB and found them too stiff for my liking. I'm sure they were more efficient at transferring power, but I didn't like the 'feel' of them.


----------



## jack smith (15 Jun 2015)

You had to stop pedalling flick the shifter then gently turn your feet to get it to shift, swapping it to a standard shimano crank instead of the suntour one sorted it


----------



## gbb (15 Jun 2015)

One thing I noticed instantly with my then new Campag Veloce crankset with MPS ( microshift precision shifting) chainrings was how slick the changes are...one shift, snick, straight onto the selected ring. 
I always noticed on previous bikes when id fitted aftermarket chainrings (such as Dural rings)..the slight loss of clean shifting. Its a balance between cost effective rings that sacrifice efficiency and rings that have had a reasonable amount of development...but the cost reflects that. And thats just with modest quality chainsets.


----------



## gbb (15 Jun 2015)

We often talk about possible performance gains, be it wheels, cranksets, etc etc but sometimes you can't (or shouldn't) try to measure the benefit in speed gains, but rather appreciate the feel of better quality...whether that feel is through stiffer wheels, lighter wheels, stiffer cranksets, cleaner shiftng chain rings etc etc etc.
I got semi serious on a cro-mo framed bike, heavy, basic, strong. 20 years later im riding a carbon bike with much better wheels, components etc etc. Does any of that make me faster, not really.....but the ride quality and pleasure of ownership of the bike or its components is immesurably better. Thats sometimes what youre paying for.


----------



## simon.r (15 Jun 2015)

gbb said:


> We often talk about possible performance gains, be it wheels, cranksets, etc etc but sometimes you can't (or shouldn't) try to measure the benefit in speed gains, but rather appreciate the feel of better quality...whether that feel is through stiffer wheels, lighter wheels, stiffer cranksets, cleaner shiftng chain rings etc etc etc.
> I got semi serious on a cro-mo framed bike, heavy, basic, strong. 20 years later im riding a carbon bike with much better wheels, components etc etc. Does any of that make me faster, not really.....but the ride quality and pleasure of ownership of the bike or its components is immesurably better. Thats sometimes what youre paying for.



I agree entirely. My titanium framed, carbon forked, Ultegra kitted out 'best' bike is worthy of a much better rider than me, but it really is a joy to ride. Even minor servicing like tweaking the gears or adjusting the brakes is a pleasure because of the quality of the components.


----------



## Drago (15 Jun 2015)

You're getting quality confused with standard of design and finish.


----------



## ianrauk (15 Jun 2015)

simon.r said:


> I agree entirely. My titanium framed, carbon forked, Ultegra kitted out 'best' bike is worthy of a much better rider than me, but it really is a joy to ride. Even minor servicing like tweaking the gears or adjusting the brakes is a pleasure because of the quality of the components.




Spot on my friend.. spot on.
I could have wrote what you just did...


----------



## Spoked Wheels (15 Jun 2015)

Citius said:


> Other than weight differences, there is no performance difference between different cranksets. They all do the same job, in the same way.
> 
> Some claim benefits from oval rings, but that's more a matter of personal preference.



I upgraded from 105 to Dura Ace and there is a small difference in weight but the difference that I'm interested in is stiffness. With the 105 when riding off the saddle the chain would rub on the derailleur cage..... not much but enough to annoy me  the Dura Ace is stiffer and I get no chain rubbing at all.


----------



## MichaelW2 (16 Jun 2015)

Spoked Wheels said:


> I upgraded from 105 to Dura Ace



was that 105 a Hollowtech II version ?
Lots of crank stiffness data here.
Note that stiffness is resistance to deflection under load. If you don't have the strength or weight to deflect a crank, then a stiffer one will have no advantage.
Chainring quality does make a difference, to durability, shifting and stiffness (for big ring).


----------



## slowmotion (16 Jun 2015)

The more you spend on the components, the better you think you ride.

That's all.

It's rather like HiFi really.


----------



## bpsmith (16 Jun 2015)

I have seen many a post, by the usual suspects, on here saying "other than weight" they're all the same and then saying "weight" hardly affects" your cycling experience. It has been the same response, regardless of component. It's getting boring now. 

I bet the culprits aren't riding the cheapest bike they can find though, despite that being the correct bike to have, based in their posts.


