Shimano Deore Octakink Crankset

mikeyj28

Hi

In a mad state yesterday i took my bike to my lbs as my cranks were totally shot.I agreed for them to put on a replacement as it was cheaper than putting on new rings.
It turns out these were the ones.

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=40496

Are they any good or just bog standard , heavy cranks? I did have Old school LX ones with square taper & a 5 bolt link to the crank arm.

Should i stick with these for my XC riding for a few months or sell them and buy the XT or SLX version?
Opinions please.

I ride a Kona Kula Deluxe with lightish parts all round and SRAM X9 mechs/shifters & XT cassette

Thanks guys in advance

submityournentries

ive got them on my bike and found them to be lovely, really smooth and pretty hard wearing, so i would leave them till the die then change them then

projectsome

mikeyj28 wrote:

Hi

In a mad state yesterday i took my bike to my lbs as my cranks were totally shot.I agreed for them to put on a replacement as it was cheaper than putting on new rings.
It turns out these were the ones.

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=40496

Are they any good or just bog standard , heavy cranks? I did have Old school LX ones with square taper & a 5 bolt link to the crank arm.

this is exactly what I'm doing on the weekend. I too have the octalink chainset and the rings are worn. I'm getting the m590 with the black crank arm

do you know if it comes with the intergrated bottom bracket or if it will work with the octalink one???

supersonic

The 590 is an external system and should come with the BB.

It is NOT octalink.

mikeyj28

supersonic wrote:

The 590 is an external system and should come with the BB.

It is NOT octalink.

On my cranks there is a sticker saying octalink & they are simano deore ones. Maybe this is the wrong picture/model but it is very very similar.Sorry if it is a mistake for the picture guys.
It is bloody similar though

supersonic

You might have an older Deore Octalink, but the ones in the CRC link are the external bearing type.

Uchiga

Well i can tell you now the M590 is heavy but a solid piece of construction i have it on my Scott. As for octalink. I wouldnt bother. You either go hollowtech II or square taper.

External bottom brackets like hollowtech and GXP etc are stiffer so brilliant for performance in racing etc as well as being lighter.

Square taper have large ball bearings that are generally sealed meaning they last a bloody long time no matter what. They arent as stiff though and so arent for the most performance orientated type of bottom bracket.

Octalink is a combination of the two. Smaller bearings than square taper and wider than square taper making them stiffer than square taper but not as stiff as external bottom bracket cups. They also last longer than external bottom brackets but not as long as square taper. Its a compromise between the two and frankly from what i hear its not worth it. Still up to you.

supersonic

I use LX Octalink on My Zaskar LE. I can't say my Hone cransket feels any stiffer really. Certainly stiffer than the LX square taper it replaced, but the LX was hollow armed. The ES0 BBs last a long time.

Uchiga

It may feel that way but if you think about the relative widths of the bottom brackets External are the widest Octalink Second widest and Square taper are the narrowist. Ergo and via physics and what you can feel when you get to a high level the stiffness also goes in that order. I've riden an Octalink bottom bracket on a mates bike and to be honest its better than square taper but not as good as hollowtech. And i could get some flex out of the bottom bracket and not from the frame like i can with my external bottom bracket.

supersonic

It depends on crank arms too, you can have the stiffest axle and interface in the world, it is no good if the cranks arms themselves or chainrings flex. Or the frame. Have to look at the whole picture. Add into that that ligher people generally produce less torque, then 'stiff enough' is just fine. I like Octalink as a good mid range set up, and my LX is certainly stiff enough for me and the bike it is on.

stubs

Personaly I thought the XT Octalink hollowtech 1 set was brilliant the EN70 BBs lasted for years, certainly a lot longer than early external bearings and even when the bearings and seals were shot you could still ride them for miles without anything breaking.

I dont know if it was any different weight wise compared to external bearing sets but the whole system was as stiff as a very stiff thing and I couldnt tell the difference between the 2.

supersonic

My LX Octalink crank weighs 646g, with a 280g BB, so about the sameweight as the LX external system.

I think the last gen XT was just 620g, with BB about 250g so only slighly heavier than todays XT external. They were fantastic cranks. In fact I'd rather se these than some mid level truvativ set up that weighs over a kilo.

stubs

supersonic wrote:

My LX Octalink crank weighs 646g, with a 280g BB, so about the sameweight as the LX external system.

I think the last gen XT was just 620g, with BB about 250g so only slighly heavier than todays XT external. They were fantastic cranks. In fact I'd rather se these than some mid level truvativ set up that weighs over a kilo.

The XT octalink cranks are on a mates sons bike now they are well scuffed and scratched but with a new BB every year or so and new rings they will run forever. Assuming Shimano keep on making the BB I dont think you can get the 70 series BBs now the best is the 52 still good just not the best.

I think Shimano dropped a big one by not making octalink an open standard. If they had done we might never of had all that Isis rubbish and no external BBs made out of recycled bog paper.

supersonic

Good thing is Octalink will be around for ages yet as it features in the new 9 speed Alivio groupsets.

stubs

supersonic wrote:

Good thing is Octalink will be around for ages yet as it features in the new 9 speed Alivio groupsets.

Thats good to know I thought I might have to start hoarding the BBs.