Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

SRAM Rival crankset, modified I-beam?

Started by damyth · · Last activity · 5 posts · 399 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
31 March 2007
Last activity
1 April 2007
Original author
damyth
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
399
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I was considering buying the SRAM Rival compact crankset until I had
    an opportunity to examine it up close in the flesh, at the LBS. The
    crankarm cross section looked like "IC" (ascii art). The "C" section
    was on the back of the crankarms. In fact, it pretty much looked like
    the Ritchey WCS cranks with the crankarms flipped over (outside in).

    Will this be another crankset that's prone to break?

  2. damyth said:

    I was considering buying the SRAM Rival compact crankset until I had
    an opportunity to examine it up close in the flesh, at the LBS. The
    crankarm cross section looked like "IC" (ascii art). The "C" section
    was on the back of the crankarms. In fact, it pretty much looked like
    the Ritchey WCS cranks with the crankarms flipped over (outside in).

    Will this be another crankset that's prone to break?

    Wait, let me get my crystal ball....ya know, we sold more than a few
    WCS cranks and none have ever broken.

    If you are uncomfy, don't buy it. If there is anything 'out there' in
    spades it is compact cranks. Cheap to expensive, Sugino, TA, Campag,
    shimano, Ritchey, FSA, Sram/Truvativ, ETC....

  3. damyth said:

    I was considering buying the SRAM Rival compact crankset until I had
    an opportunity to examine it up close in the flesh, at the LBS. The
    crankarm cross section looked like "IC" (ascii art). The "C" section
    was on the back of the crankarms. In fact, it pretty much looked like
    the Ritchey WCS cranks with the crankarms flipped over (outside in).

    Will this be another crankset that's prone to break?


    theoretically, yes. the water gets muddied as soon as real-world
    factors like stone impact damage and maintenance quality is taken into
    account, but in theory, the most fatigue resistant cranks are those with
    the rounded profiles of campy and shimano.

    is there a reason you can't mix & match? i have shimano cranks on
    otherwise campy bikes.

  4. jim beam said:

    the most fatigue resistant cranks are those with
    the rounded profiles of campy and shimano.

    Are Campy aluminum cranks really rounded on the back side rather than
    hollowed out or flat?

  5. Ron Ruff said:
    jim beam said:

    the most fatigue resistant cranks are those with
    the rounded profiles of campy and shimano.

    Are Campy aluminum cranks really rounded on the back side rather than
    hollowed out or flat?


    depends on the year/model. Some yes, some no. Aluminum CHR/REC of a
    couple years back are a nearly oval cross section, slight depression on
    the back, no machining; new VEL/CEN aluminum are scooped on the back.
    Carbon are a nice smooth ample section always. C-180 Record are a nice
    oval, no scoops.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    www.yellowjersey.org
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.