----------



## KneesUp (16 Jun 2015)

bpsmith said:


> I have seen many a post, by the usual suspects, on here saying "other than weight" they're all the same and then saying "weight" hardly affects" your cycling experience. It has been the same response, regardless of component. It's getting boring now.
> 
> I bet the culprits aren't riding the cheapest bike they can find though, despite that being the correct bike to have, based in their posts.


I've got a £20 crankset from decathlon on my bike at the moment. It's not the thing that stops me taking on the hour record


----------



## bpsmith (16 Jun 2015)

KneesUp said:


> I've got a £20 crankset from decathlon on my bike at the moment. It's not the thing that stops me taking on the hour record


You're actually following your own logic though, in buying a £20 crank and believing all others wouldn't make any difference to you. That's fair enough.


----------



## KneesUp (16 Jun 2015)

bpsmith said:


> You're actually following your own logic though, in buying a £20 crank and believing all others wouldn't make any difference to you. That's fair enough.



Not quite.... Mine was worn out and I got sick of the gear change so I took the one of my OHs bike as a temporary measure. About 6 months ago. She hasn't noticed yet, but I might need to put some cranks on her bike before we go on holiday


----------



## bpsmith (16 Jun 2015)

KneesUp said:


> Not quite.... Mine was worn out and I got sick of the gear change so I took the one of my OHs bike as a temporary measure. About 6 months ago. She hasn't noticed yet, but I might need to put some cranks on her bike before we go on holiday


So are you simply going to replace hers with another £20 decathlon one and leave yours as is?


----------



## KneesUp (16 Jun 2015)

bpsmith said:


> So are you simply going to replace hers with another £20 decathlon one and leave yours as is?


I was thinking of putting my old one on hers tbh


----------



## accountantpete (16 Jun 2015)

Another with (second hand) Dura Ace (7900) - great stiffness and the improvement is perceptible especially going up hills.


----------



## Spoked Wheels (16 Jun 2015)

MichaelW2 said:


> was that 105 a Hollowtech II version ?
> Lots of crank stiffness data here.
> Note that stiffness is resistance to deflection under load. If you don't have the strength or weight to deflect a crank, then a stiffer one will have no advantage.
> Chainring quality does make a difference, to durability, shifting and stiffness (for big ring).


Yes, the old 105 is the 5700 series. No problem with it other than when riding off the saddle, I got some chain rubbing. I adjusted my fd as best as I could but I never fixed the problem. Conclusion was that the crankset was flexing maybe 2mm. 
The Dura Ace doesn't flex or flex very little, not enough to rub on the fd. No need to adjust the fd at all. It's a little easier to move from one chainring to another but not a huge improvement. 

Weight difference? I can't remember the difference but probably well under 100g. It's welcome as a whole saving....makes the bike 7.5kg which is not bad at all for a large frame.

Does quality make a difference? I think so. If you can afford it then go for it. I don't run everything Dura Ace because some components aren't compatible with my setup. .... for instance I like a large cassette and Dura Ace don't do a medium cage rd and my old 105 rd does a good enough job. 
Did I notice the difference? I did but for a very short time then I just got used to riding the new components. I remember that I was very impressed with the braking power. If I had another bike with 105 brakes then I'm sure I'd notice the difference every time. 
Does it make me faster? No idea but I doubt it very much.... I've never tried to measure the difference. 
Why did I do it if performance gain is small? 
I like good quality things without being stupid about it. I bought nearly everything second hand, in very good condition and at a fraction of the cost I'd pay for new.
I got the look I was looking for. Eliminated the chain rubbing, gained breaking performance and saved a bit of weight.
Would I do it again? Absolutely.


----------



## Citius (16 Jun 2015)

You have to consider how much stiffness you actually need, given the relatively low forces being put through the crank arms in the first place. Even riding up an alpine col, top riders will only be pushing about 20kgf with each pedal stroke - that kind of force is not going to be worrying too many crank sets.


----------



## Tojo (17 Jun 2015)

Spoked Wheels said:


> Yes, the old 105 is the 5700 series. No problem with it other than when riding off the saddle, I got some chain rubbing. I adjusted my fd as best as I could but I never fixed the problem. Conclusion was that the crankset was flexing maybe 2mm.
> The Dura Ace doesn't flex or flex very little, not enough to rub on the fd. No need to adjust the fd at all. It's a little easier to move from one chainring to another but not a huge improvement.
> 
> Weight difference? I can't remember the difference but probably well under 100g. It's welcome as a whole saving....makes the bike 7.5kg which is not bad at all for a large frame.
> ...



