Light weight Triple Crankset

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
pow216
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:55 pm

by pow216

Anyone know the weight of the Shimano Hollowtech II FC-4603 or FC-5703 triples?

FC-6603 is supposed to be 892g but does that include bottom bracket or not?

Any other options to consider for a lightish triple crankset?

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3500
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

Campag cranksets are normally lighter than shimano one. For example my Veloce chainset +BB is lighter than my 6600 standard + BB. Thge same may be true for Campags new triple chainset.

by Weenie


oysters
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:19 am

by oysters

The new campagnolo triples include an athena 11speed triple that has carbon crank arms. Powertorque BB. I'd be surprised if that isn't going to be lighter than all the shimano offerings. They all are meant to have the lowest Q factors available in road triples.

Apparently they use hollow technology in their aluminium crank arms, so they might come in quite light too. I'm thinking of getting the centaur version for myself, I might change some of the ratios I want with TA crank rings.

roca rule
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:23 am
Location: so. cal.

by roca rule

i believe lightning has a triple spider option, they cost a good amount, but they might be the lightest triple.

oysters
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:19 am

by oysters

Is the llightning triple a mountain bike triple only? As in, 64/104 BCD?

roca rule
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:23 am
Location: so. cal.

by roca rule

if you look at their website, they advertised a 130X74 road triple. they offer this along the 110, 130 and 94 bcd.

User avatar
Frankie - B
Administrator
Posts: 6591
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 8:17 am
Location: Drenthe, Holland

by Frankie - B

It seems you are set on a triple crank, but if you are not hindered by physical problems, please also have a look at compact cranks. Paired with the right cassette they offer about the same gearing ratios without the downfalls of a triple.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
'Tape was made to wrap your GF's gifts, NOT hold a freakin tire on.'

KB
Posts: 3868
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULLGARIA UK

by KB

Agree with Frankie. I did a spreadsheet a few years ago when I switched from triple to compact. The range of gears was almost the same with the compact, except that with the triple there were quite a few gears were wasted as they were so close together as to make no difference. I have a compact with 48/33 rings and a 12/27 cassette. Even for my old legs it's enough.

mrfish
Posts: 1617
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:49 pm
Location: Near Horgen, Switzerland

by mrfish

Unless you ride a tandem. Then I would go for a triple unless you are either both extremely fit or live in Florida.

pow216
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:55 pm

by pow216

The question was about weights of various triple cranksets. Not about peoples preferences to compacts or triples!

Valbrona
Posts: 1482
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:25 am
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

by Valbrona

Stronglight Fission Triple is about the best road-specific triple on the market - carbon cranks with a titanium axle. And you have the option of steel or ceramic bearings. It is traditional 110/74 BCD so lots of chainrings to choose from.

Yes there are lots of MTB triples, but these of course come with MTB chainlines.

Yes Campag triples are good, but they are not 110/74 BCD. Mr Campagnolo has not kind of worked out that triple uses generally want small chainrings.

DaveS
Posts: 2529
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:26 pm

by DaveS

Some of us want maximum range for the mountains. I used a 53/39/28 for a number of years, riding exclusively in the Colorado mountains. Worked great, with a 12-25 cassette. Today, I'd choose an 11-25, 11 speed.

KLabs
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am

by KLabs

Frankie - B wrote:It seems you are set on a triple crank, but if you are not hindered by physical problems, please also have a look at compact cranks. Paired with the right cassette they offer about the same gearing ratios without the downfalls of a triple.

DaveS wrote:Some of us want maximum range for the mountains. I used a 53/39/28 for a number of years, riding exclusively in the Colorado mountains. Worked great, with a 12-25 cassette. Today, I'd choose an 11-25, 11 speed.

Yes, a 50/34 or 52/34 compact crank can be used with an 11-34 10spd cassette, using an M772 or M972 MTB RD, and actually provide more range than a 53/39/28 triple and 12-25 cassette :-)

oysters
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:19 am

by oysters

Yes, but with very wide gear spacing. Sometimes its nice on long rides to be able to ride with closer gear spacings, at the cadence you want. Plenty of times I'd pick that option over a slight decrease in weight...much more efficient in the long run.

tantra
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 12:19 am

by tantra

pow216 wrote:The question was about weights of various triple cranksets. Not about peoples preferences to compacts or triples!


As a former triple user and someone who mainly rides in the mountains, let me suggest one other option. Get a compact crankset and replace the 34t ring with a 33t ring (available from TA Specialites). Pair that with an 11-28 rear cassette and you very nearly have the same low gearing and gear range as a triple. I have this setup on my bike with a D/A 7900 drivetrain. It shifts beautifully front and back, and is WAY lighter than any triple setup. It's actually lighter than a normal 7900 drivetrain with an 11-28 cassette, since the 33t ring is lighter than a 34t ring.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post