I have the chance to get a new powermeter in either 53/39 130 BCD or 52/36 in 130/110 BCD. I live in a fairly flat area and only have about 3 races a year where I even use the small ring, but those ones have some 18% monster grades them. I'm tempted to go with the 36 just so that I have that low end just in case I need it and its nice at training camps where we have some pretty ridiculous climbs and I'm not trying to go into the red on them on a 7 hour ride.

My hesitancy with the 52/36 is that I run Sram and the only non-shimano company that makes a 130 BCD 52T ring is FSA. I had some FSA cross rings in the past and the shifting wasn't awesome, so I'm a bit worried about how the Pro Road model chainrings shift. Anyone have any issues or problems with them?

the 130/110 srm setup is a pain. the rings have to be purchased from SRM, as they have the mount areas machined properly to fit the spider. if you use regular rings, the outer ring bolt heads will protrude too far, and i think there was some other issue about the spider "ears" resting on a non-flat surface.
i'm glad srm offers "proper" compact spiders now.

Not true

I would agree with the previous poster about the 130/110 set up though.

edit: see post below

True, but not to bash your product, but I just don't trust myself with carbon rings. Stronglight and Miche makes the rings, but I can't get them very easily in the US.

That's fair enough, no bashing taken

I would have thought that Fairwheel bikes could get you a 52 x130 chainring. I've just had a look at their online shop and they have 52x130 TA's in stock

did a quick check, sram does or did make a 52t 130bcd.
i have never owned the 110/130 srm. although i no longer have it, my srm was 130 (on an SiSL and it was sweet). i have, however, "dealt" with the cranks, changing customers' worn rings or switching from a 53/39 to 50/34 or back. i am 99% sure a standard big ring will not allow the little ring to fit, it must have chainring bolt reliefs on the left side. the inner ring might be normal, i'm 99% sure i dont rememeber
i think there is still at least one 110/130 srm at the shop. if so, i will take pics of what i'm talking about.

So the question here is one regarding the SRM or the Chainrings ??

From what I've tried, the shift quality of most aftermarket chainrings do not differ that much. Most are ok, and nothing lousy about them if set up right but yes the FSA ones tend to be a little noisy until worn-in a little. I have the FSA Super Road rings, they shift well on a 110BCD 36/52 setup. But that might be because I run Di2 on the bike too.

The SRAM Red FD isn't particularly well received in terms of stiffness which translates to somewhat sloppy shifts under load. The lower range ones seem to work better, though heavier.

Stronglight and TA doesn't make 52T on 130BCD ??

Maybe you can try checking with xxcycle.com on the options available.

I have no experience with the SRM mentioned here so cannot comment on its quirks.

I just got a set of FSA super 53/39t, waiting for my p2m. Will update on their performance.
Having used SLK light and Gossamer, the chain rings are good, except for Gossamer plastic spindle at nds keep coming over.

Just an update- Sram does not make the 130BCD 52T ring anymore and QBP couldn't get them. I ended up just going with a 110bcd unit. I misheard and you DO have to mill the outer ring on the 130/110. I figured that a 52T would be fine and that I will eventually order a Stronglight 54T or 55T tt ringset if need be.

The original question was about the shifting in case I went that route. I didn't so I guess its moot now, but I asked everyone that owned the rings and some shop people and they have vastly different opinions on the FSA rings for one reason or another.

the differing opinions is probably from a few things: fsa rings vary in shift ramp detail, and are sensitive to manufacturing tolerances. sometimes the chain varies in overall width. fsa claims shimano (and other?) chains vary in width slightly and will hit their ramps differently. i would guess the chainring tabs vary in thickness as well, as some other chainring manufacturers have mentioned. and for what are probably patent restrictions, their ramp shapes are more sensitive to these details for chain pickup performance.
and sometimes it's the front derailleur setup.
note that this is mostly speculation.