I agree, I settled for Ultegra 6800, really wanted a high grade Campag groupset, but the cost dictated, (I got a Ultegra groupset for £440) and I am really impressed with it and I'm now converted, the quality at that price considering that it is only one down from Dura-Ace on manual groupsets, but even so if the funds became available I would build a new bike with a carbon Campag groupset, but at the minute it's pie in the sky


----------



## Nigelnaturist (23 Jun 2015)

Spoked Wheels said:


> Yes, the old 105 is the 5700 series. *No problem with it other than when riding off the saddle, I got some chain rubbing. I adjusted my fd as best as I could but I never fixed the problem. Conclusion was that the crankset was flexing maybe 2mm. *
> The Dura Ace doesn't flex or flex very little, not enough to rub on the fd. No need to adjust the fd at all. It's a little easier to move from one chainring to another but not a huge improvement.
> 
> Weight difference? I can't remember the difference but probably well under 100g. It's welcome as a whole saving....makes the bike 7.5kg which is not bad at all for a large frame.
> ...


Is that with the trim function being used, as I can do the whole 10 gears on my middle ring, with a little noise from the rear on the low rear gear (23th) though not on the cage, and pretty much the whole 10 from the the inner and outer though its push the angle of the chain a bit and I suspect any noise is from that rather than chain rub, chainset a spa cycles own with zircal rings, shifts pretty well too can even push it to 24th difference large to small on the chainset.


----------



## Spoked Wheels (23 Jun 2015)

Yes, even when trimming being used.


----------



## Nigelnaturist (23 Jun 2015)

Spoked Wheels said:


> Yes, even when trimming being used.


Maybe the angle wasn't quite right, it is a difficult thing to set as when you tension the bolt it does move a touch, I think I must have been lucky as it seemed to be spot on first time.


----------



## Spoked Wheels (23 Jun 2015)

Nigelnaturist said:


> Maybe the angle wasn't quite right, it is a difficult thing to set as when you tension the bolt it does move a touch, I think I must have been lucky as it seemed to be spot on first time.


How do you explain that with the Dura Ace Crankset I get no rubbing and I did not touch the dérailleur?


----------



## Nigelnaturist (23 Jun 2015)

Spoked Wheels said:


> How do you explain that with the Dura Ace Crankset I get no rubbing and I did not touch the dérailleur?


let me think, drugs not worn off yet............... thinner chain, manufacturing tolerances, unless its the same chain, changed the bb by any chance if not them stiffer chain ring, unless I can think of something else


----------



## Spoked Wheels (23 Jun 2015)

Nigelnaturist said:


> let me think, drugs not worn off yet............... thinner chain, manufacturing tolerances, unless its the same chain, changed the bb by any chance if not them stiffer chain ring, unless I can think of something else


Nothing else changed.... same BB, same chain and same dereilleur, if fact I didn't have to touch it..... hence my conclusion that there was a little bit of flex from the 105 crankset. 

One bit of important information I forgot to mention is 105 was a 175mm arm length and Dura Ace is 170mm. I doubt 5mm would make such a difference though.


----------



## KneesUp (23 Jun 2015)

Spoked Wheels said:


> Nothing else changed.... same BB, same chain and same dereilleur, if fact I didn't have to touch it..... hence my conclusion that there was a little bit of flex from the 105 crankset.
> 
> One bit of important information I forgot to mention is 105 was a 175mm arm length and Dura Ace is 170mm. I doubt 5mm would make such a difference though.


The 105 could have been slightly loose?
That 5mm of extra leverage is significant?
The FD could have been sticking slightly, and when the cranks were changed it was knocked in such a way that it freed off?


----------



## derrick (23 Jun 2015)

The only thing i have ever noticed when upgrading cranks is a smoother quieter shifting. Maybe my legs are not strong enough to make the rings flex.


----------



## e-rider (23 Jun 2015)

Citius said:


> Other than weight differences, there is no performance difference between different cranksets. They all do the same job, in the same way.
> 
> Some claim benefits from oval rings, but that's more a matter of personal preference.


"there is no performance difference between different cranksets" what a load of nonsense; you clearly have never ridden a high quality chainset!


