download/file.php?id=49668&mode=view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Subtract the BB, weight is same. Add carbon spider (~$100), S-Works is lighter.



I have watched a weight around 455g for the S-Works. That's not so close to this Ciamillo crank but I agree that if you're looking for the cheapest gram saved this Ciamillo crank is not the best.
But the stiffness is gonna be impressive and the design very unique. And I don't speak about unlimited custom options that are making this product very interesting for people looking for optimized parts for their own use !
The last thing is that it's a 100% made in USA product and this only fact should be taken into consideration from US buyers who want to preserve their jobs.[/quote]

It's a bit of a let down . First we had those early shots of the crank design which I thought looked really cool . Then we had some postings about the weight dropping and new design . Now what we are left with is a crank that looks a lot like the Rotor crank without a coat on and when you add the spider and bb is a bit disappointing in the weight area . I Still think there will be issues with the carbon rods joining the aluiminium. I can see water and salt getting in there and causing issues. Looks very exposed.

It'll have covers over those arms, I'm sure of it.

The weight itself isn't very impressive already compared to other competitors out there. Adding another sleeve or cover over the arms further defeats the purpose of any weight savings.

Also, I see a high possibility of grit, dirt and sand getting trapped in between the rods and areas making cleaning a rather tough job. I second artray's opinion on this.

This new crank design is too "busy" for me

Bikerumor has a nice new update on Ted's crank: http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/12/21/cia ... more-53011



We’ve posted a ton on these recently, and I started this as a mere update to the post earlier this week. But, the more I spoke with Ted, the more info came out and, well, here we are with lots of great details on the construction of his Gravitas cranks.

First off, they’re shipping. The first few units have mailed to some of his long-standing customers, and more will trickle out each week until they’re up to full speed. Orders placed now will likely ship in five or six weeks. Second, given the overriding theme among the comments, I asked directly about the stiffness of the design and why use carbon tubes. Here’s Ted’s response:

“We’re shooting for a sub-400g crankset that’s as stiff as or stiffer than Dura-Ace. The tubes are made by a company that specializes in hi-mod carbon tubes. We started this process by reverse engineering other cranks on the market, and this three-tube design can be made stiffer. The engineer designed these tubes to be 1.5x as stiff as the Rotor cranks, and the end result is slightly less than 1.5x because of the alloy parts interface. But, all we have to do is slightly increase the wall thickness and/or diameter of the tubes and we can make this the stiffest crank on the market without adding any weight. I wanted to have the lightest component in that arena without compromise.”

Read on to see how it all comes together, and get a promo code to enter to win a set of these and his brakes!



The Gravitas crankset's pins can be anodized or powdercoated in a variety of custom colors.

A two part process connects the carbon tubes and alloy ends. First, they’re bonded together. The bonding agent fills in any gaps, providing a solid connection. Then holes are bored through both the alloy parts and carbon tubes, and pins (blue in the top pic) are threaded together inside the holes. It’s called PTS for Pinned Tube System. These both lock the carbon tubes in place and prevent them from rotating.

The other side of the story is customization. This design lets them very easily make custom lengths and Q-factors without needing a ton of size-specific tooling. To get the exact length a rider needs/wants, they simply cut the tubes accordingly. Depending on the frame’s BB width, they have a range of spindle widths they can use, too, with spacers taking up any slack. A narrower 68mm BB shell would give you a wider range of customization than an 86mm one, of course.

They can also change the spider’s mounting width to tweak the spacing between chainrings to accommodate different rings in both 10- and 11-speed. The spider is interchangeable, letting you run standard or compact with the same arms.

Several spindle options will be offered to accommodate all modern bottom bracket sizes, BB30 first. A 24mm BSA spindle should be available in a couple weeks, which is likely to be a bit heavier because the spindle’s wall thickness will have to increase.

_________________
Colnago extreme-C Scott Addict SL

"increase the wall thickness and/or diameter of the tubes and we can make this the stiffest crank on the market without adding any weight."

how is that possible? more material = more weight?

I really like the idea behind this crankset and it looks beautiful, I'm just a little bit curious as to how well the carbon tube system will work, especially manufactured from UHM carbon. Stiffer generally equates to more brittle. I'll be waiting for the ride reports .............

I would like to know what happened to the original design which I liked better . Why can't the cranks be all carbon?
When this crank was first posted the weight was mentioned on more than one occasion and the assumption given by the posts was that this was going to be one of the lightest cranksets out there .It now seems to have changed in to a little bit lighter version of an undressed rotor crank . I liked the original design and I wonder why the change to the rods and how come the talk has gone from being super light to a stiffer heavier crank. For me the impact was about the weight of this crank and it seems to have been lost .

I have not talked to Ted. The first crank was going to be 454 grams with a big emphasis on stiffness. I was one of the first to chime in and say 454 grams is not that exciting, plenty of other lighter options. Now understand that I posted this on Weight Weenies. You could still end up with a nice crank at 454 grams but you are not going to appeal to the super weight conscience.

With the new design at 390 grams or whatever it will be, this is a big deal. This would match the lightest cranks made in the world and Ted says that he was still focused on stiffness.

I understand that the looks changed, and 60 grams might not sound like a huge difference. These cranks now have the potential to be the lightest and stiffest cranks ever made. I am not saying they are the lightest and stiffest, we will find out when we see some postings from the first users. Hopefully soon.

At 390g, these are NOT the lightest cranks made. I currently own a set of lightning sl cranks (172.5). With the 110 spider they weigh about 356g. Before that I had vumaquads which came in at 378g w/ 50/34 rings.

It's quite possible they'll be able to go with 2 carbon tubes instead of 3 at some point in the future, that would (probably) make it the lightest crankset, but not yet.

I do think they look better than the lightning cranks (the vumaquads looked better as well), but I'm gonna stick to the true WW thing here and go w/ lighter!

_________________
Speedplay is the devil.

Is anyone concerned that the cranks may not have undergone an appropriate testing regimen before being shipped, and with some novel design aspects and potential failure modes no less?

I don't know how the 'rules' apply to new parts in the US, but I'm sure ciamillo will have taken all necessary precautions

Ok, I check the weight of one of my THM Clavicula cranks, 336 grams without chainrings or BB. So they are not record breaking on the weight. They still look cool.

on what data is the zero crank as stiff or stiffer than dura-ace(which version). will lab tests results graphs be released?

the weight is mediocre for the price. exclusive unique design is what will sell these boutique cranks.

the sram red bb30 crankset is comparable on weight <400gm and proven in the toughest races in pro tour calendar..

_________________
Current Rides:

2010 SWorks SL3/DI2