Upgrading FSA Crank

lohsnest said:

I currently have an FSA power pro triple crank (older dicontinued line) but it is similar to their Energy Triple line. It weighs in at 777 grams. I am thinking of upgrading this crank and weighing my options. I am very happy with the FSA brand as a whole and will probably stay with it, but need some advice.... I have two options:

1. Go with an FSA Pro Team triple crank, but in carbon. This is the cheapest way I can think of, as it will not entail upgrading my BB. I don't think that weight savings is tremendous, but for those gram counters, it's still about 110 grams. I can pick one up for $180. It weighs in at 660 grams.

2. Go to an FSA Pro team double crank, in carbon for $169, change the bb to a a double for $55. I may or may not have to change the derailleurs... I'm thinking that an adjustment to the limiting screws should be enough. The weight on this crankset is 555 grams.

Ideally, I would want to change to a double crank, only if it is economically feasible. I never use the G ring.

If you have any alternatives, I welcome any ideas.

I duno what this FSA fantasy is all about. An ultegra double or triple and BB to go with it can be had for less. But that may cost a few grams and some poseur' points.

boudreaux said:

I duno what this FSA fantasy is all about. An ultegra double or triple and BB to go with it can be had for less. But that may cost a few grams and some poseur' points.

Not a fantasy....

I could go with a Campy crank since I have a Campy drivetrain, but their carbon version's a bit much for me. FSA makes a great product and if I could get it in a double, that's what I will do.

Thanks for the input, though....

Don't thank boudreaux!!!! He'll get a big head and continue insulting those of us who actually buy new cycling equipment and support the manufacturers!!! BTW, the FSA carbon cranks are awesome. Just my 2¢ If you've got the $$, and want one, just do it.

waterboy420 said:

Don't thank boudreaux!!!! He'll get a big head and continue insulting those of us who actually buy new cycling equipment and support the manufacturers!!! BTW, the FSA carbon cranks are awesome. Just my 2¢ If you've got the $$, and want one, just do it.

I'm just trying to be diplomatically sarcastic and not lower myself to his level......BTW, thanks for the feedback.... I think I am going to go with a triple crank, not that I care for the g ring, but because it'll cost me more to swap out the bb and pay someone to do it... I personally have neither the time, patience or experience to do it myself....

lohsnest said:

Not a fantasy....

I could go with a Campy crank since I have a Campy drivetrain, but their carbon version's a bit much for me. FSA makes a great product and if I could get it in a double, that's what I will do.

Thanks for the input, though....

Having a campagnolo drivetrain has about 0, zilch, to do with what crank you choose. And what is it about full speed ahead cranks is somehow better quality or better designed than, say, a DA crank?

RC2 said:

Having a campagnolo drivetrain has about 0, zilch, to do with what crank you choose. And what is it about full speed ahead cranks is somehow better quality or better designed than, say, a DA crank?

First of all, I never said that FSA was better. FSA is my preference, since it comes available for ISIS and Octalink BB. I happen to have an FSA crank already and an ISIS BB, so it would be easier to go with another FSA designed for an ISIS BB. I'm sure that I could go with a DA crank, but that's not my preference...

The guy is allowed to not want a shimano crank. Personally, I think its cool to like a different crank/drivetrain type if it is compatible.

lohsnest said:

First of all, I never said that FSA was better. FSA is my preference, since it comes available for ISIS and Octalink BB. I happen to have an FSA crank already and an ISIS BB, so it would be easier to go with another FSA designed for an ISIS BB. I'm sure that I could go with a DA crank, but that's not my preference...

FSA with ISIS is my preference too, because I like to use and support the competition and american manufacturers wherever possible. Plus, ISIS is not a Shimano proprietary design like Octolink; it's an open standard which encourages healthy competition since any crank maker can use it free of charge.

Shimano got enough of my money for the shifters and derailleurs on the new bike; I like to spread out the rest of the dollars to high-quality US sources.

dhk said:

FSA with ISIS is my preference too, because I like to use and support the competition and american manufacturers wherever possible. Plus, ISIS is not a Shimano proprietary design like Octolink; it's an open standard which encourages healthy competition since any crank maker can use it free of charge.

Shimano got enough of my money for the shifters and derailleurs on the new bike; I like to spread out the rest of the dollars to high-quality US sources.

Thanks for all the feedback.... I wound up getting an FSA Carbon Team Pro crankset with triple chainrings..... I figured it would be easier for now.... I can always eliminate the inner ring at a later time.

I did not realize, though, that my current FSA crank was mounted on a square BB. That entailed me getting a new ISIS BB. My LBS did not have any FSA BB for triple crank, so I wound up getting a Truvativ..

