Advice on new crankset...Fulcrum RRS?

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Post Reply
Posts: 409
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:00 pm
Location: London, United Kingdom

by parajba

Hi everybody,

I would need an advice. I new a new crankset for my 2011 Cervelo S2. I currently have a Fulcrum RS. Not sure about whether it's GXP or else? It's definitely not a BB30 as the S2 doesn't have BB30.

Can anybody shed some light as to what BB standard do I currently have and if:

1. Will the latest Fulcrum RRS crankset work with my bike and current BB?
2. And the new Sram Red?
3. Will I have to buy anything else in addition to 1. or 2. as above? Bottom bracket? Bearings?

I'll pay the LBS to install it properly.

Apologies about the (a bit silly) questions...I guess we all have to learn from somebody!

Why am I changing? I have a compact and I really don't like it! Going 39/53.

Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:38 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

by ScottGoBlue

Have you considered just going to larger chain-rings, like a 52/36 or 52/38 on your current compact crank?


Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 6:43 pm
Location: Canada

by crohnsy

IIRC the 2011 S2 has a english threaded BB. Fulcrum uses an ultra torque BB so as long as you have english ultra torque cups you are good to go.

Posts: 409
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:00 pm
Location: London, United Kingdom

by parajba

Thanks all for the kind replies.

Re swapping out the rings only, that's certainly an option given that it's exactly what I just did on my commuter/winter bike. I could order a pair of StrongLight CT2 39/53 for around £100. Quite happy with them on my commuter.

Here's the questions though:

1. Will a 110BCD work on a Fulcrum RS crankset? Is it exactly 110BCD too? I seem to remember that Fulcrum/Campagnolo used slightly different BCD? Maybe I'm wrong here.

2. Will the 110BCD vs 130BCD make any difference in terms if performance? (think leverage, force applied, torque). In theory a larger base should be better than a smaller one? This bike is for racing only and I wouldn't want to compromise even if it means a mere 1% drop...

And, on a slightly different note but still relevant to point 2. above:

3. The ratio of a 50T with 11T is similar to the ratio of a 53T with a 12T. However, I believe that the 53 and 12 is more efficient (hence better power transfer) than a 50 and 11 because the surface where the chain engages is larger. Difficult to explain...Can anybody shed some light? (I understand that a 50 - 11 is actually slightly longer than a 53 - 12 but we can consider it similar and comparable for this exercise).

Thanks for all your inputs!

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post