FSA Carbon crankset - any good, and what about BB's??

daniel_b

Gents,

I was plannng to swap the groupset over between my Felt and my Marin, but then I saw this on CRC:
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=10151


The one on the Marin would appear to be the same as the one above, as in it says Octalink on it, and the triple on CRC is listed as an octalink.

I know little about BB's, but the one on the Felt looks different to that on the Marin, so I am assuming it might be ISIS?

If I buy the above crankset, and recommendations on what BB I should go for?
I see someone on crc recommends an FSA titanium one, but that's £135!

Would something like this do the trick:
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=906

Or am I best to look elsewhere (Different fitment?) for cranks and BB's??

Many thanks

Dan

wheeler585

To be honest i wouldnt reccomend any of the isis bottom brackets, the bearings inside dont seem to last as long, ive heard of them come new out the box with play!! Guaranteed someon to swear by them now though ha!

Ive got the fsa pro tema issue chainset on my training bike, but i have the octalink version, which takes a shimano v2 bottom bracket. So i would reccomend the octalink, very smooth and still going strong, even with all the crap and grit on the roads!!

maddog 2

the SKF ISIS BBs are supposed to be okay. Not sure if they are readily available in road width though. If you do dry miles and not a lot then ISIS can be fine, but in other cases they do have a rep for eating BBs.

and octalink are fine. I found the sealed units (Ultegra) easier to live with that the adjustable/rebuildable ones (DA) though.

daniel_b

Thanks for those posts chaps, very useful :-)

The Octalink is looking favourite then, and I can always remove the inner ring if need be.

Thanks for the ultegra reccomendation as well.

Am I right to think I can't work out what size BB my bike runs until I remove it?

Dan

Monty Dog

If you're planning on running Octalink there are only two sizes of BB - 109mm for a double and something like 115mm for a triple. Your Felt will take an English threaded BB - there are no other variables.

daniel_b

Thanks Monty, so I would assume something like this would be appropriate:

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=906

In the 68-118 size?

Another stoopid question, how does this octalink compare with hollowtech, is octalink old tech nowadays, is it inferior in all ways, or just weight, or not at all?

Dan

maddog 2

118 is triple, 109.5 is double

If you're only running two rings then a double setup will be better than a triple with a ring taken off, as the Q-factor will be less.

Octalink is fine. The HT2 stuff is stiffer but it's up to the individual as to whether this is a big deal or not.

cougie

I personally wouldnt bother with carbon cranksets. Shimano abandoned them - and if they prefer alloy - then thats good enough for me.

pliptrot

Carbon cranksets tick all the boxes for "bad engineering practise" and -frankly- they're a dumb idea. They're popular because only 1 company is big enough to afford the cold forging equipment required to make their aluminium alloy cranksets - thus making anybody else's alu. alloy offerings poor in comparison.

As for BBs, there's a lot of twaddle out there. Shimano Dura Ace Octalink BBs will -with a little TLC - last a very long time indeed. However, they need a modicum of skill and patience to set up, which is evidently a negative factor to today's cycling community.

synchronicity

pliptrot wrote:

Carbon cranksets tick all the boxes for "bad engineering practise" and -frankly- they're a dumb idea. They're popular because only 1 company is big enough to afford the cold forging equipment required to make their aluminium alloy cranksets - thus making anybody else's alu. alloy offerings poor in comparison.

I totally agree with that, but still, look at this pic:



I'm not sure what the latest news is about it. :?

I also think carbon stems are a bad idea. They're basically 4, 5 or 6 fasteners separated by a 3 - 5" tube. No real advantage going to carbon there. Magnesium would be a better material...(stella azzurra, deda have made them, although the itm was a bit of a flop)

ride_whenever

For decent isis BB (if you're still interested) the crank brothers one is supposed to be excellent as is the superstar components one.

ride_whenever

For decent isis BB (if you're still interested) the crank brothers one is supposed to be excellent as is the superstar components one.

cougie

Shimano dropped their CF ideas - I'm sure that was the latest news a few months back.

They do look nice - but I spend more time riding the bike than looking at it.

st68

both my road bikes have fsa cranksets with isis bb both so far tw have been good as for bb wear i was forever wearing out my campag bbs so thats why i changed over

synchronicity

cougie wrote:

Shimano dropped their CF ideas - I'm sure that was the latest news a few months back.

They do look nice - but I spend more time riding the bike than looking at it.

I heard that too, but then I thought they changed their minds again... :?

4candles

synchronicity wrote:

pliptrot wrote:

Carbon cranksets tick all the boxes for "bad engineering practise" and -frankly- they're a dumb idea. They're popular because only 1 company is big enough to afford the cold forging equipment required to make their aluminium alloy cranksets - thus making anybody else's alu. alloy offerings poor in comparison.

I totally agree with that, but still, look at this pic:



I'm not sure what the latest news is about it. :?

I also think carbon stems are a bad idea. They're basically 4, 5 or 6 fasteners separated by a 3 - 5" tube. No real advantage going to carbon there. Magnesium would be a better material...(stella azzurra, deda have made them, although the itm was a bit of a flop)

The Dura Ace carbon chainset 172.5mm length is scheduled to arrive around the 11th January 2009.

cougie

synchronicity wrote:

cougie wrote:

Shimano dropped their CF ideas - I'm sure that was the latest news a few months back.

They do look nice - but I spend more time riding the bike than looking at it.

I heard that too, but then I thought they changed their minds again... :?

Hadnt heard that ! But are they making them just because people will buy them, or because its a good material ?

I always manage to ding the end of my cranks - so for me - CF cranks wouldnt be a good idea.