----------



## Citius (23 Jun 2015)

e-rider said:


> "there is no performance difference between different cranksets" what a load of nonsense; you clearly have never ridden a high quality chainset!


----------



## Apollonius (23 Jun 2015)

I think the OP asks a really good question. You probably don't realise what a dramatic difference there is between them until you have held one in your hands off the bike. The issue of strength and rigidity is also significant. It is the good old cyclists' rule of three in action. You want light, cheap and strong. You can only have two.


----------



## Citius (23 Jun 2015)

e-rider said:


> "there is no performance difference between different cranksets" what a load of nonsense; you clearly have never ridden a high quality chainset!



Seriously though - tell me what the performance differences are.


----------



## derrick (23 Jun 2015)

Smoooooooth


----------



## bpsmith (24 Jun 2015)

I have a creak on my Bianchi when in the top 3 or 4 gears. Have tried the many fixes on here, but still there. Not had the crank off yet though.

It's a PF30 BB with FSA Gossamer Pro BB30 compact. Is it most likely to be the BB or is there a chance that the crankset is creaking?

I have done around 1,500 miles so far, mostly dry. No other issues aside from the creak. What's the norm for when these need replacing roughly?


----------



## Citius (24 Jun 2015)

bpsmith said:


> I have a creak on my Bianchi when in the top 3 or 4 gears. Have tried the many fixes on here, but still there. Not had the crank off yet though.
> 
> It's a PF30 BB with FSA Gossamer Pro BB30 compact. Is it most likely to be the BB or is there a chance that the crankset is creaking?
> 
> I have done around 1,500 miles so far, mostly dry. No other issues aside from the creak. What's the norm for when these need replacing roughly?



The creak will be the BB30 - not the crankset. You won't stop the creaking without removing/re-fitting the crank and/or bearing cups.


----------



## Apollonius (24 Jun 2015)

I too have a Bianchi with the same FSA BB30 set-up as you. It creaks, cracks and rumbles, all of which are amplified by the box-like structure of the carbon frame. The only way I keep mine quiet (and it has done two tough, wet winters and much rain) is to tip the bike over a bit and dribble chain lube into the space between the axle and the bearing housing. I know it washes the grease out, but I suspect the grease has been long-gone anyway. 
I spoke to Darren (aka Bianchiman) about this at the Bianchi stand on Sunday at Eroica and he told me that the top man on Bianchi bottom brackets is the Bianchi dealer in Wrexham. I have considered upgrading to Campagnolo, but there is such a bewildering range of different sorts of cups, cranks etc that I am unsure what to do. No doubt special tools will be needed too. 
Off-topic, I know, but this may help.


----------



## Citius (24 Jun 2015)

The best upgrade for a BB30 bottom bracket is a 68mm threaded adaptor..


----------



## bpsmith (24 Jun 2015)

Citius said:


> The creak will be the BB30 - not the crankset. You won't stop the creaking without removing/re-fitting the crank and/or bearing cups.


That was my initial thoughts too. Not bothered trying to resolve it yet, but it's a tad annoying.


Citius said:


> The best upgrade for a BB30 bottom bracket is a 68mm threaded adaptor..



I read a few reviews of these and they weren't that great tbh. Reports of the same creaks, along with them coming loose every so often, etc.


----------



## bpsmith (24 Jun 2015)

Apollonius said:


> I too have a Bianchi with the same FSA BB30 set-up as you. It creaks, cracks and rumbles, all of which are amplified by the box-like structure of the carbon frame. The only way I keep mine quiet (and it has done two tough, wet winters and much rain) is to tip the bike over a bit and dribble chain lube into the space between the axle and the bearing housing. I know it washes the grease out, but I suspect the grease has been long-gone anyway.
> I spoke to Darren (aka Bianchiman) about this at the Bianchi stand on Sunday at Eroica and he told me that the top man on Bianchi bottom brackets is the Bianchi dealer in Wrexham. I have considered upgrading to Campagnolo, but there is such a bewildering range of different sorts of cups, cranks etc that I am unsure what to do. No doubt special tools will be needed too.
> Off-topic, I know, but this may help.


Mines not the worst creaking out there, but a little annoying, when everything else is whisper quiet. 

Not tried anything on mine yet, but was considering removing the cranks for a clean and regrease of the bearings.

What sort of mileage should we expect from the PF30?


----------