Thanks for the help.

dhk said:

FSA with ISIS is my preference too, because I like to use and support the competition and american manufacturers wherever possible. Plus, ISIS is not a Shimano proprietary design like Octolink; it's an open standard which encourages healthy competition since any crank maker can use it free of charge.

Shimano got enough of my money for the shifters and derailleurs on the new bike; I like to spread out the rest of the dollars to high-quality US sources.

Do you think any of that FAS [censored] is made in the US? 🙄

lohsnest said:

Thanks for all the feedback.... I wound up getting an FSA Carbon Team Pro crankset with triple chainrings..... I figured it would be easier for now.... I can always eliminate the inner ring at a later time.

I did not realize, though, that my current FSA crank was mounted on a square BB. That entailed me getting a new ISIS BB. My LBS did not have any FSA BB for triple crank, so I wound up getting a Truvativ..

Thanks for the help.

What a d!ickweed. A granny you don't need + a new BB. Then you will need another BB when you ditch the granny to get the chainline right. A double and correct BB would have been a much better choice. 🙄

boudreaux said:

What a d!ickweed. A granny you don't need + a new BB. Then you will need another BB when you ditch the granny to get the chainline right. A double and correct BB would have been a much better choice. 🙄

Okay....double crank argument I can accept... I didn't really want to mess with the existing derailleurs, chain, etc. so I decided to keep my current configuration. Of course, I would have liked to have kept my old BB except that it was designed as a square bb, not ISIS, which is what my crankset was. I don't see a way to change that.

Believe me, I looked at my options as far as ditching the G-ring. I came to several conclusions....

1. FSA and every other manufacturer makes triples for a reason, and they're not all for grannies.

2. Yeah, it's not the chic thing to have, but it does serve a purpose, like climbing steep hills.

3. I'm not racing right now, so what's a few extra grams?

I strongly believe that it's the riding that's important and how much one gets out, not how much one spends or how conformist one is. Biking has never been about rigidity and the fact that I have an extra ring is really irrelevant because in the back of my mind, I will never use it, since I always like challenging myself.

boudreaux said:

Do you think any of that FAS [censored] is made in the US? 🙄

I don't consider FSA cranks and chainrings [censored], but I'm sure I don't have as much experience with them as you do. How would you rate the FSA crankset and BB in design, quality, and price to Shimano?

Yes, I thought FSA was a US company with at least some production here. Did a bit of research just now, and was surprised to see the FSA brand name is owned by Tein Hsin, a Taiwanese company. This rings the bell because the bearings in my OS BB are "THI". Another myth shattered.

Regardless of technical merits, I appreciate FSA and any one else trying to compete with the Shimano monolith.

lohsnest said:

Okay....double crank argument I can accept... I didn't really want to mess with the existing derailleurs, chain, etc. so I decided to keep my current configuration. Of course, I would have liked to have kept my old BB except that it was designed as a square bb, not ISIS, which is what my crankset was. I don't see a way to change that.

Believe me, I looked at my options as far as ditching the G-ring. I came to several conclusions....

1. FSA and every other manufacturer makes triples for a reason, and they're not all for grannies.

2. Yeah, it's not the chic thing to have, but it does serve a purpose, like climbing steep hills.

3. I'm not racing right now, so what's a few extra grams?

I strongly believe that it's the riding that's important and how much one gets out, not how much one spends or how conformist one is. Biking has never been about rigidity and the fact that I have an extra ring is really irrelevant because in the back of my mind, I will never use it, since I always like challenging myself.

In your first post, you said you never use the granny ring. Now here is the heads up on using a triple crank with the longer spindle as a double. The middle ring is in the same position as the big ring would be on a double. Using the middle ring with the big cogs is like crosss chaining a double. Ya shouldn't be doing it. I have no issue with triples.In fact, I have several.I aslo know how to use them.

boudreaux said:

In your first post, you said you never use the granny ring. This is true.... I have never used the granny ring. Now here is the heads up on using a triple crank with the longer spindle as a double. Here, I was actually considering if it was possible, at some time in the future, to remove the smallest (granny) ring (with the uderstanding that I might have to change out the BB). The middle ring is in the same position as the big ring would be on a double. Okay, so I understand that I will have to get a new BB for this feat. Using the middle ring with the big cogs is like crosss chaining a double. Ya shouldn't be doing it. Thanks for the heads up! I have no issue with triples.In fact, I have several.I aslo know how to use them. Well I'm glad you have triples. I'm also hoping you can see that I'm not just trying to throw stuff out there, but I am trying to get more and more knowledge on the mechanical aspects of bicycling and trying to get more into tinkering around.

Best Regards