SRAM RED GCP Cranks & Chain Ring WEight
Moderator: robbosmans
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:52 am
I have searched long and hard and have not found the following weight Matrix. Can anyone help me please with the following.
What are the weights for the following configuration (excluding the Bottom Bracket):
SRAM RED GXP:
172.5mm 53/39, 52/36, 50/34
175 mm 53/39, 52/36, 50/34
I have a 175mm 53/39, on a 56" Frame, I am 5'10". Thinking of switching to a 172.5mm 50/34. Would love to know what the weight difference is between the two !!!
Many thanks for all your help !
What are the weights for the following configuration (excluding the Bottom Bracket):
SRAM RED GXP:
172.5mm 53/39, 52/36, 50/34
175 mm 53/39, 52/36, 50/34
I have a 175mm 53/39, on a 56" Frame, I am 5'10". Thinking of switching to a 172.5mm 50/34. Would love to know what the weight difference is between the two !!!
Many thanks for all your help !
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
2013 Sram Red Exogram Crankset GXP 172.5 50-34t Chainrings: 569g
Current Steed
Supersix Evo 6.25kg
CAAD10 6.8kg
Giant TCR SLR 6.8kg
Past Lovers
Focus Izalco Pro
Cervelo S1
Supersix Evo 6.25kg
CAAD10 6.8kg
Giant TCR SLR 6.8kg
Past Lovers
Focus Izalco Pro
Cervelo S1
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:52 am
Thanks so much. Hopefully others sill chime in for the other setups
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:52 am
Are the etap cranks different? I thought SRAM red crabks were all the same
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:52 am
I wish SRAM would just post the weights for different configurations.
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:52 am
Wow BB30 is that much lighter, almost 50g
- prendrefeu
- Posts: 8580
- Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
- Location: Glendale / Los Angeles, California
- Contact:
Big diameter spindle = less material in the spindle necessary = lighter.
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.
prendrefeu wrote:Big diameter spindle = less material in the spindle necessary = lighter.
Not just less, Sram use Steel in GXP but Aluminum in BB30 's spindle.
They don't think Aluminum in 24mm spindle is stiff enough so they only use it on 30mm version. (Shimano dura-ace 's spindle is also steel)
- prendrefeu
- Posts: 8580
- Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
- Location: Glendale / Los Angeles, California
- Contact:
That is correct.
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
Steel is still heavier than aluminum in terms of mass. However, since the amount of material would weigh about the same to achieve an equal stiffness, due to the modulus of steel and aluminum. Cost probably has more to do with it, and compatibility with the other groupsets. The same axle, perhaps made with slightly different grade of the same material, can be used on many cranksets throughout the range of groupset levels and the production process would remain about the same. Sram has been using steel axles since the inception of GXP. It's perfectly possible to make aluminum axles for GXP cranksets, but this would cost a significant alteration in the product line, something not economically worthwhile on the scale of business Sram is operating. Mostly likely Sram persists to milk the patent of the GXP crankset technology.
My business strategy would be to develop a whole new line of cranksets with the BB386EVO in mind (Ø30mm axle with 86mm outside-to-outside bearing spacing) and create an all-out better crankset that is slightly lighter and stiffer and with a direct compatibility with more the frames on the market, and forego that pesky BB90 standard that e.g. Trek uses that IMO needs to get dropped anyway. I would also develop a new and integrated (hollow?) chainring standard similar to Shimano.
My business strategy would be to develop a whole new line of cranksets with the BB386EVO in mind (Ø30mm axle with 86mm outside-to-outside bearing spacing) and create an all-out better crankset that is slightly lighter and stiffer and with a direct compatibility with more the frames on the market, and forego that pesky BB90 standard that e.g. Trek uses that IMO needs to get dropped anyway. I would also develop a new and integrated (hollow?) chainring standard similar to Shimano.
“I always find it amazing that a material can actually sell a product when it’s really the engineering that creates and dictates how well that material will behave or perform.” — Chuck Teixeira